In moving Around the Block to a new provider, Substack, I published a post on this platform, “Test,” in error. The erroneous post was taken down.
You will receive all future Around the Block posts at https://tedblock.substack.com.
Sorry for any confusion.
(Note to readers: You may receive this post twice in two different formats. Why? After several years of struggling with my current blog host I’ve decided to try out another service, Substack. Let me know what you think. You can reach me at tedblock@around-the-block.com. I’ll probably post a few future posts in both formats until I make a final decision.)
For several days my Around the Block to-write list included yet another post about the injustice of Justice Samuel Alito and his insurrectionist flags. I mean, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me! But so much has been written, what could I add? So I procrastinated. I worked on other projects. And frankly, I couldn’t find the correct angle to meaningfully add to the discussion.
And then I read a piece in the Daily Kos, by Joan McCarter, who framed the issue perfectly, pointing out the inability of Democratic leadership to do something about the shame that the Supreme Court has become. A shame that has made the American justice system a travesty. Or, in a word, an “injustice!”
So, rather than re-invent the wheel, I give you McCarter’s excellent piece. As you read it, I ask you to answer one question: If the type of behavior Alito is demonstrating, if Thomas’ clear conflicts of interest, were displayed by say, Justice Kagan or Justice Sotomayor, what would Republicans do? Issue statements like Durbin’s milquetoast “I think he should recuse himself from cases involving Trump and his administration,” or as McCarter writes, “He (Durbin) is still not sure whether his committee should investigate; He wants more time to think about it.” No, Republicans would demonstrate their outrage on Fox, open hearings and attempt to haul the offending justice before their committees “faster than a speeding bullet.” (Speeding bullet reference intentional…we are talking about Republicans!)
Wherefore art thou, Democrats?
by Joan McCarter
Daily Kos Staff
Friday, May 24, 2024 at 12:00:09p EDT
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s insurrectionist flag flying was bad enough the first time around. The second instance demands action. Congress, Chief Justice John Roberts, and the third branch body that oversees the judiciary—the Judicial Conference—have to act, but it’s not going to happen unless the Senate Judiciary Committee raises some hell.
The problem is the chair of that committee, who is also the No. 2 leader of the Senate Democrats, is dithering. Dick Durbin of Illinois, told reporters “I don’t think there’s much to be gained with a hearing at this point” when news broke that Alito flew an upside-down American flag at his home days after the violent insurrection of Jan. 6, 2021, as well as while the court was still considering whether to take up cases over the 2020 election.
“I think he should recuse himself from cases involving Trump and his administration,” Durbin continued.
After the second flag scandal, Durbin is still just calling for Alito’s recusal on cases the court is deciding right now: Donald Trump’s immunity in criminal cases in his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and on the prosecution of Jan. 6 riot participants. He’s still not sure whether his committee should investigate; He wants more time to think about it.
“Justice Alito is not taking care to avoid political identity,” he told The Washington Post. “He is identifying the right-wing elements in our political system. And that’s unfortunate. It’s further evidence of the need for him to recuse himself from cases that involve the Trump administration.”
“[Chief] Justice Roberts has to step back and realize the damage that’s being done to the reputation of the court,” Durbin added.
Roberts might realize that, but the chances that he’s going to do something about it are about as unlikely as Alito’s recusal.
Outside groups, including Indivisible and Demand Justice, as well as legal experts are pressuring Durbin to act by launching an investigation into Alito’s insurrectionist leanings. “Chief Justice Roberts must demand that Justices Thomas and Alito not be allowed to participate in deciding the immunity case or any other decision related to Jan. 6,” Norman Eisen, former impeachment counsel to the House Judiciary Committee, and Michael Podhorzer, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, wrote this week for MSNBC.
“And the Senate should hold hearings immediately investigating their conduct. Any other course risks the court’s legitimacy, Americans’ rights and the rule of law,” they concluded.
Durbin is facing pressure inside the Senate as well. Two Democrats on the Judiciary Committee, both nipping at Durbin’s heels to succeed him as chair, want more. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island told MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell that what Alito is doing by refusing to recuse on these cases is breaking a “law passed by Congress, specifically applicable to Supreme Court Justices. When they pay no attention to it, they are actually violating statutory law.”
