Category Archives: courts

Tantrum

Posted on by
Reply

I am getting tired of Government by Tantrum.

Our Missouri Senate has been an unfortunate participant for several years, some years so badly that some recent legislative sessions were among the most unproductive in state history.

The latest tantrum was last week’s display of political pettiness not at all befitting a chamber that used to be known for its deliberative and far more collaborative approach to governing.

It seems that some senators were so upset because the Missouri Supreme Court had the audacity to rule that the Senate had passed an unconstitutional bill that they forced cancellation of the annual State of the Judiciary address by the Chief Justice W. Brent Powell.

That oughta teach that uppity court a lesson.

The State of the Judiciary address goes back to 1974 when Judge Robert T. Donnelly asked for the legislature’s support of modernizing the court system. It was the early days for widespread use of computers in government and the court needed more people to use this newer technology to produce a more efficient court system.

But some Republican Senators were filibustering, keeping senators from going to the House of Representatives for a joint session for this year’s speech.

In the past, the Senate (and the House) would just have gone to work writing a bill that didn’t violate the Constitution.  But Senator Rick Brattin ranted about “a runaway court” that he claimed was created to be the lesser of the three branches of government. And he threw in some other disrespectful comments not worth repeating here. Senator Adam Schnelting, whose is a licensed realtor and minister, complained of the court’s continued “usurpation of power.”  He charged the court had usurped the power of the Senate to pass laws that apparently are above review.

Senator Nick Shroer, who is a lawyer, accused the court of legislating from the bench, in effect vetoing a bill. Somehow he did not think the court should have the power to interpret the law and protect us from serious legislative mischief.

The court ruling, by the way, was 7-0, including three judges appointed by our immediate-past governor, Mike Parson.

State Representative Rudy Veit, a lawyer who practices in Jefferson City, suggested, accurately, that the Senate’s carrying-on was “immature.” He told a reporter that one of the court’s roles is to determine when the legislature doesn’t follow the constitution in writing laws.

He’s right. The Senators are wrong. The founders created three separate branches of government and set up a system of checks and balances that protects citizens from one branch rule.
The legislative branch passes a law. The President or governor can veto it or sign it. If it’s a bad law and arguments against it are sufficient to prove it so, the courts can void it. There is nothing that prohibits a legislative body from rewriting its proposal so that it fits within proper legal guidelines. A mature Senate would be doing that.

The senators’ filibuster that resulted in the cancellation of a speech traditionally short on drama but long on the business of the court system was disrespectful of the court and the constitution.

The courts are government’s referees. Their rulings at the higher levels sometime carry an unspoken message: “Try to do it better next time.”  Petulance in the face of such an admonition serves no purpose and delays getting down to work doing better.

The Missouri Senate would be well-served if some of its members demonstrated the kind of maturity that is expected from the deliberative body that senates at the national as well as state level are supposed to be.

Donnie and Nico

Posted on by
1

“Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun,” said Chairman Mao as he led his armed struggle/revolution in the 1930s.

Today we have an impulsive, petulant short-attention span child with a pistol who has invaded Venezuela and kidnapped its president and his wife and brought them to our country to face American criminal charges.  As is usually the case with Trump, there is little indication that any kind of long-term thinking went into this scheme. He says the United States is going to “run” Venezuela but it is clear there is no plan in place to do so.  There are no planeloads of diplomats in Caracas developing a transition plan, no one sent in to calm an uncertain and certainly angry population.

Secretary of State Rubio tried to clarify to a minor degree that we do not plan to “govern” Venezuela only to have Trump double down that we are going to “run” the country. The Washington Post, citing two White House Sources say a personal grudge might be a factor in Trump’s actions. Suggestions had been made that Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Machado should be put in charge of the country. Trump showed no interest in the idea?  Why?  Because Machado accepted the Nobel Peace Price last year. And we all know that Trump for reasons that only he cannot understand stood no chance anyway.

The Prize Committee cited her “tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela.”  She had her detractors including a faction that disagreed with her support of Trump’s oil embargo.

So who IS in charge now?

Vice-President Delcy Rodriguez Gomez has been sworn in as acting president. She has declared the country deserves peace and dialogue, not war and is offering cooperation with the United States.  On Saturday however, after the kidnapping, she had a different tone, calling the kidnapping “barbaric” and saying she still considered Maduro the leader of the county.  Time and circumstances, however, bring a reality to things. She’s a lawyer and a diplomat who has been Vice President since 2018.

She seems to have put forth somc contradictory messages. On her social media channels Sunday, she said Venezuela wants to develop ‘balanced and respectful international relations…based on sovereign equality and non-interference. She called on Washington to agree with a program “oriented toward shared development, within the framework of international law.”

At the same time, she ordered police “to immediately begin the national search and capture of everyone involved in the promotion or support for the armed attack” by the United States.”

President Trump’s gunboat diplomacy leaves so many questions unanswered.

What does that look like, his plan to run Venezuela, apparently with no interest in “balanced and respectful international relations” and shared development within the framework of international law?” Unfortunately those are not things Trump respects.  Will our miliary take the place of the police and other security forces?  How long will it take them to become as well-versed as the existing Maduro loyal miliary, police, and security establishment?  And how much blood will be shed in gaining military control of the country?

(For that matter we have not heard the human cost of the arrests of the Maduros, or the building damages caused by the raid and whether this county will rebuild the damaged properties.)

Who will the United States install as it military governor, or whatever the title might be?

One would think that a true leader would have these things decided and in place within hours after turning a country upside down.  But not our impulsive child-president with a pistol.

There is precedent for this kind of thing but we haven’t heard Trump justify the Maduro arrest by citing the arrest Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega exactly 36 years earlier, to the day.  Noriega’s dictatorship had been supported by the U.S. government that had paid him large sums to fight drug trafficking, and to keep an eye on Cuba. He fell out of favor by pushing for Panamanian Independence. There also were suggestions he was taking bribes to let drugs reach our country. President George H. W. Busch sent in American troops to topple the regime. He spent 20 years in an American prison for drug trafficking, and seven years in France for money-laundering. He was returned to Panama with a 60-year term for murder, corruption, and embezzlement.  He was 83 when he died in 2017.

The trial arguments will be fascinating. Whether they are similar to the Noriega is something we want to see.  The idea of snatching the president of another country, and putting him on trial for violating the laws in a another nation will be an interesting discussion point and one that the United States Supreme Court will have to parse.

If we can arrest Maduro, can we enforce our speed limits on British roads?  Can a French person who shoplifts an American product in Paris be prosecuted here?  Can the president of a foreign country be charged under American law for exporting a product that is legal in his county to meet a growing demand that product in the United States?

By the way—-what happened to the Fentanyl excuse?  Now all of the talk from Trump is about Venezuelan oil.

Associated with that question is this: Can a President of the United States be prosecuted here or anywhere, for failing to reduce the demand for Maduro’s product, in effect sanctioning by inaction its use?

When did Venezuela’s drug captains become more important than the Columbian Drug Cartels that dominated our drug concerns for so long?  Trump has indicated Colombia, Cuba, Greenland, Iran, and Mexico are potential targets of someone who agrees that power comes from the barrel of the gun.  He drools over Greenland, especially, which has never been a threat of any kind to us.

I probably could cook up more questions but I’ll leave that to you.  But here is another one?

If we’re going to run Venezuela, why not make it a 51st state?  If we want Greenland for its rare earths, why would not Venezuela and its oil be the new star on our flag?

Our cynical self has peeled around my shoulder and suggested we would rather have Greenland and Canada because Venezuela has brown people in it, and Canada and Greenland people are white.  But, “We’ll worry about Greenland in about two months,” the child with a gun said on Air Force One.

In the meantime, the spotlight is off the Epstein papers for a while.  That’s okay. When it swings back, there will be a huge volume of material sifted from the most recently studied papers.

