Category Archives: war

Heather

Posted on by
Reply

It is not uncommon in our household for one of us (usually Nancy), to ask the other, “Have you read Heather’s column today?—Heather Cox Richardson, a Boston University history professor who gives us great understanding of the historical roots of contemporary events, calls her column, “Letters from an American.”  It’s one of the top columns on Substack.

Her column a day after President Trump’s fact-free speech Thursday night lifts the veil to expose his handlers (string-pullers?) and the frightening future they are planning for our country. It is a lesson we better learn from our past. As any good academic person would do, she footnotes her comments.

0-0-0-0-0-0

Yesterday President Donald J. Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and deputy White House chief of staff Stephen Miller all threw the weight of the U.S. government behind a far-right conspiracy theory that says Trump and his loyalists are defending the United States of America against a communist takeover.

As Gil Duran of The Nerd Reich recalled today, two years ago, far-right influencer Jack Posobiec and co-author Joshua Lisec wrote a bestselling book called Unhumans: The Secret History of Communist Revolutions (and How to Crush Them). Trump ally and media guru Stephen Bannon wrote the introduction. Donald Trump Jr. blurbed the book, saying that it provided a playbook to deploy “immediately to save the West.” Then–Ohio senator J.D. Vance also blurbed the book, saying: “In the past, communists marched in the streets waving red flags. Today, they march through HR, college campuses, and courtrooms to wage lawfare against good, honest people. In Unhumans, Jack Posobiec and Joshua Lisec reveal their plans and show us what to do to fight back.”

Posobiec is a loyalist who worked to keep Trump in office after voters elected Democrat Joe Biden in 2020. He is known for courting controversy by promoting what Maya Oppenheim of the The Independent in 2018 called “wholly erroneous and debunked conspiracy theories,” including the infamous 2016 “Pizzagate” conspiracy theory that Democrats were operating a child sex ring in the basement of a Washington, D.C., pizza restaurant.

In Unhumans, Posobiec and Lisec argue that the United States is under siege by “the left,” which in their view means anyone from communists to “progressives.” “For the purposes of this book, we will call them the unhumans,” the authors write, because they “oppose everything that makes up humanity. As they are opposed to humanity itself, they place themselves outside of the category completely, in an entirely new misery-driven subdivision, the unhuman.”

Lisec explained to Nathan J. Robinson of Current Affairs that the reason they called the book “Unhumans” “is because it’s a verb, to unhuman someone…. To ‘unhuman’ someone means to deprive someone of their rights to life, liberty and property.” The authors insisted that “communists” were trying to “unhuman” those they consider good Americans, and that “we can’t tolerate an ideology like that” and so must do it to them first.

Ignoring the fascist revolutions that gave rise to World War II, the authors tie together left-wing revolutions from the late Roman Republic to the French Revolution of 1789 to the Russian and Chinese revolutions to the present and claim that all political positions designed to regulate business, provide a basic social safety net, promote infrastructure, or protect civil rights reflect that same left-wing radicalism. In their telling, Spain’s fascist dictator Francisco Franco, who said, “Wherever I am, there will be no communism,” is a hero.

Franco ordered illegal detentions, torture, and mass killings in the name of social cleansing. As Michelle Goldberg of the New York Times noted in 2024, the right wing has often championed Franco, but “it’s extremely unusual for a candidate for vice president of the United States to openly align himself with autocratic terror.”

The embrace of authoritarianism in Unhumans reflects the modern version of an ideology shaped after World War II by those determined to get rid of the modern state. Although the great majority of both Republicans and Democrats embraced such a government, right-wing reactionaries insisted it was a slippery slope to socialism. Defending business regulation, social welfare, infrastructure investment, and civil rights cost tax dollars and so, they said, redistributed wealth.

Over the years, reactionaries insisted that Americans who believed in such a system were un-American takers sucking dry the country’s makers. Increasingly, they demonized Black Americans or people of color and women as lazy and looking for government handouts, breaking laws with impunity, corrupting the country with their godless ways, and winning elections only by cheating.

And yet voters continued to elect lawmakers who supported the modern government. This infuriated the far right, but even establishment Republicans recognized that voters liked Social Security and cancer research, clean air and reproductive rights. While they turned out voters by railing against the “Liberals” who supported regulations and the welfare state, they made sure not to cut into those programs deeply enough to cause a backlash.

Trump has unmasked that facade. He has put the far right in power, where they are destroying the modern American state. Right-wing officials have undermined the world trade system that underpins American prosperity, empowered economic monopolists by slashing regulations and public lands, decimated reproductive rights and healthcare, cut social safety programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Medicaid, slashed medical and scientific research, and dismantled the post–World War II rules-based international order that has maintained global stability for seventy-five years.

But the right-wing push to get rid of the modern state is deeply unpopular. And so Trump and his loyalists are embracing the idea that his opponents are in league with a historic throughline of left-wing revolutionaries.

Trump’s speech last night began with a completely fantastical vision of current conditions in the U.S. that has been widely debunked, point by point, by fact-checkers. But his portrait of a nation “doing really well” was a setup for his warning that the prosperity and success he touts are under direct threat by “leftists” both abroad and at home.

Trump claimed to present evidence that beginning with the 2020 election cycle, China “carried out what was believed to be the largest compromise of election data in history.” He referred to “China’s illicit acquisition of 220 million U.S. voter files” and called this an “unprecedented election security nightmare.” In fact, as Louis Jacobson and Amy Sherman of PolitiFact report, documents the White House itself posted show that such information is publicly available for purchase, and such purchases are common.

Trump also said documents showed that “members of the deep state” worked “to actively suppress and downplay information about the extent of China’s sinister election meddling.” But, in fact, the intelligence community told Trump about foreign interference in 2021, and Biden released its report when he took office. The report said China did not make an effort to change the outcome of the 2020 election.