Whitehouse went on to say that “it has gotten to the point where the Chief Justice has to engage, and I think you will see more action on that shortly out of the Judiciary Committee.”
Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Tuesday that “Chief Justice Roberts ought to be summoned to a hearing before the Judiciary Committee of the Senate. He ought to show some leadership and be held accountable.”
“Of course, Justice Alito ought to be subpoenaed as well in my view, but likely he is not going to appear, and I think it is a time of reckoning for the Congress,” Blumenthal continued.
“Justice Alito says the Congress can’t regulate, to use his term, the Supreme Court. But the Congress set salaries. It sets rules of procedure. It sets the numbers of justices. The founders didn’t want the United States Supreme Court to be above the law.”
Alito famously declared himself and the rest of the justices just that in an interview with The Wall Street Journal last year, in which he made a startling assertion of constitutional power: “No provision in the Constitution gives [Congress] the authority to regulate the Supreme Court—period.”
That interview was with David Rivkin Jr., a regular contributor to the WSJ who also happens to be a lawyer who was about to argue a major tax case before the court. Durbin once again called on Alito to recuse from that case, as well as on Roberts to do something about Alito, for all the good it did.
This is not so subtle pressure on Durbin to do more than tweet sternly worded statements from two of his senior committee members. They see what all of us see: Asking nicely for Alito to recuse—which Durbin and House Democrats have done—is weak sauce.
It’s time to act. House Democratic leadership should be talking impeachment instead of issuing empty demands to Alito. No, Speaker Mike Johnson won’t go along with it, but Democrats are a hair’s breadth from having control of the House and they should act like it. They are also likely to take the House back in November, which gives an impeachment threat now more weight.
The Senate Judiciary, led by Durbin, has to investigate. They have to put maximum pressure on Roberts starting right now, before the court issues its rulings on Trump immunity.
Allow me to come clean with you; I’m in the throes of a dilemma. Today’s column was supposed to be a follow-up to my post of a few days ago, Between Trump and Biden, what should real Republicans do? I was planning to go beyond those precious few “real” Republicans I had written about and focus on the ever-growing number of sycophantic Republicans lemmings and the incorrigible MAGA “deplorabless.” (Thanks, Hillary)
But those good and informative intentions got waylaid by one Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, Samuel Alito, and his upside-down, stop the steal American flag flying on his home flagpole three days before Joe Biden’s inauguration and while, according to Jodi Kantor’s Times article, “the court was still contending with whether to hear a 2020 election case.”
But wait, there’s more.
So, rather than my babbling on about all the news of the week, news that is, frankly, throwing me deeper and deeper into a state of depression, I decided to simply introduce each of the following stories with brief and, hopefully, cogent thoughts and allow you to determine what level of depression you care to descend into. (Recognizing that these stories are sourced from the many newspapers, magazines and newsletters I subscribe to, I’ve included a PDF of each for you to read or disregard.)
Sycophants and Lemmings
Anyone who has been following Trump’s election interference trial* in Manhattan is probably aware that starting with Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, GOP sycophants both in and out of office, have been lining up like mindless drones** to show support for the disgraced and disgraceful ex-president. I guess shameless pandering is more important to these people than self-esteem, or doing their job as elected officials (I believe, Congress is still in session and their NYC boondoggle absented them from doing the “work of the people”. Tell me if I’m being too picky.)
*As noted in my last story, I refuse to label this trial the “hush money” trial. Yes, Trump paid hush money to cover up his indiscretions, but to what end? To interfere with the election!
**Mindless drone is one of the more colorful synonyms for lemming. Interesting fact: There is a myth about mass lemming suicides, apparently not true. So why does the myth prevail? Since someone who blindly follows a crowd—maybe even toward catastrophe—is called a lemming, the myth has been invoked to express modern anxieties about how individuality could be submerged and destroyed by mass phenomena, such as political movements or consumer culture. Couldn’t think of a better description of these GOP clowns than that.
First, sycophants in general as described by Dana Milbank of The Washington Post:
Next, from Matt Bai also in The Post, a story about perhaps the sycophant-in-chief, J.D. Vance:
Incorrigible MAGA “Deplorables.”