Finally, this note on this topic—Maduro is a bad guy.  But is violating international law and other standards the answer to the problems he caused?

And how should NATO respond when his guerillas hit Greenland

Have at it folks.  The box below would welcome you comment and concerns.  We are, after all, in this world box together.

 

 

We All Know What Tomorrow Is

Posted on by
Reply

How can we forget?

I had been asked to keep a pandemic journal because we had no personal journals from the 1918 Spanish Flu Pandemic that told how people survived day by day during that scary time. We share some of those times because there was, at the start, no known medicine to treat whatever it was, and—as was the case with the misnamed Sanish Flu (it could have been the Kansas Flu)—the first advice was to mask up, stay indoors, close public gathering places such as bars, restaurants, churches, etc.

I was working on my Journal on January 5, 2021, watching video of the Trump rally that was becoming more dangerous with every lie that he told. I was not very forgiving of him for years before and I will never forgive him for this day. He remains the most despicable person in public or private life I have ever run across.  I added some photos to the entry as they became available and a text of Trump’s incitement to riot a couple of days later so journal reader a century from now (or longer, of course, I hope) will know how our country survived a pandemic but darned near didn’t survive Donald Trump—the first time. As long as there is a United States of America it will be a national shame that he was elected again, and more and more people are understanding that now. Here is how I watched in horror—as I hope you did—what happened that day. Wednesday, January 6, 2021

0-0-0-0-0

I begin this entry at 1:50 p.m. while watching something happen in Washington that neither I nor my citizen ancestors going back to the days of Washington, Jefferson, and even earlier founders could have imagined—thousands of supporters of our president, egged on by him in an hour-long tirade near the White House—have laid siege to the United States Capitol, interrupting the debate on certifying results of the Electoral College. I am watching FOX, the network that has been uncomfortably friendly with our president for years, as some demonstrators are trying to break through the doors into the House of Representatives.

Reporters just said law enforcement officers are guarding the doors with guns drawn, and another of the reports said moments ago that he’s been getting text messages from ambassadors saying this country would be highly critical of other countries if anything such as this happened there.

What we are seeing is appalling.  One observer calls it “a breakdown of the constitutional process.”  It’s the most significant incursion inside our Capitol since the British attack in 1814.  There is no doubt our president stoked this outrage and has been doing it for months, years. This morning, he and his children and other supporters had a rally near the White House.  His son, Donald Junior—who hopes to become the next national chairman of the Republican Party—told the crowd that their presence should tell mainline Republicans their day is past. “It should be a message to all Republicans who have not been willing to actually fight, the people who did nothing to stop the steal. This gathering should send a message to them: This isn’t their Republican Party anymore. This is Donald Trump’s Republican Party. We’re going to try and give our Republicans the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”  Then his father ranted for about 90 minutes, speaking to a crowd he had been begging for several days to show up in Washington today.  He urged the protestors to go to the capitol.

They did and about an hour after Congress started the process and started dealing with the first protest—of the Arizona results the House and Senate suddenly adjourned.  When I saw that happen (on C-SPAN) I switched to CNN and then to FOX because I suspected there was trouble developing.

FOX reporters are as stunned as anybody on the other (less Trumpish) networks by what is unfolding in front of them. Others got into the hallways and office areas.

Protestors get into the capitol and are shown on video walking through Statuary Hall.

One reporter on Pennsylvania Avenue just reported things are becoming increasingly violent in the streets. Senators and Representatives are locked in their offices. The Vice-President, who was presiding over the joint session, has been evacuated.  The President apparently is in the oval office where he earlier sent a Tweet criticizing the VP for lacking courage to overturn the election results today.  That was after VP Pence told members of Congress he would not try to singlehandedly throw out electoral votes. He had sent a letter to all members of Congress saying, “It is my considered judgment that my oath to support and defend the Constitution constrains me from claiming unilateral authority to determine which electoral votes should be counted and which should not.”

A few minutes ago he tweeted, “Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our country. Stay Peaceful!”

One senator just tweeted a picture of protestors in the Senate Chamber.

The Mayor of Washington has instituted a 6 p.m. curfew.

So far, Josh Hawley has been silent—and he’s one of those who lit this fire several days ago when he announced he would challenge the election results. He was later joined by a dozen others, and the president who “rallied” his supporters in Georgia Monday and who encouraged demonstrators this morning to march on the Capitol.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, interviewed on FOX “cannot be sadder or more disappointed. This is not the American Way. I’m with capitol police; I’ve heard on the radio shots have been fired.”   (we later learned a woman had been shot, apparently while with the crowd trying to break into the House chamber.) “This is Un-American, what’s going on.” He called on Trump to make a statement.  The president sent out a Tweet shortly after that, about 2:15: “I am asking everyone at the U. S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No Violence! Remember WE are the Party of Law & Order—respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!”

About the same time, Brett Baier on FOX reported Speaker Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer had asked that the National Guard be deployed to clear the protestors.

2:30—FOX shows protestors breaking windows and climbing into the building.

Fox at 2:50 showed a photograph of a demonstrator sitting in the chair in Nancy Pelosi’s office.

The New York Times reported later that night that he’s from Arkansas, Matthew Rosenberg, who left a quarter on the desk and took a personalized envelope from the office. And he could be in very bad trouble. His Congressman, Steve Womack, tweeted about him, “I’m sickened to learn that the…actions were perpetrated by a constituent. It’s an embarrassment to the people of the Third District and does not reflect our values. He must be held accountable and face the fullest extent of the law. This isn’t the American or Arkansas way.”  And Arkansas Senator Jim Hendren tweeted “Don’t know this guy, but he needs to go to jail.”

Another photo shows a demonstrator sitting in the Senate President’s chair.

Haven’t seen an I-D of this creep yet.

(all Photos in this post are from Google Images)

2:52—Pelosi and Shumer call on president to go on the air and call on protestors to leave.

2:55—DOD mobilizes troops.  A barrier will be set up around the capitol, crowd to be cleared out. And a tight lockdown will be put in place.

2:20—FOX reports at least one person has been shot.

2:20—senate secured and demonstrators are being pushed out of the second and third floors of the rotunda.

3:05—President-elect Biden goes on the air.  He began, “At this hour, our democracy is under unprecedented assault, unlike anything we’ve seen in modern times. Let me be very clear: The scenes of chaos at the Capitol do not reflect the true America, do not represent who we are. I’m genuinely shocked and saddened that our nation, so long a beacon of hope and light for democracy, has come to such a dark moment. America’s about honor, decency, respect, tolerance. That’s who we are. That’s who we’ve always been.”

He demanded the president call on his supporters to end an “unprecedented assault” on democracy. “I call on President Trump to go on national television now to fulfill his oath and defend the Constitution and demand an end to this siege.”  He urged the protestors to end their occupation of the House and Senate and blamed today’s violence on Trumps refusal to accept defeat. “At their best, the words of a president can inspire. At their worst, they can incite…This is not dissent. It’s disorder. It’s chaos. It borders on sedition, and it must end now. I call on this mob to pull back and allow the work of democracy to go forward.” He finished, “President Trump, step up.”

A few minutes later the White House released a taped message from Trump encouraging people to go home—-but most of his 61-second message was a whine about the election:

“I know your pain, I know you’re hurt. We had an election that was stolen from us, it was a landslide election and everyone knows it, especially the other side.  But you have to go home now, we have to have peace. We have to have peace. We have to have law and order we have to respect our great people in law and order. We don’t want anybody hurt. It’s a very tough period of time. There’s never been a time like this where such a thing happened where they could take it away from all of us from me from you from our country. This was a fraudulent election. But we can’t play into the hands of these people. We have to have peace. So go home. We love you. You’re very special. You’ve seen what happens, you see the way others are treated that are so bad and so evil. I know how you feel. But go home and go home and peace.”

We love you. You’re very special. ??????  No condemnation, no criticism.  Whine and pat these domestic terrorists you have encouraged on the heads and tell them to go home.