Actually, one of the documents Trump released yesterday shows that Russia tried to influence the 2020 election to defeat Biden. Its operatives worked “with US officials and other prominent persons” to “spread claims about former Vice President Biden as well as Ukrainian politicians and alleged Ukrainian influence in the 2016 US elections.” Trump has denied Russian interference in U.S. elections.

Trump tied American journalists to this alleged plot, claiming the Chinese government was paying journalists to write negatively about him. He then attacked the media for being “part of a plot…to continue this [election] fraud for whatever reason. They want to keep it going. They want to protect the radical left.” He called for the government to revoke their broadcast licenses.

“The findings are stunning,” Trump said, and indeed if they were true, we should expect dramatic diplomatic rifts and lawsuits. But does Trump actually believe any of this? The White House today said plans for a lavish state visit of Chinese leader Xi Jinping to Washington, D.C., in two months have not changed.

Trump’s warning of a communist threat against U.S. elections was a setup for his insistence that future elections could be rigged and that the country must do as he says to stop that danger.

He said he had ordered the Department of Homeland Security “to notify every state about noncitizens on their rolls and direct them to be deemed ineligible.” And he demanded Congress pass the SAVE America voter suppression act, saying “the only reason you wouldn’t do it is you want to cheat because your policies are so bad and your candidates are so pathetic that you can’t get elected in any other way.”

“These reforms are urgently needed to stop the vulnerabilities that I have mentioned,” he said, and he told Americans to call lawmakers to demand they pass the SAVE America act.

Today Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin demanded states run voter rolls through a federal digital tool designed to identify noncitizens who are ineligible for certain government programs. Federal judges have blocked federal demands for those rolls sixteen times and prohibited the use of the federal tool, noting it was not designed to scan citizens’ information and often flags recently naturalized citizens as noncitizens. Blocked by the courts, Mullin threatened state officials with criminal prosecution if they don’t comply with Trump’s demands.

Yesterday Secretary of State Rubio expounded on the administration’s opposition to “Radical Left terrorism.” A meeting at the State Department was billed as an examination of the “transnational” nature of far-left terrorism, but Shannon K. Kingston of ABC News noted that Rubio and other officials from the Trump administration spoke primarily about what they call “antifa” and conditions in the United States, including the assassination attempts against Trump.

Kingston noted that a 2025 analysis by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) showed that left-wing political violence in the U.S. “remains much lower than historical levels of violence carried out by right-wing and jihadist attackers.”

Nonetheless, the White House said, “Under the leadership of President Donald J. Trump, far-left extremism will be treated with the same seriousness and ferocity the world has long reserved for jihadist terrorism.”

There is a point to all this. Bannon argued in Tuesday’s War Room podcast that the idea of “communists” threatening to take over the United States through corrupt elections is “a predicate for immediate action.” That immediate action, he said, would be for Trump to declare “a national security emergency executive order…that took all of SAVE America plus plus plus plus.” And then, we can be sure, the Republicans will win the 2026 elections and, as Trump keeps saying, all the elections for the next 100 years. They would do so by default as the administration purged so-called communists from public life.

The parallels between Unhumans and the administration’s current rhetoric showed yesterday in Miller’s speech at the State Department. Bannon’s introduction to Unhumans begins with an epigram that reads: “Communism is when ugly deformed freaks make it illegal to be normal then rob and/or kill all successful people out of petty resentment and cruelty. The ideology is all just window dressing.”

Miller told the State Department attendees: “It’s not a coincidence that when you look at these violent antifa demonstrations, you see any photograph of those who are assembled, to be blunt, not one of the people that is demonstrating looks like a normal person, not one looks normal. They’re all deformed in some way, in their appearance, in their dress, in their mannerism. Why is that?… You look at two photographs, and you see, you know, a normal American street, you see an antifa protest. Why did the people that are violently demonstrating, why is there not one normal looking person among them? Every one of them, through the course of their life and their decisions, has scarred their body and their appearance in many different ways, to the point in which their outer appearance becomes a manifestation of their inner hatred.”

In response to Trump’s address last night, the chair of the Democratic Association of Secretaries of State, Cisco Aguilar of Nevada, released a statement saying: “That was some bullsh*t.”

—

Notes:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-jack-posobiec-pizzagate-rape-melania-sign-twitter-conspiracy-theory-far-right-a8159661.html

https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/trumpworlds-favorite-writer-says-the-right-must-emulate-dictators-in-battling-leftist-unhumans

https://www.thenerdreich.com/why-trump-keeps-talking-about-communism-the-unhumans-playbook/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/releases/2026/07/trump-administration-unleashes-global-campaign-to-crush-radical-left-terrorism/

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/05/opinion/jd-vance-fascism-unhumans.html

https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/17/politics/china-election-trump-xi-state-visit

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/homeland-security-secretary-markwayne-mullin-threatens-states-election-rcna588002

https://abcnews.com/Politics/rubio-urges-international-counterterrorism-crackdown-left/story?id=134820036

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/jd-vance-jack-posobiec_n_66a2755fe4b04c3a302465e7

https://www.mediamatters.org/voter-fraud-and-suppression/steve-bannon-says-trumps-thursday-night-speech-must-be-predicate

usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2026-07-17/trump-says-these-documents-prove-his-false-claims-of-election-fraud-heres-what-they-really-say

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/fact-checking-trumps-address-on-china-the-2020-election-and-what-documents-show

https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/that-was-some-bull-state-election-chiefs-condemn-trumps-long-debunked-election-lies/

Facebook:

lasvegassun/posts/cisco-aguilar-who-also-chairs-the-democratic-association-of-secretaries-of-state/1471435425029177/