Two stories about probably the most incorrigible deplorables, Marjorie Taylor Greene, from Jemima Kelly’s Financial Times story, “Too MAGA for Trump!!!” and, from Zeeshan Aleem of MSNBC, Matt Gaetz, echoing Trump’s infamous admonition, “Stand back and stand by.”
Alito’s flag, or is it Mrs. Alito’s flag – his excuse that his wife raised the flag is kind of like when in the sixth grade you told your teacher, “the dog ate my homework,” – is just another reminder of John Roberts’ rot-infested Supreme Court. And I haven’t even mentioned Clarence and Ginni Thomas!
First, Jodi Kantor’s Times’ exposé, and then, The Atlantic’s Adam Serwer’s analysis. I urge you to read them both, if for no other reason than for you to be able to tell your Republican friends, “Speaker Johnson’s is correct that the court system is “corrupt,” and that “it’s not about justice, it’s all about politics,” But he should be directing his screed not at the Manhattan court and DA but at SCOTUS and specifically Roberts, Alito and Thomas!”
I couldn’t finish this summary of recent events without some non-trial Trump news.
First, a USA Today story by Natasha Lovato, “What happens if Trump gets convicted ahead of November election?” the lede of which is, “Most legal experts agree that anyone could become president of the United States despite being found guilty of a
crime, as the U.S. Constitution only defines the requirements to run for the highest office in the land.” Makes sense, right? He’s Trump, where anything goes. Even if, according to The Law Dictionary, these are some of the rights convicted felons lose:
While you might agree that a “public position” includes being president of the United States, I guess the Founders didn’t anticipate Trump and didn’t include “convicted felon” as a disqualifier.
So, now that we know the experts say that Trump can become president even as a convicted felon, what happens if he wins? As Doris Kearns Goodwin wrote, Abraham Lincoln famously had a “Team of Rivals.” Not Trump. Zac Anderson’s USA TODAY story writes as a candidate and then as president, Trump will surround himself with a “Team of Felons.” Fasten your seat belts!
Finally, I began this “Trump, Trump, Trump” section suggesting that it will cover non-trial news. But Trump’s behavior before, during and after court appearances left me with no alternative than to include Tribune News Service syndicated columnist Cal Thomas’, Op-ed, “Does the US want a potty mouth for its president?”
Do you want a potty mouth for president? More importantly, do his holier-than-thou Evangelical supporters?
The Washington Post published an Op-Ed this week titled, “Between Trump and Biden, what should real Republicans do?” The story was co-signed by three former Republican senators, John Danforth (Missouri), William Cohen (Maine) and Alan Simpson (Wyoming).
Danforth, a self-described “political moderate,” served three terms in the Senate and, after his Senate career, briefly as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Cohen, the son of a Russian Jewish immigrant who owned the Bangor Rye Bread Co., served in the House of Representatives for six years and the Senate for 18 years. Described by David Halberstram as a “Republican moderate from Maine and “something of a maverick centrist,” Cohen served as Secretary of Defense in (Democratic) President Clinton’s second term. Simpson, who I actually met at the CNN studios in San Francisco as he was leaving from his appearance and I was getting ready for mine*, represented Wyoming in the United States Senate from 1979 to 1997. Simpson was a moderate conservative who supported abortion rights and voted against a ban of late-term abortions (but did not support an exception for physical health, only for life-threatening conditions). Until 2017, Simpson, at 6’7″ held the title as the tallest U.S. senator in history.**
*Really happened. I had a +/- 5 second appearance on CNN in 1996 commenting about advertising on the Internet, a controversial topic back then. Looking back at that clip I have to admire my prescience. (BTW, much to my wife’s dismay, I still have that shirt and tie!)
**In 2017 at 6’9″, Luther Strange was appointed to the Senate from Alabama succeeding Jeff Sessions who had been appointed U.S. attorney general in Trump’s first administration. Neither Sessions nor Strange have been heard from since. “ROLL TIDE!)
I guess these three, plus Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger and a few others, are what might be described as part of that ever shrinking group of “real” Republicans.
So, what do these real Republicans think about the choice of Biden or Trump? Did they help struggling GOP voters by providing some direct advice as they speculated that many are “considering staying home, writing in a name of their own choosing or voting for a man they don’t really want to see in the White House?”
Not really.