3:40—FOX shows video of woman shot in the capitol. She’s reported critical at a hospital. This is the only reported shot fired and only reported person injured.

It’s dusk in Washington now and reporters and city officials are worried about what will happen tonight, despite the curfew.  The Mayor and metropolitan police have announced anybody on capitol grounds after 6 p.m. will be arrested.

4:15: Rep. Steve Scalise says he hopes to get the capitol open and continue the debates tonight. Some other members reportedly feel the same way but we haven’t heard from the Congressional leadership yet.

At some point in all of this, this afternoon, the networks proclaimed John Osoff had won the Georgia Senate election although the margin is so thin that a recount is likely. He’s 33 and will be the youngest member of the Senate although not the youngest person elected. That honor goes to Joseph Biden.

About 4:55 it was announced that police think the capitol is secure again.

About an hour ago, Hawley tweeted: Thank you to the brave law enforcement officials who have put their lives on the line. The violence must end, those who attacked police and broke the law must be prosecuted, and Congress must get back to work and finish its job.

He drew three quick responses:

Samuel George

Sir – you inflicted this by rejecting the vote of the people

Your name will always be associated with today. Cool legacy.

Alex Rozar

This was your doing.

Former President George W. Bush released a statement late this afternoon “A statement on the insurrection at the Capitol,” a pretty plainspoken comment.  It’s especially impactful because he has seldom spoken about things since leaving the White House—as past presidents traditionally have done.  But there’s no love lost between the Bush family and Trump.

“Laura and I are watching the scenes of mayhem unfolding at the seat of our Nation’s government in disbelief and dismay. It is a sickening and heartbreaking sight. This is how election results are disputed in a banana republic — not our democratic republic.

“I am appalled by the reckless behavior of some political leaders since the election and by the lack of respect shown today for our institutions, our traditions, and our law enforcement. The violent assault on the Capitol — and disruption of a Constitutionally-mandated meeting of Congress — was undertaken by people whose passions have been inflamed by falsehoods and false hopes.

“Insurrection could do grave damage to our Nation and reputation. In the United States of America, it is the fundamental responsibility of every patriotic citizen to support the rule of law. To those who are disappointed in the results of the election: Our country is more important than the politics of the moment. Let the officials elected by the people fulfill their duties and represent our voices in peace and safety.

 “May God continue to bless the United States of America.”

 Former President Clinton: “Today we faced an unprecedented assault on our Capitol, our Constitution, and our country. The assault was fueled by more than four years of poison politics spreading deliberate misinformation, sowing distrust in our system, and pitting Americans against one another. The match was lit by Donald Trump and his most ardent enablers, including many in Congress, to overturn the results of an election he lost.”

Former President Obama: “History will rightly remember today’s violence at the Capitol, incited by a sitting president who has continued to baselessly lie about the outcome of a lawful election, as a moment of great dishonor and shame for our nation. But we’d be kidding ourselves if we treated it as a total surprise. Right now, Republican leaders have a choice made clear in the desecrated chambers of democracy. They can continue down this road and keep stoking the raging fires. Or they can choose reality and take the first steps toward extinguishing the flames. They can choose America.

“I’ve been heartened to see many members of the President’s party speak up forcefully today. Their voices add to the examples of Republican state and local election officials in states like Georgia who’ve refused to be intimidated and have discharged their duties honorably. We need more leaders like these — right now and in the days, weeks, and months ahead as President-Elect Biden works to restore a common purpose to our politics. It’s up to all of us as Americans, regardless of party, to support him in that goal.”

Jimmy Carter: “This is a national tragedy and is not who we are as a nation. Having observed elections in troubled democracies worldwide, I know that we the people can unite to walk back from this precipice to peacefully uphold the laws of our nation, and we must. We join our fellow citizens in praying for a peaceful resolution so our nation can heal and complete the transfer of power as we have for more than two centuries.”

Twitter has shut down our president’s access for 12 hours because of a message he put out this afternoon.  Facebook took down his “We love you” video and has banned him for 24 hours.

The Kansas City Star tomorrow morning available on line this evening:

“No one other than President Donald Trump himself is more responsible for Wednesday’s coup attempt at the U.S. Capitol than one Joshua David Hawley, the 41-year old junior senator from Missouri, who put out a fundraising appeal while the siege was underway.  

“This, Sen. Hawley, is what law-breaking and destruction look like. This is what mobs do. This is not a protest, but a riot. One woman was shot and has died, The Washington Post reported, while lawmakers were sheltering in place.

“No longer can it be asked, as George Will did recently of Hawley, “Has there ever been such a high ration of ambition to accomplishment?” Hawley’s actions in the last week had such impact that he deserves an impressive share of the blame for the blood that’s been shed.

“Hawley was first to say that he would oppose the certification of Joe Biden’s Electoral College win. That action, motivated by ambition, set off much that followed — the rush of his fellow presidential aspirant Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and other members of the Sedition Caucus to put a show of loyalty to the president above all else.

“After mayhem broke out, Hawley put out this uncharacteristically brief statement: “Thank you to the brave law enforcement officials who have put their lives on the line. The violence must end, those who attacked police and broke the law must be prosecuted, and Congress must get back to work and finish its job.” So modest, Senator, failing to note your key role in inspiring one of the most heartbreaking days in modern American history. We lost something precious on Wednesday, as condolence notes to our democracy from our friends around the world recognize.

“Among those Hawley got to emulate him was Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall, whose very first act as a member of the world’s greatest deliberative body was to sell out his country by attempting to overturn the outcome of a legitimate election.

“This revolt is the result, and if you didn’t know this is where we’ve been headed from the start, it’s because you didn’t want to know.”

“’The Frankenstein just tore down the doors to the palace,” U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Democrat from Missouri, told The Star. Which happened because, as he said, “One-third of the nation has bought into a bald-faced lie, and they are living in a fact-free America.’

“’I’m currently safe and sheltering in place while we wait to receive further instruction from Capitol Police,’ tweeted U.S. Rep. Sharice Davids, a Democrat from Kansas. ‘Today is a dark day for our country. It’s unacceptable that we have a President who has repeatedly condoned and even encouraged this despicable behavior. It must stop.’”

“We’ll say again what Davids is too polite to say: Trump did not manage this madness on his own. Far from it.

REPUBLICANS KNEW TRUMP’S FRAUD CLAIMS WERE BOGUS

“Just before the putsch began, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said sadly that we need to once again work from an agreed upon set of facts. Only now has he noticed that lying to the public on a daily basis poisons democracy.

“People have taken this too far,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said on Fox News. Until he had to run for cover, McCarthy was fine with this sick stunt.

“U.S. Rep. Andy Barr, a Republican from Kentucky, said in a statement, ‘Today’s events at the U.S. Capitol are tragic, outrageous, and devastating. They are wholly inconsistent with the values of our constitutional Republic.’

“Yes, they are. But they are wholly consistent with Trump’s calls to overturn this election to address nonexistent fraud. And they are wholly predictable, given the willingness of most Republicans to repeat these baseless claims.

“When we wrote that Hawley’s actions were dangerous — and that those of Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt and others were too, in their pretending for far too long that the election wasn’t over — some readers found that absurd. ‘Oh my goodness, how will democracy and our country survive?’ one reader wrote in sarcasm. ‘How will Biden possibly govern? The Star editorial board’s hysteria over nothing is approaching CNN levels.’

“No doubt plenty of Americans will see even this free-for-all in the temple of democracy as defensible. And those of you who have excused all of the brazen lawlessness of this administration can take a little bit of credit for these events, too. They couldn’t have done it without you.

“Hawley, Marshall and other Republicans who upheld Trump’s con about widespread fraud knew all along that his claims were bogus. Now that they’ve seen exactly where those lies have landed us, decency demands that they try to prevent further violence by making clear that Joe Biden did not win by cheating. Please, gentlemen, surprise us.”