YouTube:

watch?v=NoyiHAMTk3g

X:

atrupar/status/2078136910694715775

i/status/2078225308503671116

rcohen/status/2077528414852984883

Bluesky:

mcopelov.bsky.social/post/3mquj46i4hk2r

muellershewrote.com/post/3mqspe3ohnk2r

marcelias.bsky.social/post/3mquxehtpf22t

Instagram:

p/C712zy5Nk-X/?hl=en

Some Reflections on Memorial Day, Part One 

Posted on by
1

This was a Memorial Day that has taken some time for us to process.  The holiday’s origins are easily overlooked each year by the rush of noisy celebrations that seem far removed from the original intent of the day.  I was awash in those contrasting “celebrations” that have overshadowed the “observance” and “commemoration” originally intended. But I found toward the end in a closed state park a quiet reminder of why Memorial Day is and should be recalled for its origins—and why this contemporary noisy version of Memorial Day anticipates the next great holiday that this year will challenge our honesty about who we have become.

This might be written more for my benefit more than for yours and I hope you will excuse me for these ruminations.  I didn’t plan on them stretching into four chapters but a lot was going on, not the least of which was “The Greatest Spectacle in Racing.”

We’ll talk about the race but this series is not all about racing for the race is only part of the story.

The weekend had been spent in a city that observes/commemorates Memorial Day throughout the entire month of May. I know of no other city that rivals Indianapolis’s Memorial…..Month.

Indianapolis is a prototype that diminishing cities might use to reinvent themselves.s  through the course of several decades and several setbacks, Indianapolis has emerged as a dynamic, livable place of major league proportions in spirit and enterprise. And each year it throws one big party in May.

Reconciling the big party in that prototype city with the solemnity the holiday was originally created for, reconciling what men and women in the military died for in the war that created Memorial Day dwith what we are and what that the city is provided the ingredients for a lot of thinking on the long drive back to Jefferson City on Monday that took me through a lot of American history and some of my own.

I was born in Decatur Illinois, a town where Abraham Lincoln’s family briefly lived after moving from Indiana. I was raised in two small central Illinois towns, Mt. Pulaski (population about 1,500) and then Sullivan (a bigger place of about 3,300 when we moved there in fourth grade). Abraham Lincoln practiced law in both places as a circuit-riding attorney.

Lincoln scholars point to 1843 as the first time Lincoln and a couple of friends first quoted the phrase from three of the Gospels that “a house divided against itself can not stand” as they helped organize the Illinois Whig Party.

Fifteen years later, he spoke them again in accepting the nomination to run against incumbent Senator Stephen A. Douglas: “If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could then better judge what to do, and how to do it. . . .A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.”  He lost that election but it paved the way to the presidency two years later and the great test that followed that determined the correctness of the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and by 1858 Abraham Lincoln.

A civil war that tested that assertion took Lincoln to Gettysburg on November 19, 1863, where more than seven-thousand soldiers from both sides had been killed and more than forty thousand had been wounded. He paid tribute to those who died defending the Declaration of Independence’s proclamation that our nation had been “conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”

He called upon the nation that day to complete what he called the “unfinished work”  and “the great task remaining before us,” not referring to the war but to the words of the Declaration. He called for the people to recommit themselves to that cause so the nation should have a “new birth of freedom” flowing from, by, and for the people—a united people, a house NOT divided.

A 1904 newspaper article reported that in October 1864, almost a year after Gettysburg and about six months before the Civil War ended, three women in Boalsburg, Pennsylvania decorated the graves of Union soldiers.  Boalsburg, an unincorporated area of 4,600 today, makes the disputed claim that the event was the earliest documented observance of a memorial day.

On May 1, 1865, just three weeks after Lee’s surrender and two weeks after Lincoln’s death, as many at 10,000 people in deeply Confederate Charleston, South Carolina dedicated the graves of Union soldiers who had died in a Confederate Prison. Reports tell us many in the audience were Black.

Waterloo, NY claims to have held the first FORMAL annual observance of a memorial day on May 5, 1866. Local druggist Henry Welles is credited with thinking of the event.

The first national observance was on May 30, 1868 when former Illinois white supremacist John A. Logan, who had become became strong Lincoln supporter at the start of the war and abandoned his racist sentiments after fighting alongside black troops, issued a national proclamation calling for “for the purpose of strewing with flowers or otherwise decorating the graves of comrades who died in defense of their country. ” Logan, a wartime Union General, was the Commander of the Grand Army of the Republic, an organization for Union Army veterans such as my great grandfather. The day originally known as “Decoration Day” was expanded after World War I to honor all of our country’s military dead. It officially became Memorial Day in 1971 when it became a national Monday holiday that now is most often considered the unofficial beginning of summer.

Logan County, where Mt. Pulaski is, was named after Logan’s father. My great grandfather enlisted in the Union Army in Moultrie County, where Sullivan is.

My journey Monday, the now designated Memorial Day, took me back through that area of Lincoln and Logan, and Private Robert T. Priddy—who served under General Sherman at Vicksburg—where Logan was with another Union Army unit.  I had been thinking a lot about the cacophony that the holiday weekend had become as the miles of pavement disappeared beneath my car, I found myself in a quiet place that helped me put the day, the weekend, into a context.  I’ll take you from the cacophony to the quiet in succeeding chapters.

-0-

Blasphemy:

Posted on by
Reply

—The act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God or to something sacred.

(Warning: This entry begins with an intemperate phrase not normally uttered by the author but circumstances have driven him to do so because there appears no better way to state the case).

If there are any people in the world that Donald Trump hasn’t pissed off yet, do not despair. The rest surely will be included soon. (Messrs Putin,  Un, and Xi excepted).