After jabbering on about important issues, issues they characterize as the “five principles that historically have defined our party, issues like the:
The Constitution:
The Union:
Fiscal responsibility
Free enterprise
Peace through strength
…They decided to form a new organization, “Our Republican Legacy,” a group that “will be a catalyst for a movement to reassert traditional Republicanism against the populist version it has become under [wait for it] Donald Trump.”
So, these ex-politicos, with nothing to lose, who should have had no fear about Trump retribution, outlined five key issues which anyone with a clear thought in their head would score, Biden: 5; Trump: 0. And all they could say to those beleaguered GOP voters is, “we will not tell people how to vote in 2024 or beyond.”
To which I say, “Why not?” Why not show some courage? Why not show you’re not spineless like the Trump sycophants who are showing up at his “election interference”*** trial?
***I refuse to label this trial the “hush money” trial. Yes, Trump paid hush money to cover up his indiscretions, but to what end? To interfere with the election!
Why, if these moderate, real Republicans fear “a continuation of the populist version it (the GOP) has become under Donald Trump,” did they not go out on a very substantial limb and say, “for this election at least, as we’ve laid out, Donald Trump is a danger to our nation, a danger to democracy, a danger to the world. In the real world****, you only have a bilateral choice, Trump or Biden. Be realistic. Be a real Republican. Voting for Trump in 2024 is not a vote for a real Republican. It’s a vote for a dangerous, unhinged, wannabe despot. So, just this once, don’t worry about the “R” or the “D.” If you really love this country, if you can’t fathom an end to democracy as you’ve known it, if you’re a real Republican, swallow your GOP pride and vote for Biden. Because if you don’t, if Trump wins, there will no longer be a Republican party about which you can be proud.
****A real world does not include Robert Kennedy Jr. Ask his family.
In my post, It’s May – What better time to start thinking about potential Trump Veeps, I had some fun with the Dakotas.
In a section of the post about South Dakota governor and admitted dog killer, Kristi Noem, I wrote:
“Kristi Noem, the farm girl, former beauty queen and presumptive idiot, is also governor of South Dakota – or is it North Dakota. Wait, which Dakota is the setting for “Fargo?” Wait, why are there two Dakotas? And why are there two Virginias? Or two Carolinas? Just so there’ll be more GOP senators? If there’s a better reason for District of Columbia’s statehood (or Puerto Rico’s for that matter) please let me know via a comment to this post an email to me directly (tedblock@around-the-block.com)”
The story went on to mention the governor of North Dakota, Doug Burgham:
“…Governor Doug Burgum of North Dakota is mentioned several times. Really? Really! I guess if we have to have two Dakotas, we have to have two Dakota entries. But, North Dakota? Burgum doesn’t even have “Fargo” to hang his hat on.”
I was wrong. It is Fargo, North Dakota. Why was I wrong? While I said I looked it up, I didn’t. I just assumed. Why? Because I had so much material on Noem and virtually none of Burgham, Fargo’s geographical placement worked better in South Dakota.
How did I learn of my error? One of my readers, and most valued commentators, wrote back:
“When I lived in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Fargo was just a hop, skip and a jump across the North Dakota border? Has it Moved? Or did I misread your geographical meaning?”
No, dear reader. You did not misread the geographical meaning. It simply seemed funnier in South Dakota.
Of course my error does have some value: it amplifies my geographical, but perhaps more important, electoral/democratic question – “Why are there two Dakotas?” The Dakotas (North Dakota, population, 779,094/South Dakota, population, 858,469) have three Electoral College votes and two United States senators each. Washington DC, with a population of 672,738 has no senators nor any Electoral College votes. Just doesn’t seem right!
In any event, sorry for the error.
I really hadn’t given too much thought about whom Donald Trump, the “presumptive” GOP candidate for president will pick for his VP.
(Don’t you think it’s time for the media to stop using “presumptive” when they refer to Trump’s candidacy? Presumptive means, “based on probability.” I mean, Lindsay Graham, former virulent Trump-hater said the other day he’d “absolutely still support Trump even if he’s convicted of felonies” between now and the 2024 presidential election in November. Does that suggest that every time I reference the South Carolina senator I have to write “presumptive brown-noser Lindsay Graham?”)
But I digress.