(Hawley gestures to the demonstrators this morning as he goes into the Capitol.)

About 9:30 tonight the Senate defeated the challenge to Arizona’s electoral votes 6-93 as several of the original protesting Senators withdrew their support of the challenge after today’s actions.

A TV station in San Diego (KUSI) says it has confirmed the identity of the woman who was shot to death inside the capitol.  It says she’s Ashli Babbit, a USAF 14-year veteran who did four tours overseas. The French news agency, AFP, said tonight that Babbit tweeted yesterday about those going to Washington for the rally, “Nothing will stop us….they can try and try and try but the storm is here and it is descending upon DC in less than 24 hours….dark to light!”,

I had said right after the election that one of my greatest concerns was how much damage Trump could do before he left.  I’ve written a couple of pretty harsh blog pieces (the most recent one was Monday) about him.  I can’t say I was surprised by what happened today—I was surprised by the scope of the events but not that there was mob violence based on his encouragement of it. Now, with two weeks to go before he departs the White House, there are some concerns being voice in tonight’s news coverage about this deranged man with his finger on the nuclear trigger remaining in his job for those 14 days.

Tonight (it’s 10:15 p.m.) there’s talk about whether steps need to be taken under the 25th Amendment to remove him.  And there are reports of several resignations from his staff and possible resignations from his cabinet or high-level staff.  There are also a lot of questions being asked about how the mob could have penetrated the Capitol security.

I don’t think I would want to be in the White House tonight.  Our president must be in a rage that borders on insanity, not only because Pence hasn’t done his bidding and Congress not only won’t do his bidding and because some of his closest associates are on the verge of bailing out, but because he has no access to s social media, no way to rant and rave at an unprecedented level.

This has been one of those days that will be a “What were you doing when….” question is asked. It’s a landmark day in national memory much as the Kennedy assassinations and the King murder and the Moon landing, and the Twin Towers attack (and in Jefferson City’s case, the 2019 tornado). This one is so special because even the Kennedy and King assassinations didn’t leave people this shaken about the future of our republic.

It’s now after midnight.  The TV nets are reporting the streets of Washington are quiet.  The day’s toll, according to various reports:  Four dead—one shot to death by a police officer and three who had medical emergencies.  Fourteen police injured , two hospitalized, one critical.

The joint session re-convened. Two or three protests were offered but none had a Senator’s name on it—the first House member with one protest said the Senators had withdrawn their names. The count stopped with Pennsylvania when several House members and Senators Hawley and Cruz filed a protest.  The Senate dispatched with the Hawley-Cruz part of it 7-92.  The House is voting down the protest on its side of things but it’s time to call it a terrible day and go to bed.

While all of this has been going on, the common folks were dealing with the coronavirus.  MODOH reports yesterday’s positivity rate was 21.5% and hospitalizations just under 2800. Nationally, yesterday was the deadliest day in the pandemic.

0-0-0-0-0

And now, five years later, having witnessed his tragic-for-our nation return and his actions pardoning himself and his “peaceful tourist” followers from any responsibility for those events, having witnessed his and his followers’ efforts to turn Ashley Babbit into a martyr, having watched him try to prosecute those who would have prosecuted him if he had not kept his lies about that day alive and current, we are starting to see many of those who lacked courage to challenge him then and again in 2024 starting to realize what they have unleashed up on our freedoms and our national honor.  Overseas, America’s symbol is Trump and it is a symbol that is daily destructive to our position in the world as a creator of and defender of freedom.

History will look at this generation of Americans and will ask, “How could they have gone so wrong?”  Scholars will analyze and theorize, none of which will change what we are because of that day and the days since that all of us have witnessed.

It is 2026. Change seems to be coming. But as it evolves, the movements behind Trump and January 6 are returning also, Oath Keepers, Conspiracy theorists, and the Super-Religious Patriots who see power as more holy than service and who see their God in Trump.  This is going to be an ugly year. But a year from now the nation will emerge battered, perhaps soon to be without him, although bearing the deep scars he has left. We must believe the Better Angels will outlast him and we then can get about the business of rebuilding our country.

Pimples

Posted on by
Reply

Back in the Twentieth Century, when your correspondent enrolled at the University of Missouri, male freshmen and sophomores were required to enroll in what we called “rot-see,” more properly, ROTC—the Reserve Officers Training Corps.  Two years of military education designed to encourage students to join the Army, Navy, or Air Force after two more years of military education.

I decided to focus my energies on becoming a journalist.

One of our instructors in Crowder Hall, a Sergeant whose name I might be able to recall in the middle of the night, once referred to Fort Leonard Wood as “a pimple on the ass of humanity.”

I think of him almost every time I walk into a convenience store and see a line or two or more of machines that are or are not slot machines (according to their owners) but are instead Video Lottery Terminals.

Owners of the machines say they’re legal because there aren’t slot machines that are state-regulated. The casinos, which want a monopoly on all things gambling (except the state lottery that they can’t lay their hands on, so far) say they are slot machines and state law allows only casinos to have legal slot machines.

The question of their legality tied up the Missouri Senate so badly that for three years in a row that almost no legislation was passed except for a state budget. Most of the instigators of that deplorable era have moved on or moved out, allowing the legislature to actually accomplish several things for good or for ill in the most recent regular session.

The legacy of those deadlocks is Amendment 2, the sports wagering proposal barely grafted onto our state constitution last November that will have almost no benefit to the citizens but will greatly fatten the pocked of casinos and our sports teams.  Backers of legalized convenience store slot machines refused to let sports wagering legislation, or almost any other legislation, go anywhere unless those bills also legalized the slot machines.

The backers of the VLTs, therefore, are largely to blame for Missouri now having a constitutional amendment rather than a law.  Laws are easier to correct or to make more fair for the people of the state than amendment is.

The casino industry also is largely to blame because it refused any kind of a compromise. The legislature refused to be the adult in the rooms (the House and the Senate) and put it collective foot down and resolve the issue in a way that protected the state’s interests.

The stage is now set to decide in the court system if those “gray market” machines are or are not legal.   A few days ago, a St. Louis federal jury ruled that the biggest supplier of those slot machines has been engaging in unfair competition and has misled players and stores about how the games operated.

The jury had no trouble deciding—in only two hours after a five-day trial. The owner of traditional bar games had sued Torch Electronics and won a half-million dollars, four times what was sought.

The jury’s finding could clear the way for Federal District Judge John Ross to rule whether these machines are legal. He has indicated a reluctance to wade into the “politically fraught” waters involving this issue but indicated he would rule after the Torch case was decided.

Gambling generates a lot of Money in Missouri and it’s important that those in the biz make sure those who make decisions on laws and regulations are friendly.

Tthose who make that money have not been shy about buying high-level political friendships with it, thanks in large parts to the financially-persuasive involvement of former House Speaker Steven Tilley, now an influential lobbyist who has endeared himself to key figures such as Governor Kehoe, whose political action committee account was fattened by a quarter-million dollars last year, and former Attorney General Andrew Bailey, who kept Torch money and who backed away from defending the Highway Patrol—which had been sued by Torch to keep it from seizing machines.

Bailey’s predecessor, now-U.S. Senator Eric Schmitt, returned $5,800 in campaign donations from Torch’s owners after questions were raised about possible conflicts of interest. State Treasurer Vivek Malek, after a Tilley-arranged meeting with Torch’s owner, put stickers on the VLTs advertising the state’s unclaimed property program, which had nothing to do with those machines but drew criticism from those who thought they indicated the state had licensed them.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that the plaintiff’s attorney in the case told the jury that 101 of Torch’s 6,000 machines throughout Missouri took in $32 million in seven years and generated $11million in profits to Torch, a payout rate of about 65% while regulated casino slots pay out more than 90%. No law requires operators of those machines to share their wealth with state programs and services.