Even his evangelical Christian friends have been taken aback by his attack on the pope coupled with the totally indefensible image of him apparently raising a modern Lazarus from the dead.  

He could have said the image was a symbolic representation of his claim that he inherited a dead country but raised it up to be the hottest country in the world, a claim that would be only slightly less ridiculous than what he told reporters it was: “I thought it was me as a doctor, and had to do with Red Cross, as a Red Cross worker, which we support.” Why he thought anybody with an IQ above five would buy the explanation that he thought he was portraying a doctor will forever be a mystery.

“Had to do with the Red Cross?” We’re not sure if the woman in the lower right corner is a nurse or an airline cabin attendant.  Had she been a nurse, she might have had a red cross on her blouse. But there is nothing in the image that would lead any sentient being to think “Red Cross” when they looked at it.

And “doctor?” Nobody from Doctor Kildare to The Pitt has ever worn that kind of outfit. And his claim only shows him to be more of a fool.

The image is full of nationalistic symbols—the Statue of Liberty, the fighter jets roaring overhead, the flag.  We’re not sure what the figures above his head are (one has wings). Perhaps they are the spirits of his battlefield casualties rising to a place he has said he’s not sure he’ll go.

Not Jesus?  The piece is reminiscent of this image we discovered on the internet. I have not discovered the artist so he or she could be properly credited, but the attire and the general mood of the work can easily lead one to think Trump-as-Jesus or Donald the Christ if you will, seems pretty derivative.

Jesus undoubtedly never looked like this WASP.  It is an image any White Christian Nationalist would enjoy hanging in living room, though.

Vice President J.D. Vance rushed to his boss’s defense with the absurd suggestion that Trump was only joking and, “He took it down because he recognized that a lot of people weren’t understanding his humor in that case.”

The Knights Templar, which began as a Catholic military order supporting the first Crusade a thousand years ago, called the image “offensive and blasphemous,” and said it was “deeply offended by this and have no other choice but to condemn it wholeheartedly and ask for a public apology to the Christian brethren who have been deeply upset by this depiction. We respectfully remind President Trump of the Bible Scripture found in Galatians 6:7 ‘God will not be mocked.'”

Continue reading →

Monstrosity

Posted on by
Reply

President Trump says he wants to build a 250-foot tall arch to celebrate this country’s 250th anniversary.  It is yet another project that wreaks of excess and of self-promotion.  Whatever its official name becomes, it’s always going to be known as the arch that Trump built. Arch deTrump, some already are calling it.

The only thing taller in the area that stretches from the Arlington National Cemetery east to the Library of Congress across from the Capitol is the Capitol itself, and by only a few feet.

Grace, beauty, and appropriateness have never been in his lexicon.  Gross, ugly, and inappropriate too often define him to an increasing number of people.  Last week, in an oval office reveal of the design for this monstrosity. CBS reporter Ed O’Keefe asked the President who the arch is for.  “Me,” he said.

The fact checkers who have built their careers on Trump’s lies had a day off on that one.

The Commission on Fine Arts refers to it as the Triumphal Arch. To be honest, the  letter “i” should replace the “h.”

The only manmade arch that we have been able to find that is bigger than this is the one on the St. Louis riverfront.

Napoleon’s Arc de Triomphe in Paris is almost 100 feet shorter, at 164 feet.  The Monument to the Revolution in Mexico City is only 220 feet. The Arch of Triumph in Pyongyang, North Korea tops out at 197 feet.

The four-sided arch that is the Pennsylvania State Memorial at Gettysburg, honoring the 34,500 Pennsylvania soldiers who fought there, checks in at 110 feet. Not far away, the National Memorial Arch at Valley Forge honoring those who wintered there 1777-78 is sixty feet high.

The top of the Memorial Arch in Huntington, West Virginia is only 42 feet from the ground. The Camp Randall, Wisconsin arch honoring Civil War veterans from that state needs only thirty feet to dignify them. The Bushnell Soldiers and Sailors Memorial Arch in Hartford, Connecticut is but 116 feet and the Washington Square Arch that commemorates George Washington’s inauguration in New York City gets the job done in 77 feet.

“It’s going to be beautiful,” he says.  Philip Kennicott with the Washington Post offers a brutal opposing view:

It is an insult to the men and women who risk their lives to protect democracy, who have fought in wars against fascism, who have actually achieved victory rather than merely declared and celebrated it. Its symbolism is borrowed and confused, and it will block a sacred vista that connects the Lincoln Memorial to the final resting place of the Civil War dead, and veterans from every major war and conflict this country has fought.

This is a subtly that escapes people such as Trump who think symbolic as well as real sledgehammers and wrecking balls are among mankind’s greatest inventions. The arch will stand at the southern end of the Arlington Memorial Bridge, interrupting the flow of history from the Lincoln Memorial to the peaceful hillside that is Arlington National Cemetery, a cemetery on land confiscated from Confederate commander Robert E. Lee as a resting place for those who defended the Union in the Civil War.

Some critics say the planned arch will obscure much of he cemetery but will frame Lee’s mansion at the top of the hill beyond. Is that intentional?  Who knows, although Trump has expressed a fondness for honoring Confederate leaders.

Trump has said it will be 250 feet high as a symbol of the nation’s 250th birthday. As of last week, however, it is only colored drawings.  The first shovel of dirt for the project has not yet been turned and Independence Day is less than 90 days away.  As one critic put it, “If it isn’t going to be done this year, it really has nothing to do with the 250th Anniversary, and as Trump said, it’s for him.”.

Kennecott concludes, “It perverts a fundamentally American idea about war. We have fought them, we have died in them, and we have brought war to too many people who did not deserve our meddling with their politics and sovereignty.