In fact I hadn’t given it any thought at all until an article from the Daily Beast crossed my desk, Kristi Noem Killed Her Dog—and Committed ‘Political Suicide’
Frankly, I hadn’t even paid attention to Kristi Noem’s “dogicide” until I remembered that she was high up on Trump’s VP list.
Kristi Noem, the farm girl, former beauty queen and presumptive idiot, is also governor of South Dakota – or is it North Dakota. Wait, which Dakota is the setting for “Fargo?” Wait, why are there two Dakotas? And why are there two Virginias? Or two Carolinas? Just so there’ll be more GOP senators? If there’s a better reason for District of Columbia’s statehood (or Puerto Rico’s for that matter) please let me know via a comment to this post an email to me directly (tedblock@around-the-block.com).
(I’m going to have to pause now. After actually looking at the photo that accompanies this story and seeing the choices for a potential second in line to a 77 year old president, I became slightly nauseous.)
I’m back. Thank goodness for Pepto-Bismol. I hadn’t broken out the pink stuff since I went to see “Barbie.”
Let me preface my analysis:
You’ve got to hand it to Alan Jay Lerner, the lyricist half of Camelot’s Lerner & Lowe. Although he died in 1986, Lerner, Merlin-like, was able to predict what Reagan’s party would look like in May 2024: “everyone goes blissfully astray”; “tons of wicked thoughts”; “a libelous display”; “divine mistakes” – remember, Lerner hadn’t heard of James Comer (Hunter Biden’s nemesis), jacket-less Jim Jordan or Speaker Mike Johnson (full disclosure: no one had heard of Mike Johnson in 2023!). Prescient understates Lerner’s vision.
Enough digression. On to the analysis.
What better person to start with than Kristi Noem. At one time considered a top five choice, Noem’s revelations in a forthcoming memoir that she SHOT HER DOG(!) seems to have done her in (not to mention the dog, Cricket). As one Trumpworld source told the Daily Beast, “Haven’t seen a more public suicide than Jim Jones at Jonestown.” Or, as a GOP strategist opined, “Confirming it yourself, and doing so in a book — this wasn’t a slip of the tongue — it shows kind of a string of bad judgment along the way.”
As Trump would’ve said on his hideous reality show, The Apprentice, “You’re fired.” Unless, since this is Trumpworld, you can never say never. Remember, in the run up to the 2016 election, Trump did infamously say he could “stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody” and not “lose any voters.” I guess Lindsay Graham remembers.
*(At $1 a copy, I think Rubio’s fund raising prowess might be a concern to the Trump team.)
Marco Rubio? The man Trump dubbed “Little Marco?” The same Little Marco who attacked Trump for being a fake conservative, a con man, and a mogul whose only true art was not that of the deal but that of the bankruptcy? The Marco Rubio who many people think is the current front-runner but whom the compiler of the rogues gallery photo at the beginning of this story inexplicably left out? The same Marco Rubio who, defending himself against Trump’s epithet, said, “He’s always calling me ‘Little Marco’, I’ll admit he’s taller than me. He’s like 6’2’’, which is why I don’t understand why his hands are the size of someone who’s 5’2’’. Have you seen his hands? And you know what they say about men with small hands?” Yes, Marco, we know what they say.
A potential hitch in a Rubio vice-presidential candidacy is that the Constitution prohibits electors from voting for both a president and VP from their home state, so either Trump or Rubio would have to move. The Bulwark reported that Trump has no interest in changing his state of residence to accommodate a VP pick, but Rubio is up for it. Of course, Rubio has shown he’ll do anything to get ahead. As I wrote in an Around the Block-News with a Twist* story during the 2016 GOP primaries, “In a clear demonstration that he will pander to almost any group in order to secure the Republican presidential nomination, Florida senator Marco Rubio said today that while he is officially a Roman Catholic, he and his family also attend Evangelical services and, that when he was younger, he was a Mormon. Perhaps going forward we’ll give him Around the Block’s own epithet – “Obsequious Marco.”