There has been a general reluctance by city and county prosecutors to declare the machines beyond the law. One county and one city have taken that step but a ruling by Ross of illegality could give others the backbone to challenge the machines’ presence.

Regardless of how Judge Ross rules, the conflict about whether they are or whether they aren’t slot machines has left Missouri with an unfortunate result.  Sports wagering is now in the Missouri Constitution rather than in the Missouri Revised Statutes.  Putting something in the Constitution doesn’t make it immune from change but the opportunity for constitutional change is much harder than it is to change a law.

Regardless of how Judge Ross rules, Missourians are losers because the people we elected to represent us in the Capitol didn’t do their jobs in voting video lottery machines legal or illegal and failed to pass a sports gambling law that serves the people.

You might ask them why they lacked the backbone to put the state in control of the gambling industry rather than the other way around. Check their campaign contribution reports on file at the Missouri Ethics Commission and you might find some answers.

A REALLY Special Session

Posted on by
Reply

Our lawmakers are back in Jefferson City to help decide what kind of a country we will have, and what kind of country we will be. That’s a pretty strong observation. But if we are honest, it is also pretty strongly true.

Governor Kehoe has called them back because President Trump worries he won’t have continued absolute power for the last half of his term unless legislatures in various states take unprecedented action to change congressional district lines to eliminate Democrats.

Forget what the voters decided in the 2024 Congressional elections. Make sure some of them can’t have the representative they elected because a President who brags about his popularity is worried that, in truth, he is so unpopular in poll after poll that Americans might vote in 2026 to impede his seizure of absolute power.

The Missouri legislature wants to take Representative Emanuel Cleaver’s elected job away from him by splitting his district so about half of his biggest supporters can’t vote for him in 2026.

It is interesting that Republicans, who have so many chest-thumping evangelical Christians supporting them, want to eliminate a member of Congress who is a Christian minister. Perhaps Emanuel Cleaver isn’t Christian enough. Perhaps they think he is spiritually lost or spiritually bankrupt because he’s a Methodist, a mainline Christian group that has split in a dispute about whether God creates gays.

Wouldn’t you think that a president who peddles Bibles, poses holding a Bible in front of a D. C. church, and says in commercials that he has several Bibles and it’s his favorite book would want someone like Congressman Cleaver in Washington as a moral force?

That’s Trump’s problem. He is not a moral force himself. In fact, there are plenty who wonder if he has any morals at all.

Donald Trump, who is so scared of losing power that he will disrupt the entire system of picking a representative government, wants the legislature to just turn over the keys to the democratic process in Missouri to him.

He talks about American exceptionalism but cares not for the government system that gives us that distinction and he will do anything to make sure his power goes unchecked for as long as he and his political offspring can keep it.

Have the people of Missouri asked for this change in who represents them?

No.  There has been no public outcry that our congressional delegation has betrayed the people who elected it. But those we have chosen to represent us at the state level are facing a demand that the legislature go against its own public’s wishes so Missouri can help keep a man in power who day after day advances policies that are antithetical to a heritage that millions have lived and died to defend and to perfect.

Now we have the spectacle of our chosen state representatives and our chosen state senators meeting to undermine our representatives in the national government that we voted to support less than one year ago, and in the process throw out a Black Methodist minister who has served our state with great honor and decency in Washington since January 3, 2005, a man dedicated to public service in the pulpit as well as in the places of power—a dozen years on the city council in our largest city, eight years as its mayor, and more than two decades representing Christian values and his district’s needs.

He rightfully threatens to fight this ill-conceived realignment in court: “It will render people in Kansas City essentially silent and powerless,” Cleaver said. “The reason I’m saying this is Kansas City is roughly 70-something percent Democratic. If you tear Kansas City apart — put one portion of the Kansas City area in one district, the other in another — the chances are they have no representation.”

He is correct although today’s majority party does not seem to care.

What hammer does Donald Trump hold over our lawmakers that makes them so craven in doing his bidding? It’s a big one. It’s the power to withhold or even take back the billions of dollars in federal funding that underwrite about half of the state budget.

It is awfully hard to look down the barrel of that gun and not wilt. Trump wants no defiance from Missouri and from other Republican states. He and those who are pulling his strings daily prove they care not one whit for most of us but expects our voices in government at state and federal levels to say only two words: “Yes, sir.”

Some key questions emerge: Is there time to make all of this happen?  Can opponents drag out the special session before the bill passes and the court battles begin and how long will that process take before it clears state courts and goes through the federal court system, which will take even more time?

When will filing for these offices begin if this issue is tied up in courts?  Candidates cannot file in districts that will not legally exist until the courts rule which map will be THE map. When will primary elections be held, ditto? When will lawsuits challenging the results begin and be processed? Will the court fights be  done  before time for a November election?

This is going to be a long and ugly process that will do nothing to improves public confidence in Missouri’s, and the nation’s, government.

One man wants to take away one of our members of Congress with a new map THAT IS UNLIKELY TO BE PUT OUT FOR VOTER APROVAL before an election is held specifically to oust a congressman who has been elected eleven times by people in a district that Trump wants the Missouri legislature to destroy.

Here is the final question:

How much does the Missouri General Assembly want to disgrace itself for a man who has been considered by almost 150 of the nation’s most distinguished historians one of the worst presidents in history—-eve before he started swinging a sledgehammer in his second term.

Despite the words of a long-ago popular song, Freedom IS a word for everything to lose.

Our legislators will tell us at the end of this special session if they think it is, as the song also says, “just another word.”

Sometimes—-

Posted on by
1

I wish I was a reporter again. God! I used to love to ask important people, “What the Hell do you think you’re doing?” although I didn’t use those words. The point of the questions was the same.  I loved those moments, as good reporters do.  It’s what we are there for, actually.

Bloomberg News has quoted the leader of the Missouri Senate saying President Trump wants our congressional districts redrawn “to be sure Missouri’s representation matches Missouri’s Christian conservative majority.”

If I were still a reporter, I would have several questions. .

What are the values of a “Christian conservative majority” that are lacking in any of our present congressional districts—or members of Congress?  Is it just a matter of Democrats serving from two of those districts?  Does the election of Democrats indicate a majority of the people in a district lack Christian values, particularly “Christian conservative” values?

Given that our two Democratic controlled districts are centered in our biggest cities, is she suggesting St. Louis and Kansas City are to some degree not Christian?

Are these congressional districts that are not conservative Christian Muslim?  Shintoists? Buddhists? Sikhs?  Atheists?  One of the Congressmen is a Methodist Minister. Is he not Christian enough?  He’s the one in the crosshairs. How about Methodists generally?  The denomination has split recently. Which side is most Christian?

How does the Trump administration reflect the Christian values of being our brother’s keeper, of being the Good Samaritans, of helping the poor, of healing the sick? How does President Trump fit into that description of Christianity?

How is ICE and its behaviors a reflection of “Christian conservative values?”

How does she square Paul’s letter to the Galatians that proclaims, “There is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male and female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

—Or even how well the leader of our government fits the admonition from the Old Testament Prophet Micah:

He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.
And what does the Lord require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
and to walk humbly with your God.

It seems from here that there are shortages in the justice and mercy categories. And humility is not a word in the Bible he’s peddling.

One of the joys of being a reporter is being curious about things and having access to people who can discuss answers to that curiosity.

I was away from the Capitol for about five years after I left my life in the newsroom and when I went back to the Capitol to try to convince the legislature to do things the casino industry won’t let it do, I realized how much I missed the intellectual give-and-take of the place. A reporter’s job is to question and questions by reporters should not be automatically interpreted as hostile as often as they are, especially today when some political skin seems horribly thin.

How can we understand the religious attitudes that are dividing us if we refuse to ask or refuse to answer questions that test what we believe. And how Christian is it to claim that there is no room for different interpretations whether they are personal, denominational, social, or political?

Religion is an especially touchy subject these days when it has become a political tool or weapon. I struggle to accept those who think differing views make someone less Christian.