“But no matter the cause, no matter how great the victory, we fundamentally honor sacrifice and service. We celebrate the end of wars and the achievement of peace, not victory. Roman victory arches are lovely to look at, but they were primarily political statements, assertions of personal power and propaganda by ambitious men”.

Caesar Trumpus wants his arch.

If it can’t be finished by July 4, maybe he can complete it in time to celebrate his glorious victory over Iran.

IGNORANCE

Posted on by
Reply

Any good journalist abhors ignorance, even personal ignorance. Consumers of our products in all of their forms probably have no idea of the number of stories, programs, and books that spring from seeing something and thinking “?” and then learning the answer.

Most people don’t have or don’t take the time to pursue an answer. But it’s the old “who, what, when, where and how” that defines the journalist’s mind and the journalist’s work product.

I often have told people that it is the unknown that journalist face at the start of every day that makes getting up long before the rooster crows and staying up long after the sun sets. At the end of the day we have done something that science says is impossible: We have made something out of nothing. It’s called “news,” the unpredictability of life captured and the story told, a vanquishing of ignorance—-sometimes whether you want it vanquished or not.

Ignorance is dangerous whether it is in common courtesies, traffic codes, health warnings, but especially in politics where ignorance not only is preyed upon by candidates and advocates but by those who have been given great responsibility.

We are alarmed by steps being taken to erase the unpleasant parts of our past and to be dishonest about our heritage and the responsibilities we have as citizens to conquer our baser relations with others, based on how we have overcome them in the past.

Today’s observation was triggered by the appearance of President Trump’s special envoy to Greenland, Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry, who recently denied to host Joe Kernan of  CNBC’s “Squawk Box” that the President’s interest in Greenland amounts to American imperialism:

“When has the United States engaged in imperialism? Never. Europe has engaged in imperialism. The reason the Danish have Greenland is because of imperialism.”

When has the United States engaged in imperialism? How about two centuries of it.  We would not be the United States if it was not for imperialism.

I reached onto my bookshelf for Daniel Immerwahr’s How to Hide an Empire, a volume Landry should read if he wants to rise above the ignorance that soaks this administration. What might we call the administration’s takeover of Venezuela and its threatened takeover of Cuba and Greenland and the earlier blabbering of making Canada the 51st state if not “imperialism?”  Added to that discussion is the frequent dismissal in this administration that Puerto Ricans are not Americans.

The administration in its efforts to cleanse or whitewash our history prefers we are ignorant of many things including that the imperialistic spirit was part of this nation from the beginning, when early explorers operating under an already-ancient papal proclamation that it was proper to seize lands from “infidels,” claimed lands occupied for thousands of years by others in the name of God and Country.

Just 55 years after the landing of businessmen the a few religious dissenters landed at Plymouth, the first war broke out between Europeans and Native Americans when the Europeans wanted to expand the borders of Massachusetts Bay and Rhode Island. It was the beginning of a 200 year-plus takeover of territories occupied by dozens of previously independent nations.

Two especially egregious examples are the subjugation of the Cherokees, a people with their own constitution and their own written language, with their own plantations is six southern states, their own capital and their own system of slavery.  They were given a new territory to occupy in the 1830s so the Europeans could have their ancestral lands.

Throughout the rest of the 19th century, similar measures were enforced with the forced movement of other nations, some of whom wound up in the same place, a place set aside for Indians. But the attraction of unassigned territory in that area created the 1889 Land Rush when 50,000 settlers roared in to take over the area. The now-“American” area was recognized in 1907 as the state of Oklahoma.  Not until seventeen years had passed did the people displaced through the decades and now disrupted by the land rush—the people of the Indian nations forced there— become recognized by congressional action as American citizens although it was not until 1948 that Congress passed the Indian Voting Rights Act.

The 1846 Mexican war made one-third of Mexico part of the United States. Fifty years later, we went to war with Spain and fought the Philippine War to claim that land.

Immerwahr looks at 1941 as an example of our imperialist holdings: Alaska and Hawaii were not yet states. But these also were NOT foreign countries: Philippines, Puerto Rico, Panama Canal Zone, U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa. (Panama was Panamanian but it was leased to the United States at the time.) One out of eight people in the United States lived outside the 48-state “logo map” as he calls it.

He also notes a “stream of smaller engagements” that have bought at least parts of other nations under our control for military bases. He cites 211 times that American troops have been deployed to 67 other countries since 1945.

The book came out before Venezuela and Iran.

Immerwahr concludes the introduction to his book, “At various times, the inhabitants of the U.S. Empire have been shot, shelled, starved, interned, dispossessed, tortured, and experimented on. What they haven’t been, by and large, is seen”

Landry asked, with his ignorance on full display, “”When has the United States engaged in imperialism?”  The truth is in Immerwahr’s book should he care to read it although this seems to be an administration led by a President whose questionable reading habits and abilities have been much discussed and whose preference for historical literacy seems non-existent, a “blessing” he demands be extended to all of us in a year when accurate recall of our history should be our guiding interest.

We leave you with these cautionary words from President Calvin Coolidge:

“It is difficult for men in high office to avoid the malady of self-delusion. They are always surrounded by worshipers. They are constantly, and for the most part sincerely, assured of their greatness. They live in an artificial atmosphere of adulation and exaltation which sooner or later impairs their judgment. They are in grave danger of becoming careless and arrogant.”

And ignorant.

 

 

It’s Time to Order Another Obelisk 

Posted on by
Reply

The Missouri Veterans Memorial at the Capitol is a quiet place,  of a slow-moving cascade of water flowing into a reflecting pool around which people can ponder how much is lost to war.

And how much will be.

To the east of the pool is a shaded walk that takes visitors past nine memorial obelisks remembering the nine wars in which Missourians have fought since statehood in 1821—Mexican War, Civil War, Spanish-American War, World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam, Persian Gulf, and finally the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Now, less than a year after the ninth obelisk was dedicated—after an end date of that long war was determined—it is time to plan for a tenth one.