(*If you access the Rubio story from 2016, remember: any post I label as “News with a Twist” is twisted news, otherwise know as satire)
Scott, South Carolina’s junior U.S. Senator, is often described by GOP operatives as a “sunny” and “optimistic” guy – a trait that some campaign observers suggest would be a great counter-balance to Trump’s vision of “American carnage. Of course, Mike Pence, the ultra pious, ultra conservative, born-again Christian was also the polar opposite of the irreligious, faithless Trump. How did that work out?*
*(Does Trump’s inaction when his January 6 insurrectionists were chanting “Hang Mike Pence” ring a bell?)
Working for Scott is his race; Scott, as the above image clearly shows, is black. I guess that suggests he’s now one of “Trump’s African-Americans.”* Working against him is his inconsistent support of Trump. Scott voted to certify Biden’s 2020 win, still thinks Mike Pence “did the right thing” on January 6, and dared to challenge Trump in the 2024 race. But he may have erased any ill will when he endorsed Trump ahead of the New Hampshire primary, despite the fact that Trump’s opponent, Nikki Haley, help to launch Scott’s Senate career when she was South Carolina governor. When Trump highlighted this awkward fact during his primary-night victory speech, Scott delivered some grade-A groveling, telling Trump he doesn’t hate anyone, “I just love you!” Any comment on the deeper meaning of “I just love you” will get me into “political correctness” trouble.
*At at 2016 campaign rally in Redding, California Trump singled out a black man in the crowd and said, “Oh, look at my African-American over here. Look at him. Are you the greatest? Do you know what I’m talking about
Stefanik, a Republican from upstate New York, is the fourth-ranking member in House GOP leadership, As a 39-year old woman, GOP operatives argue that she might be a counterweight to reelecting a 77-year-old man who was found liable for sexual abuse and repeatedly accused of sexual misconduct. (I’m old enough to remember that vice-presidential selections were made to balance a ticket geographically. Oh, how times have changed.)
In 2016, Stefanik harshly criticized Trump for his incendiary rhetoric and policy views, saying he “has been insulting to women.” But after she started rising in the GOP leadership, she morphed into a MAGA cheerleader, appearing so desperate to be Trump’s running mate that it appears that she’ll say anything to support him – from bemoaning the plight of the J6 “hostages” to blaming the media for the jury’s verdict in the E. Jean Carroll case. Aside from the fact that she doesn’t appear to be Trump’s type, as a white woman of Italian and Czech heritage, some of her supporters are concerned that the ever mercurial Trump, who’s described her positively as a “killer,” might consider the last name “Stefanik” “too ethnic.” (Wait, isn’t Melania’s Slovenian name, “Melanija Knavs”? As Larry David might say, “Pretty, pretty, pretty ethnic.” Or, as the late, great, Emily Litella would’ve said, “Never mind!”)
The rest of the potential names being considered range, not from the “sublime to the ridiculous” but from the “ridiculous” to the “ridiculouser” (is that even a word?). So, without further ado, and in no particular order, here are the other most frequently mentioned prospects:
The aforementioned North Dakota governor Doug Burgum; Ohio senator J.D. Vance; former Democratic representative and 2020 presidential hopeful Tulsi Gabbard; former 2024 presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy; Texas governor Greg Abbott; former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson; Florida congressman Byron Donalds; Arkansas governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders; Alabama senator Katie Britt; Arizona senate candidate Kari Lake; and, in the “I kid you not category, Georgia representative Marjorie Taylor Greene; Florida governor Ron DeSantis; and, according my sources, Melania’s favorite, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson. No really, I kid you not!
Wait, what? No Selena Meyer, the greatest VEEP of all time? Where is that famous GOP sense of humor when we need it? Mitch? Anyone?
I recently had the opportunity to cast a ballot for a friend and neighbor running for a delegate seat to the 2024 Democratic Convention to be held in Chicago in August. My friend was elected to one of the two seats from our Congressional district and will be going to Chicago to attend. While I was at the polling site I chatted with another person running to be a delegate and asked, more than semi-seriously, “Democratic Convention? Chicago? Doesn’t anyone at the DNC remember 1968?”
For those of you not old enough to remember – or those of you old enough, but too old to remember – a good place to refresh your memory is this Wikipedia article.
In short it was a disaster, both inside and outside the Convention. Disarray inside, anti-war demonstrations outside and brutal use of force against the demonstrators by Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and his police.
Back to my question to the delegate candidate. He responded quickly and confidently, “Not to worry, the DNC has assured us that Chicago is ready; there will be no repeat of 1968.”