As I have often remarked, “Nothing screws up faith more than religion.”

I’d like to know what religion has to do with congressional redistricting.  I doubt that Donald Trump has made that one of his reasons for trying to gerrymander-rig the 2026 elections.

Apparently, six Christian districts and two heathen districts isn’t good enough.  We’ll be watching how legislators suddenly take a heathen area and with a few strokes of their genuine Donald J. Trump Sharpie, legislators will turn a heathen part of the state into a Christian one.

I’m pretty sure that is not something James Madison and his fellow creators anticipated when they wrote the Constitution. And I’m also pretty sure the court system has never ruled that congressional districts must be drawn intentionally to reflect Christian values.

I’m just an observer now. But, man oh man, there are times when I wish I could walk up to someone who thinks they’re important and ask things like this.

One Christian to another.

 

NIL

Posted on by
Reply

We don’t use the word “nil” very much in this country. And when somebody does—as in the score of a soccer game, one-nil—it is considered something of an affectation. On this side of the Atlantic we use “nothing.”  Every now and then somebody says “zero” instead of “nil.”

I started writing this entry yesterday, just after breakfast.  I’m glad I had already eaten because I saw Eli Hoff’s story in the Post-Dispatch that said my university had spent almost $32 million last year to buy athletes and I lost my appetite.

—-for collegiate sports.

Mizzou is spending a quarter of a billion dollars to put more seats into a facility that might fill them seven out of the next 365 days.  And then it’s spending more than half of the Name-Image-Likeness money on the players who will perform on the field below regardless of whether they win.

Name Image Likeness came about because of a court decision that said universities have to compensate the athletes whose names, images, and likenesses appear on shirts, mock jerseys, programs, TV promotions for the athletic department, and so forth.

So schools bid for the thoroughbred players who, once signed, have no particular loyalty to the school and can bolt for a higher-paying job at another university as soon as the season is over. And the fan base, which is paying twice as much for season football tickets this year plus a healthy “gift” (in politics the phrase is “lug.”) that entitles them to park somewhere in Boone County, watches a team to whom institutional loyalty is minimized thanks to the transfer portal and education is secondary rather than post-secondary.

The phrase “student-athlete” is so Twentieth Century.  The “athlete-student” is the name of the game these days, especially in the high-profile sports of football and basketball.  If you’re a future Wimbledon winner, you might get a few financial crumbs to play tennis for some university, but don’t expect to be paid to appear in some goofy television commercial for a company that kicks in big bucks to buy the best football and basketball players.

But being paid some pretty good money to be a college athlete isn’t a bad deal. Some jocks will have some financial security before they enter the real world where most of them will not become professional-professional athletes, rather than professional amateurs. And a few, such as WNBA star Caitlin Clark, might have to take a salary reduction to turn pro.

The NCAA says that these paid athletes are still amateurs as far as it is concerned.

Three concluding points:

I’m proud of the degree I have from the University of Missouri and I do make modest membership contributions to the alumni association. But I’ll never buy a ticket for a university sporting event because the financial tail has outgrown the dog on many of our college campuses.

I admire the athletes who DON’T have one eye on the ball and the other on the transfer portal. But the portal game is a mercenary one and I won’t support it.

The NCAA might say these folks are amateurs, but the NCAA does not run the State of Missouri and the state is missing a good bet by not extending its Athletes and Entertainers Tax program to levy an income tax on  visiting NIL-paid athletes who play here. The professional-professional athletes pay that tax. The million-dollar quarterback from Alabama or Georgie or Ohio State, etcetera, should contribute, too.

Now, there is a qualification to this spleen-letting this morning and it is this: NIL is a very complicated issue that the fan in the stands or in the fan in the recliner might not completely grasp and the reflexed knee in  this entry might be missing some important points that render these thoughts in-valid.  That’s why we have the reaction box at the end of these entries—so the host can be set straight on things. So have at it.  Reasonable discussion is always welcome (but stay within Captain Woodrow Call’s guidelines that we established a long time ago.

(As we were wrapping up this entry, we came across a 2024 article in Harvard Law Today that has an interview discussing the history and the significance of legal actions that have brought us to this point.  https://hls.harvard.edu/today/peter-carfagna-on-the-state-of-the-ncaa-nil-and-amateurism/).

 

I Don’t Know 

Posted on by
Reply

ne of these days a reporter who has some rare time on his or her hands will compile a list of all of the times a president who has claimed “only I can fix it” doesn’t know anything.

He has said, “I don’t know….” so many times that one has to question, “What DOES he know?”

In 2019, USA Today counted eleven people Trump claimed he never met or didn’t know “despite evidence to the contrary.”

One was Jeffrey Epstein, whose sex trafficking of young girls sent him to prison where he committed suicide. Trump called him a “terrific guy” and someone  he had known for fifteen years who was “a lot of fun to be with. It is even said he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side” in a 2002 magazine article.

But when the fertilized hit the ventilation system it was a form of “I don’t know” when he said, “I knew him like everybody in Palm Beach knew him…I was not a fan.”

Sooooo….Trump didn’t know him after all?

There have been assorted other people, some who have been close to him, that he suddenly didn’t know after they wrote or spoke about him critically.

The latest “I don’t know” moment came last weekend when he was interviewed on NBC’s Face the Nation and was asked on NBC’s Meet the Press if throwing thousands of immigrants out of the country without recognizing their rights to due process is Constitutional, he indicated that his power is greater than the Constitution.

“I don’t know. I’m not a lawyer. I don’t know,” he said.

A little more than 100 days ago, he took the oath for the second time that includes “”I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Given his recent actions, it appears preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution is beyond his ability, a strange attitude for someone who has had previous experience in the office.

We know he doesn’t read so he must not have read the Fifth Amendment that pretty clearly says nobody will be “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

It does not say “citizen.”  It says “person.” The Supreme Court has ruled that people who are not citizens remain people and have basic rights.

But Trump complained that following the constitution would be a nuisance. “I don’t know,” he said again. “It seems—it might say that, but if you’re talking about that, then we’d have to have a million or two million or three million trials.  We have thousands of people that are—some murderers and some drug dealers and some of the worst people on Earth. I was elected to get them the hell out of here, and the courts are holding me from doing it.

But “some” is unlikely to be as many as three million protected “people.”

He was asked, “Even given those numbers…don’t you need to uphold the Constitution of the United States as president?”

You don’t have to guess at his answer.

“I don’t know,” he said.

“I have to respond by saying, again, I have brilliant lawyers that work for me, and they are going to obviously follow what the Supreme Court said.”

He must not have talked to his brilliant lawyers or his brilliant lawyers lack the ability to read at least three recent decisions that protect due process rights for immigrants.

As far as one to three million trials—-

There would be far fewer “trials” if Trump and his minions obeyed court rulings and acted Constitutionally.  And if they actually did focus on immigrants with serious criminal records. Many of them have fled from countries where it is a criminal offense to try to exercise OUR constitutional rights—that their country does not recognize.

And there would not be full-blown trials. These folks would go before an immigration judge, such judges being employees of the Justice Department, not part of the constitutional judicial branch.

That would not require full trials, as Trump suggested. What it would require is the chance to appear before an immigration judge. Such judges are not part of the judicial branch; they are employees of the Justice Department. Regardless, Trump’s brilliant lawyers would have to prove that these bad people are in fact members of Venezuelan gangs, a legal nicety Trump chooses to ignore.

That might bring about a definition of “invasion,” which Trump too casually claims to justify round up people under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act.  It would be inconvenient to have to prove that the chicken plucker, pork processor, roofer, and operator of a restaurant with an international cuisine.

The Supreme Court already has ruled twice that men facing terrorist charges cannot be shipped off to the friendly El Salvador prison without due process, namely a hearing. There has been at least one “administrative error,” but that’s too bad. The victim of it has to say in the Salvadorian lockup.  When asked if anybody in his administration is in touch with the Salvadorian government to secure the mistake’s release, Trump said,

“I don’t know.”