As this is written, no Missourian has been killed in Trump’s War—-which is not what it will be called in the black granite when the tenth obelisk is installed.  As of now, it probably will say “Iran War,” but it’s too early to carve anything into stone because we don’t know what the scope of this conflict will finally be.

Nor, apparently, does the man who ordered it. He started the war and now he is whining that NATO is giving him no help.

NATO, the people he has spent the last several years insulting and threatening, seems content to letting President Trump stew in his own juice.  NATO is more about protecting Ukraine (remember Ukraine, Mr, President?) and itself than helping President Trump.

The Coalition of the Willing has become the Coalition of the Unwilling.

To refresh our minds:  then-President George W. Bush declared at a NATO summit in 2002 that if Iraq President Saddam Hussein did not disarm (he was accused of having weapons of mass destruction), that the United States would assemble a “coalition of the willing” to do it for him.

Saddam didn’t. So George Bush’s United States and troops from 48 other countries backed the plan. Four countries eventually put boots on the ground—us, the UK, Australia, and Poland). More than three dozen other countries provided some troops but not major numbers. Some don’t even had standing armies but provide other kinds of help.

The coalition did not hold and it became a topic of political ridicule (Busch had offered foreign aid to participants, a policy that one columnist termed “a coalition of the billing” and another observer considered “a coalition of the shilling.”) By mid-2009 everybody but the United States and the United Kingdom coalition had backed away.  The Coalition of the Willing was considered ended in 2010.

President Bush assembled his coalition before the fight began.  President Trump just barged right in—BOMBED his way right in—to a new war and did not ask for help until Iran fought back and closed the Straits of Hormuz. Only then did he look for friends in NATO only to find he didn’t have very many anymore.

He’s watching his foreign policy by sledgehammer wielded by amateurs turn into quicksand. He is so desperate that he has lessened some sanctions against Russia—imposed as a reaction to the invasion of Ukraine—in an effort to relieve some pressure on the oil supply which seemingly could help finance further Russian operations against Ukraine, if we understand where this policy is leading.  He’s firing missiles the way kids fire bottle rockets on July 4th while China watches our war-making or defensive armaments dwindle and also watches Taiwan. The early talk about not using troops is ominously sounding like —using troops.

Some observers have suggested that Iran is Trump’s Ukraine.

“Some people will die, I guess,” the President has said.

Order the tenth obelisk. Too bad the state can’t send the bill for it to President Trump.

A few weeks ago, my state representative, Dave Griffith, asked me if I could find how many Missourians died in the wars of the eighth and ninth obelisks (Gulf War, Iraq and Afghanistan).  I could not locate numbers but I did find a website that listed the names of all of the military people who died in those conflicts. I picked out the Missouri names and sent them to him.

Their names won’t be on the obelisks although the number of those who died will be someday.

Their names are on their own monuments scattered throughout the graveyards of Missouri and elsewhere, unfortunately soon to be joined by similar monuments from Trump’s War.  Here is the list from President Bush’s War, with the date of official notification.  We pray their tragic coalition will not be joined by a new coalition from Mr. Trump’s War, but we fear it will be.

Let us know if your loved one killed in these long wars is not on the list.

Continue reading →

The Four Freedoms 

Posted on by
Reply

In a far distant time, a President would deliver a State of the Union address free of bombast, lies, and accusations.

Here’s one, delivered as one part of the world was back at war and the other part was likely to erupt somewhere, sometime.   Franklin D. Roosevelt spoke on January 6, 1941. The contrast to what we heard from our present occupant of the White House  jumps out at us.

Just as our national policy in internal affairs has been based upon a decent respect for the rights and the dignity of all our fellow men within our gates, so our national policy in foreign affairs has been based on a decent respect for the rights and dignity of all nations, large and small. And the justice of morality must and will win in the end.

Our national policy is this:

First, by an impressive expression of the public will and without regard to partisanship, we are committed to all-inclusive national defense.

Second, by an impressive expression of the public will and without regard to partisanship, we are committed to full support of all those resolute peoples, everywhere, who are resisting aggression and are thereby keeping war away from our Hemisphere. By this support, we express our determination that the democratic cause shall prevail; and we strengthen the defense and the security of our own nation.

Third, by an impressive expression of the public will and without regard to partisanship, we are committed to the proposition that principles of morality and considerations for our own security will never permit us to acquiesce in a peace dictated by aggressors and sponsored by appeasers. We know that enduring peace cannot be bought at the cost of other people’s freedom…

The Nation takes great satisfaction and much strength from the things which have been done to make its people conscious of their individual stake in the preservation of democratic life in America. Those things have toughened the fibre of our people, have renewed their faith and strengthened their devotion to the institutions we make ready to protect.

Certainly this is no time for any of us to stop thinking about the social and economic problems which are the root cause of the social revolution which is today a supreme factor in the world.

For there is nothing mysterious about the foundations of a healthy and strong democracy. The basic things expected by our people of their political and economic systems are simple. They are:

Equality of opportunity for youth and for others.
††††††††††† Jobs for those who can work.
††††††††††† Security for those who need it.
††††††††††† The ending of special privilege for the few.
††††††††††† The preservation of civil liberties for all.

The enjoyment of the fruits of scientific progress in a wider and constantly rising standard of living.

These are the simple, basic things that must never be lost sight of in the turmoil and unbelievable complexity of our modern world. The inner and abiding strength of our economic and political systems is dependent upon the degree to which they fulfill these expectations…

In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.

The first is freedom of speech and expression—everywhere in the world.

The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way—everywhere in the world.

The third is freedom from want—which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants-everywhere in the world.