Shortly after that conversation, I came across David Frum’s article in The Atlantic, The Plot to Wreck the Democratic Convention May not amount to much, actually*
*PDF version for The Atlantic non-subscribers
Frum is a center-right conservative. He’s the author of 10 books, most recently Trumpocracy (2018) and Trumpocalypse (2020). For two years he was a speechwriter (now reformed) for President George W. Bush.
In his article poses Frum poses the question, “Will Chicago 2024 be a replay of the disastrous Chicago 1968, which, as Frum reminds us, helped lead to a Republican presidential victory in 1968 — “and then again in four of the next five elections?”
He goes on to describe the protections established since 1968, detailing the more recent history of calmer conventions. But not even a sage like Frum can predict the future, as he concludes his argument with a “guess.”
“The better guess is that they (demonstrators) will not only fail in that but also be unable to mobilize any large number to attack police lines and risk serious prison time.”
I hope he’s guessing right. Chicago 1968 redux will not just wreck the Democratic Convention; if it contributes to a Trump victory, it will lead to the wreck of democracy in America.
Which leads me to this week’s Time Magazine cover story, How Far Trump Would Go.*
*PDF version for Time non-subscribers
In a word, the article, based on Time reporter Eric Cortellessa, two interviews with Trump, is HORRIFYING! And in three more words, BUT NOT UNEXPECTED!
Let me turn to Heather Cox Richardson, in her Letters from an American post, for an analysis.
In case you’re not horrified enough by now, read this question by Cortellessa and Trump’s answer:
“Don’t you see why many Americans see such talk of dictatorship as contrary to our most cherished principles?” “No,” Trump said. “‘I think a lot of people like it.”
Many people I’ve talked to recently dismiss the possibility of another Trump presidency. “He won’t win,” they say. I’m old enough to remember many of those same people said the same thing in 2016. The difference: At least this time we’ve been warned!
One quick note before I go.
My site is hosted by WordPress. WordPress recently introduced “AI Assistant” meant to “Check for mistakes and verify the tone of your post before publishing.”
I never tried it before so I clicked on the link. I thought you’d get a kick out of the AI feedback I received:
The post is well-structured and engaging, providing historical context and referencing relevant articles. To enhance it, consider adding a brief summary or key takeaways for readers who may be unfamiliar with the subject matter. Additionally, including a call to action or invitation for readers to share their thoughts could further engage the audience. Lastly, reinforcing the importance of staying informed and actively participating in the political process would provide a positive conclusion.
Thrilled as I am about the comment about the post being “well-structured and engaging,” I was particularly taken by the suggestion: “Additionally, including a call to action or invitation for readers to share their thoughts could further engage the audience. Lastly, reinforcing the importance of staying informed and actively participating in the political process would provide a positive conclusion.
Many of you share your thoughts with comments and emails even without my prompting. Make no mistake, I appreciate the feedback and would love to hear from more of you. But the most important feedback is really better aimed at you than me. I’m doing what I can to help readers stay informed hoping that it helps you enhance participation in the political process. So here’s my call to action: Stay engaged. Join the conversation. Donate to candidates you believe in. Vote. And get fence-sitting Democrats you know to vote as well…and not for RFK Jr. (ironic as this post begins in 1968, the year his father was assassinated.) Now that we know “How Far Trump will Go,” we all need to help ensure that the title of David Frum’s book, “Trumpocalypse,” will never come true.
On this Shabbat, the fifth of the seven days of Passover, I turn Around the Block over to Doron Weber*, whose essay in Time so mirrored my own thoughts and opinions of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, “Bibi,” that I can only reiterate what I’ve been saying for some time: “Benjamin Netanyahu will be remembered by history as the worst prime minister in the history of the State of Israel.”
And, what I’ve been saying more recently during this presidential election year, “If Donald Trump defeats Joe Biden in November and is elected president of the United States, ending democracy as we know it and sending the world into disarray, one real and proximate reason for Biden’s loss will lay at the feet of Benjamin Netanyahu.”
April 27, 2024 7:20 AM EDT
by Doron Weber
As we mark Passover, when Jews celebrate their founding liberation from a tyrannical Pharaoh who enslaved them, the sages remind us Pharaohs come in all guises and liberation is not a one-time event. It must be re-enacted in each generation and in each heart.