“You’d have to ask the attorney general that question.” He said.  “I’m relying on the attorney general of the United States, Pam Bondi, who’s very capable, doing a great job.”  He then claimed that he is not involved in the legality or illegality of such things.

In other words, we have a president who thinks he is personally above the Constitution and he has no responsibility for illegal acts of his administration.

Moving right along.

He has threatened to take the tax-exempt status away from Harvard University because it refuses to bow to his demands to eliminate DEI on campus. That, he was reminded, flies in the face of federal law that says a resident cannot direct the IRS to rescind the tax-exempt stature of an organization.

This time he did not directly say, “I don’t know.”  He’s just following what his lawyers, hired on the basis of loyalty, say.  The he blundered through, “They say that we’re allowed to do that, and I’m all for it. But everything I say is subject to the laws being 100% adhered to.”

Uh….what?

If being ignorant on so many things or about so many people makes him a “stable genius,” then by comparison the rest of us should be able to go into the kitchen and mix up a brew of cold fusion.

-0-

 

Is the Pen Mightier Than the Pen?

Posted on by
1

President Trump thinks his is—-

(Before we dive into his most serious effort yet to destroy press freedom, we have to get off our chest the total disgrace our president has brought to the office and to this country with the proud display on his social media site and on the White House site of the AI-generated image of him as the next Pope. He might think it is funny but it is an international insult to hundreds of millions of Christians, Catholics in particular, and is unforgivable. How his religious right followers can find this acceptable in any way is beyond comprehension and their silence reveals a great deal about their—well, to use a word often  used against the left—weaponization of religion to get and keep political power.)

And his use of his pen–or marker—to try to silence the pens of the press, in this case, National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service is clearly the pen of a frightened dictator, not a president.

Dictators are scared to death of the press or of anyone who refuses to swallow whole their statements or who opposes them whether it is on the streets, in the chambers of congress, or in the courts.

I am the press.

I am the mainstream media.

I am one of Trump’s “enemies of the people.”

And I have never been afraid of the minor league Trumps I have encountered on rare occasions and I shall not be afraid of this Political Sultan of Swat who wants us to fear him because he thinks he is bigger than the game. He is not.

I have often said that I never broadcast fake news but I have broadcast news about fakes and Donald J. Trump is deep in the second category, a man who knows much about power and cares little about service, who knows little about law and cares even less about courts, a president who swore to uphold the Constitution who tries daily to dismantle it, a billionaire to says lesser people, many of whom helped elect him, will just have to live with his tariff-triggered tax increases. His suggestion that children will have to live with just two dolls for Christmas instead of thirty is astoundingly arrogant and completely unfeeling.

From his relentless attacks on the press that dares to challenge his lies, to his snatch, grab, and deportation of people too often without regard to their citizenship status or near-status, to his disregard for legal process for all within our borders, to his unreasoning chainsaw approach to turning bureaucrats into burdens on our unemployment system, there is nothing about this man that indicates he is anything but a power-devouring plutocrat.

He is not man enough to deal honestly with those who differ with him, particularly with those who point to his dishonesty.

Whether you agree with government funding of news organizations, even those our own government has used to penetrate the darkness of dictatorships in other parts of the world, is less important than what is really behind his executive order on funding of PBS and NPR.

It is censorship.

His disrespect of our system of government is on blatant display here.  We can expect legal challenges (likely to be accepted by judges who place law over loyalty) asserting his actions are obvious attempts to shut down media that he cannot control or that doesn’t parrot what he says. They need only to point to his disrespect for political process to prove their point.

The proper path to follow for a president who does not agree with something Congress has funded is to veto the bill or the line item in it. Congress then has the check on that power by having the ability to override the veto by two-thirds votes in each chamber.

But it’s too late to veto the funding this year and he doesn’t want to wait to veto it next year, so he’ll give some lawyers more billable hours when they challenge the latest executive order as unconstitutional.  And there are plenty of law firms that he can’t bully who will protect the constitution that he seems to relish violating.

“Government funding of news media in this environment is not only outdated and unnecessary but corrosive to the appearance of journalistic independence,” said his order, an obviously hypocritical  statement from someone who is, himself, corrosive to journalistic independence. s. He would not have signed his order if he did not fear reporting that does not fit his definition of loyalty and is thus is independent of him. That’s why the key phrases are “in this environment” and “the appearance of journalistic independence.”  There is no room for journalistic independence in the mental and political “environment” he lives in and wants to force on our country.

First amendment protections of free speech and a free press be damned. This is another example of Trump’s disdain for two of the foremost parts of the foremost statement in the Bill of Rights.

The White House propaganda office put out a statement proclaiming, “President Trump Finally Ends the Madness of NPR, PBS.”

Here is one of the complaints:

  • In 2021, NPR declared the Declaration of Independence to be a document with “flaws and deeply ingrained hypocrisies.”
    • In 2022, NPR scrapped its decades-long Independence Day tradition of reading the Declaration of Independence on air to instead discuss “equality.”
    • NPR subsequently issued an “editor’s note” warning the Declaration of Independence is “a document that contains offensive language.”

And what does Trump KNOW about the Declaration? Apparently nothing that requires any thought. To hear him describe it in a recent ABC interview in his office where he keeps a copy of the document, he doesn’t know jack. He was asked what it means to him and his response clearly indicates it’s just a wall decoration.

 “Well, it means, exactly what it says. It’s a declaration, it’s a declaration of unity and love and respect, and it means a lot, and it’s something very special to our country.”

Love of—–who? Not George III, although Trump can identify with him.

Respect for—-what? Taxes on imported goods? Using the army to enforce civil law?

It just “means a lot” and it’s “very special.”  Too bad the interviewer didn’t ask him to quote his favorite line.

He has portraits of past Presidents on the office walls but when asked about their importance, his answers were disgraceful for someone who is their successor.

On FDR: “He was a serious president whether we like it or not. He was a four-termer and, uh, went through a war.”

On Lincoln: He was a great president. He went through a lot.”

(So says the great military genius who described the fight at Gettysburg as, “so much and so interesting, and so vicious and horrible, and so beautiful in so many different ways.”)

“James Monroe: “The Monroe Doctrine. I think the Monroe Doctrine is pretty important. That was his claim to fame.” 

Not that Trump has ever read the Doctrine or understands why it was written.  And it is not Monroe’s only claim to fame.  Don’t ask Trump for any other things Monroe did.

To call him an empty vessel on such topics is wrong. He not an empty vessel.  His is filled with himself nobody else is important to have any room in it.

As attorney Ron Filipkowski, also an editor-in-chief of Meidas Touch News, put it, “Trump has absolutely no clue what the Declaration of Independence is or what it says.”

We don’t know that Trump’s defunding of NPR and PBS is intended to intimidate other mainline media outlets, some of which he has sued because he didn’t like the tones of their voices.  But it clearly shows a disregard for an important part of the constitution.

Unfortunately some media organizations as well as legal firms have buckled to his threats.  This is no time to do that.

Long ago I was told the best thing to do with a playground bully is to slug him in the nose the first time you meet him. Some judges, even those he appointed, aren’t afraid to do that. More people including lawyers and media organizations should be unafraid, too.

It’s important in light of this obvious censorship effort that people fight back.  We can fight back with donations to public broadcasting whether we agree totally or partially with what it says.  Protecting the right to say things is being taken from those unwilling to punch a bully in the nose.  Let it not be taken from us by whatever means he wants to take it.

He’s afraid of those who fight him.  A scared little man with delusions of adequacy that will cost us our country if we tolerate him.

-0-

The Meaning of a Wisconsin Election

Posted on by
Reply

When a people choose vindictive self-service over broader public concern, they make an eventually correctible mistake.