The fourth is freedom from fear—which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor anywhere in the world.

That is no vision of a distant millennium. It is a definite basis for a kind of world attainable in our own time and generation. That kind of world is the very antithesis of the so-called new order of tyranny which the dictators seek to create with the crash of a bomb.

To that new order we oppose the greater conception—the moral order. A good society is able to face schemes of world domination and foreign revolutions alike without fear.

Since the beginning of our American history, we have been engaged in change—in a perpetual peaceful revolution—a revolution which goes on steadily, quietly adjusting itself to changing conditions—without the concentration camp or the quick-lime in the ditch. The world order which we seek is the cooperation of free countries, working together in a friendly, civilized society.

This nation has placed its destiny in the hands and heads and hearts of its millions of free men and women; and its faith in freedom under the guidance of God. Freedom means the supremacy of human rights everywhere. Our support goes to those who struggle to gain those rights or keep them. Our strength is our unity of purpose. To that high concept there can be no end save victory.     

Less than a year later the nation knew the principles it was fighting for when a two-ocean war was threatening “the simple, basic things” we stood for…then.

T

 

(Image credit: Norman Rockwell exhibition, New York Historical Society)

0900909090

 

War

Posted on by
1

It was an interesting juxtaposition of events last Saturday night at a birthday party for a submarine at the American Legion Hall—the USS Jefferson City, which was launched on February 29, 1992.

The boat is based in Guam but none of us knew where it was at that moment.  We hoped it and its crew were safe regardless of whether they were involved in the war with Iran—and I think most of us believe it is in the area.

The Jefferson City isn’t the largest class of submarines; the USS Missouri. It is part of the first class of submarines beneath the group of which the USS Missouri is a part. It’s an attack sub longer than a football field with about 140 crew members. It is loaded with missiles.

So, our capital city has a reason to pay attention to what’s happening and what’s going to happen.

There’s not much doubt that the world is a better place without the Iran’s religious leader and ruler but there’s no guarantee his successor will be any less troublesome.

There are many things that are problems with this conflict, the biggest one being Trump pulling this country out of the landmark Iran Nuclear Deal, more formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. We have heard one talking head suggest the President Trump’s withdrawal from the JCPOA was done because it had been achieved during the Obama administration and we’re all well aware of  Trump’s disdain for anything Obama did. Among other things, the agreement required interference-free inspections by an international group looking for any signs Iraq was generating bomb-capable amounts of uranium.

The Obama White House said the agreement “blocks every possible pathway Iran could use to build a nuclear bomb while ensuring—through a comprehensive, intrusive, and unprecedented verification and transparence regime—that Iran’s nuclear program remains exclusively peaceful moving forward.”  The deal went into effect in January, 2016 after the Center for Arms Control reported Iran had “significantly reduced its nuclear program and accepted strict monitoring and verification safeguards to ensure its program is solely for peaceful purposes.”

President Obama called the issue the “most consequential foreign policy debate that our country has had since the invasion of Iraq.” The deal went into effect in January 2016 after inspectors for the International Atomic Energy Agency had dismantled and removed two-thirds of Iran’s centrifuges and certified that Iran had shipped 25,000 pounds of enriched uranium elsewhere and dismantled.

President Trump pulled this country out of the agreement, calling it “horrible,” a “decaying and rotten structure,” and “defective to its core.”

It’s too bad nobody has ever been able to pin him down on what was so wrong with the agreement that merited his flamethrower verbiage.

Time and the flow of information will tell us if he is repeating George H.W. Busch’s entrance into a Middle Eastern war because of Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction and an assumption that a populace relieved of the despotic rule of Saddam Hussein would welcome our troops as heroes—and adopt a democratic form of government.

Regime change is acknowledged as one reason for this war—with Israel as our only apparent ally— against Iran. He has not explained how his attack is a guarantee of peace and stability in the region.

Trump promised he would not involve this country in another endless foreign war.  But he has not announced any ending goal. Nor has he announced how Iran will be transformed into a peaceful democratic republic that is grateful to him to for eliminating the Ayatollah.  It is unlikely the Iranian military will give up easily or quickly. And it is hard to think that this war can be won without American boots on the ground and American bodies in it.

It is already more than an American-Israeli war against Iran.  Iranian missiles have hit other countries friendly to the Trumpian effort. Three American lives have been lost. Nine Israeli people are dead. The United Arab Emirates reports three deaths.

Trump has admitted, “Sadly, there will likely be more before it ends.”

“That’s the way it is,” he said.

His actions have united our allies and our enemies. Russia has called it “an unprovoked armed aggression” China has expressed “deep concern” and has urged respect for Iran’s security, territorial integrity, and respect for its sovereignty—-something it has not suggest Russia do in is Ukraine war. Europe is keeping its distance. The European Council President calls the attacks “deeply disarming” and calls for full respect for international law.

Good luck with that one.

France, Germany, and the United Kingdom have condemned the Iranian retaliatory missile attacks that have expanded the conflict to other countries such as Sudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan and the Arab Emirates agree.

Congress is waiting to hear about all of this, officially, and might soon be considering stiffening the War Powers Act because of Trump’s attack on Iran as well as his miliary action in deposing Venezuela’s leader.

Is it only an effort to take away Iran’s nuclear capability.  Or are his conquests, or planned conquests in Venezuela and Iran focused on controlling much of the world’s oil supply and weaponizing it? Trump has offered no cogent reason for his attack, especially after withdrawing from an agreement that might have made it unnecessary.

If he thinks this conflict with Iran is going to reverse his increasing unpopularity, he’ll find that each American soldier death in what we now can call Trump’s War certainly will not improve his standing.

The United States fought a two-front foreign war in the 1940s in Europe and in Asia. But no President ever has fought a war against an enemy abroad and also fought one against people in his own country until Donald Trump.