When Congress replaces responsibility for the many with loyalty to one, a nation is in trouble.

When courts replace justice with ideology, a nation might be lost.

We live in and often must endure our own humanness. But there are protections that we must trust within our political system that keep our mistake from becoming our destruction.

This is such a time.

The current administration has attacked the courts and the “unelected judges” who are overturning unconstitutional executive orders, preferring that the court system get out of the way. We can be grateful that our founders made the court a road block to injustice.

Elected? The dangers of an elected judiciary were on plain view in Wisconsin a few days ago where an effort was made to buy a seat on the state supreme court for someone designated as a Trump supporter who would tilt the court majority politically toward Trump.

It has become obvious to many within the last few days that they were mistaken when they accepted without question the promises given last year by Donald Trump.  Now, they must place their hope with a Congress in which some are beginning to question their loyalty to him and wonder if they have the courage to remember their responsibility.

In the end, though, it is the courts that have the ultimate responsibility for saving our nation.

The courts cannot completely nor immediately reverse the course set by the mistake. But the courts are our ultimate and final refuge—

—-which is why the recent Wisconsin Supreme Court election was so critical, not just for Wisconsin, but for all of us; not just because of WHO was elected but because of WHAT was rejected.

History has shown liberal or conservative-tilting courts are not always as clearly divided as the labels we attach to their individual members seem to indicate they will be. There is a middle ground that often is the resting place for compromise on carefully designed decisions. And it is that middle ground on the finest points of a case that might produce no major progress but will save us from any major regression.

Missouri originated a system that avoids the fight we recently saw in Wisconsin that featured a concerted effort to buy a seat on the Supreme Court. It is regrettable that we still allow people to try to buy part of our state constitution by financing multi-million dollar petition campaigns (last year’s sports wagering campaign in which the casino industry spent more than $40 million to get 3,000 more people to vote for sports wagering than voted against it after a misleading campaign is an example) and they can bankroll candidates for the legislature in an effort to buy laws.

But because our highest court judges are not elected, they cannot be bought.

Chief Justice Laura Denvir Smith, who also was the Chair of the Appellate Judicial Commission, told the Missouri Senate Rules Committee in 2007:

Judges are not intended to be politicians, choosing sides based on political considerations, or what the judge’s neighbors, fundraisers or special interest groups might think was best.  Deciding cases based on the judge’s or another’s perception of what is popular or politically expedient is inconsistent with one’s duty as a judge and is just plain wrong.  

The judicial branch of our democracy instead must be neutral, seeing that the laws are applied fairly, and providing stability in the law so that there is consistency in the rules by which people live their lives.  Although some court decisions are not popular, popularity is not the benchmark of quality in the judicial branch: The nature of our business is such that half the people are unhappy because they lost and some of the ones who won are unhappy because they don’t think they won enough.  

In every case, from a marital dissolution that only affects the couple and their children to an issue of constitutional validity, the role of the judicial branch is to resolve disputes neutrally and fairly based on the facts that are presented in court.  If they are doing their job correctly, judges decide based on the law and the facts, not based on the possible political ramifications of different results.

Sometimes the public, the parties and even the judges deciding a case are unhappy with its outcome, because the law may not produce a result that accords with our personal preferences. But if you ask those same people, when they have a case in court, whether they want a judge to pre-decide it based on the judge’s views of what will look good in the newspaper the next day, or, instead, whether they want a judge who will come to court with an open mind, listen to their side of the case, and reach a fair decision – they will pick the open mind and the fair decision – every time.

No one wants to worry that the case will be decided against them because the other side, or the other side’s lawyer, gave a large contribution to the judge’s election campaign, or to those politicians who appointed or nominated the judge for office.  Missourians learned long ago, before they adopted the nonpartisan plan, that is exactly what can and does happen when politics becomes a key factor in determining who will be a judge.

Missouri was the first state to adopt a non-partisan judicial selection process somce adopted by a majority of the states, although some states have added their own tweaks.

Although we adopted our plan in 1940 in an effort to take as much politics as possible out of the judicial selection process, the issue goes back to our first Constitution that was written in 1820 and had to be accepted by Congress before Missouri was allowed to become the 24th state.

That Constitution had the governor nominating judges at all levels and if the senate gave its consent to his nomination, the judges cold serve until they were 65 as long as they engaged in “good behavior.” But if the legislature found a judge having badly, it could by a two-thirds vote in each legislative chamber, ask the governor to remove a judge.

In the next couple of decades, though, Missourians began to doubt the wisdom of that latter point because it made the courts subservient to legislative politics and legislators were too influenced by special interests. Missouri became one of the states that decided the answer was judicial elections, legalized here in 1850.

By the start of the Twentieth Century and the machine politics of the time—the Pendergast family’s control of Democrat politics in its home town of Kansas City and in much of Missouri and the Butler machine in St. Louis, for example—the public became concerned that the judiciary’s independence was in doubt.

Beginning in 1903, when four state senators were indicted for taking bribes to vote on legislation specifying ingredients for Missouri-made baking powder and the supreme court overturned the first conviction and sentence and the other three cases never went to trial, there was suspicion that the supreme court had its own “boodle” scandal.

The Pendergast grip on Democratic politics statewide in the 1930s led to a push for adoption of a nonpartisan court plan known as “merit selection.” It was part of a national movement aimed at assuring our courts would be a true third branch of government.

When the legislature refused to hold an election on the proposal, an initiative petition forced a vote—and Missouri voters bought the idea in November, 1940.  When the legislature put a repeal of the plan on the 1942 ballot, voters strongly rejected it.

When our present state constitution was adopted in 1945, the plan was not touched.

The plan was limited to judges of the Missouri Supreme Court and courts of appeals. It also applied to some lower courts, including the probate courts, in the city of St. Louis and Jackson County. Other counties were given the option of adopting the plan.  But only six of our circuit courts have been put under the non-partisan plan, recognized nationally as The Missouri Plan.

Here is how it works:

A nonpartisan judicial commission, the Appellate Judicial Commission, solicits applications, interviews candidates and picks three finalists. The commission has three citizens appointed by the governor, three lawyers appointed by the Missouri Bar, with the chair being the chief justice of the Supreme Court. The commission picks three finalists whose names are made public, and the governor makes the final choice.

When a vacancy occurs, the commission seeks applicants and encourages the public to nominate well-qualified candidates for consideration. The commission reviews the applications of lawyers who wish to join the court and selects which applicants it will interview, then conducts those interviews in public. The commission then deliberates in a closed meeting to select a panel of three nominees for the governor’s consideration.

The governor has sixty days to announce his choice. If the governor fails to make a pick, the commission re-convenes and fills the vacancy. That has never been necessary.

The new judges then serve at least a year but then have to stand for retention in a statewide vote. The vote does not involve opposing candidates. It only asks citizens if the judge should be kept in office. There is no campaigning although the Missouri Bar’s Judicial Performance Evaluation Committee (made up of lawyers and non-lawyers) gives voters information about each of the judges up for retention so informed votes can be cast.

Although all counties can adopt this procedure, only a few use it. Only six jurisdictions do evaluations and hold non-partisan circuit judge elections—St. Louis city and county, Clay, Jackson, and Platte Counties in the Kansas City metro area, and Greene County (the Springfield area).

The plan is recognized as one that keeps politics out of judicial selection as much as possible. Unlike the federal system in which a President can reward friendly lawyers with juicy judicial appointments, this plan creates a process that sends up three people whose qualifications are based n their understanding of the law and the proper administration of it. There is no Senate approval of nominees, which would run the risk of politics being a major part of the process.

It does not keep those who want to degrade the legal system for their own protection or benefit from complaining about “unelected activist judges.”  But, having learned how it operates, this system might make it clear that some of the current attacks on the judiciary have no grounds, at least not here and not in our appellate court system.

The Missouri Non-Partisan Court Plan is the greatest protection we have against those who want to replace justice with ideology.