Lord knows how all of this will end. But there will be more American blood spilled.  In every war there has been a first casualty and nobody ever has found a way to calculate how many more there will be.

“That’s the way it is,” says the man who is causing this.

Three Celebration 

Posted on by
Reply

A few days ago we had a joint celebration at Lincoln University, the school on the hill at Lafayette and Dunklin Streets in Jefferson City.  The combination Black History Month observance, the celebration of the school’s 160th birthday, and the observance of our nation’s 250th birth anniversary also created a unique moment for local author Michelle Brooks.

Michelle has become a prolific author of nine books about Jefferson City’s history, including he one that debuted that evening, February 5 (another anniversary: the 115th of the burning of the Capitol that led to the construction of the magnificent building we have today). First to Freedom; Cole County U.S. Colored Troops, is a tribute to several of the Jefferson City black soldiers who were in the 62nd and 65th Colored Infancy of the Union Army whose financial contributions led to the creation of Lincoln.

One of the officers of the 62nd noted in his farewell speech that 99 of the 4312 men had learned to “read, write and cipher.”  In all, he noted “200 read and write understandingly, 284 can read, 377 can spell in words of two syllables and are learning to read.”

Jefferson City offered a ramshackle school building for the new institution. Classes began in the fall of 1866, nineteen year after Missouri passed a law making it illegal for black people to be taught to read and write.

I was asked to emcee the event that included an Abraham Lincoln reenactor reading the “Proposition 95—Regrading the status of slaves in states engaged in rebellion against the United States.”  Most people speak of it as the Emancipation Proclamation—which I believe should be pronounced with emphasis on the first word: EMANCIPATION proclamation—and another reenactor portraying Robert Foster, the founding officer. Missouri became the first slave state to have its own EMANCIPATION Proclamation. By the end of the war, one-in-ten Union soldiers was black—179-thousand in the army and another 19-thousand in the Navy.

Part of my remarks between presentations and to end the evening said:

“We have many great statues and bronze tableaus in and at our Capitol, but I think the finest, and most inspirational one in Jefferson City is just up the hill, the “Soldier’s Memorial Plaza” tableau.  It recalls the sacrifices made by members of the 62nd and 65th United States Colored Infantries, men who knew full well a way of life they fought to leave behind.

“They are symbolized in bronze now.  But they were symbols FOR millions of people in their time and remain in bronze as symbols of hope for all of us today and tomorrow—-life and freedom are only a hand-grasp away, and they are a reminder that an open hand  is always better than a closed fist in maintaining the nation whose 250th birth anniversary we celebrate this year.

“The first slaves were brought to Missouri to help mine lead in the 1720s.

“When Lewis and Clark went upstream past the bluff that is now the site of our city, a black man named York was part of the group, the slave of William Clark. When they came back from the Pacific Ocean in 1806, a black man was part of the explorers. His name was York. York was William Clark’s slave. He endured with them all of the dangerous times, saw all of the glories of the great mountains, and was the equal of all on that perilous trip. He  believed he would become a free man on the return and could not adjust to being nothing more than a slave again.   Eventually Clark shipped him off to Louisville Kentucky where he was reunited with his enslaved wife.

“If York and his wife had children, they would have been part of the freedom movement after the Civil War.  We don’t know what happened to him. History seems to have obscured him. But the Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th Amendment gave his descendants the freedom he dreamed of.

“When the first black member of the legislature, Representative Walthall Moore of St. Louis took office in 1921, almost sixty years after the proclamation, he had to room in Jefferson City with a black family, had to eat at a black restaurant, travel in black-owned taxis, and drink from water fountains for the colored.

“But it was Moore who got the half-million dollar appropriation that transformed Lincoln Institute into Lincoln University. .

“Forty-seven years later, I watched as the Jefferson City council, in 1968, passed an ordinance that said black legislators no loner had to stay in Lincoln University dormitory rooms and private homes, and that black people could live anywhere in the city where they could afford to live.

“One-hundred-and-sixty years after the founding of Lincoln University, many people of color still struggle to be considered “people” and there are those who judge some to be unequal only because of their color, their faith, their identities—-and the country where they were born.

“In this year when we celebrate the 250th anniversary of a document that proclaimed that all men are created equal, we again find ourselves wondering meaning the meaning of those words. Some interpreters believe Jefferson meant that all of us are BORN equal in nature.  It is in nurture that divisions are made, distrust develops, and hate can take hold.

“We learn these lessons through the honest study of history and if we are free to learn that history, we can be the ones who bend the arc of the moral universe a little more toward justice.

“Let us go forth from this good evening in the hope that history gives us for peace.”

The event concluded with a fine prayer from Rev. Dr. Adrian Hendricks II of the Joshua House Church in Jefferson City.

Heavenly Father: Tonight as we take a moment and pause to celebrate the history of African Americans, we pause to celebrate American history, giving you thanks and praise, O God, for this nation; giving you thanks and praise or i’s foundation and for its forefathers and for its Declaration to uphold the high ideals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

And yet In this hour, even as this nation struggles to uphold its identity, we give you thanks and praise for its potential, a potential that still has the opportunity to demonstrate love for our fellow man, a potential that still has the opportunity to pick up the poor and stabilize the impoverished, a potential that still has the opportunity to right historical wrongs, heal historical wounds, and to be the first global power that’s unafraid to let freedom ring!

Lord, go before us, as WE navigate a new pathway. Stand beside us, as we rediscover our moral compass and move within us as we continue to define what it means to be an American.

It’s in your mighty and matchless name that we pray,

Hallelujah & AMEN!

Amen, in deed.

(Photo credits: Jefferson City Convention and Visitors Bureau; Lincoln University)

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.