Today, 16 million Jews in a world of eight billion face rising external threats. The indigenous home of the Jewish people and the lone Jewish state among 195 countries is encircled by Iranian-armed proxies committed to its annihilation and by increasing global delegitimization.
Yet it’s hard to find a graver internal challenge to both Israel and world Jewry than Benjamin Netanyahu.
Yes, echad mishelanu, one of ours. Democratically elected by a sovereign Jewish nation in whose affairs, American Jews are repeatedly warned, it is wrong to interfere or even criticize.
But just as any Jew in America may speak out against a foreign potentate such as Vladimir Putin or Victor Orban, we are free to criticize any world leader. Especially a distracted, criminally indicted Prime Minister who failed to protect the Jewish homeland from its worst-ever, mass-casualty attack and whose reactionary ultra-nationalism tests our values and identity as Jews.
Netanyahu did not just fail Israelis on 10/7 and in the mismanaged war since, his actions directly imperil our own status and safety in America. Our children’s, too.
We must also decry a grandiose, divisive figure whose small country depends on our support and our votes in Congress but who provincially smashed U.S. pro-Israel bipartisanship and even endangers America’s standing and stability.
If dual loyalty is an anti-Semitic trope, so is dual disloyalty.
On this Passover, we must call out Benjamin Netanyahu’s rap sheet of multiple misdeeds and catastrophic failures. He is incontrovertibly Israel’s longest serving and worst Prime Minister. A once-blessed-seeming and accomplished figure who still holds parts of his nation in thrall—for all their hardheadedness, the children of Israel remain susceptible to false idols—Netanyahu has turned into a corrupt and destructive autocrat, an Israeli Pharaoh.
Having decimated albeit not eradicated the terrorist army he long bolstered, Netanyahu could end the Gaza war and rescue every Israeli hostage while offering Palestinians, absent Hamas, a pathway to govern a demilitarized Gaza under an international force. But instead, he’s scheming to stay in power by pandering to the messianic Israeli right (whom he elevated) and avoiding elections until his battered reputation recovers. He’s prolonging the war and dire humanitarian crisis and risking new conflicts while squandering a historic opportunity for a US-Saudi-Israel pact and Israeli-Palestinian progress.
Appallingly, he’s reverting to the same inflammatory language that launched him as the anti-Rabin, anti-Oslo rabble rouser in 1995 but whose repeated failure as policy—suppressing moderate Palestinians, thus granting extremists a foothold—contributed to the unprecedented catastrophe of October 7.
It is a bitter, tragic but underappreciated irony that amid all its fall-out, the cataclysm of 10/7 proved the far-reaching, extra-legal veracity of the three criminal charges against Netanyahu in his ongoing corruption trial: “fraud, bribery and breach of trust.” This was far worse than trading political favors and regulatory benefits for lavish gifts and flattering coverage from moguls.
Netanyahu’s greatest, long-term “fraud” (the Palestinians are a sideshow and can be safely marginalized) and his systematic policy of “bribery” to perpetuate that fraud (paying off the violently Islamist Hamas to buy quiet and undermine the Oslo-abiding Palestinian Authority) were fatally implicated on 10/7. The upshot? Netanyahu’s seismic and ignominious “breach of trust” with the Israeli public: his failure to protect the nation, his most sacred obligation, leading to Israel’s worst one-day death toll and the greatest loss of Jewish lives since the Holocaust.
It’s hard to overstate how 10/7 was a total refutation of Netanyahu’s 30-year policy regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and ensuring Israel’s security. He was completely, cataclysmically, wrong. Thousands of abandoned Israel civilians paid the price in blood and trauma and will continue to pay for a generation. (Notwithstanding 200,000 internally displaced Israelis.)
Yet now Netanyahu outrageously tries to dodge and spin his colossal failure. He pretends Israel’s most racist, anti-Palestinian, ultra-right government that he assembled and led did not bring about this disaster. Or that he wasn’t repeatedly warned his judicial overreach was undermining Israel’s military and inviting attack.
Like the son who murders both parents, then demands mercy as an orphan, Netanyahu now claims only he can defend Israel from the same Jihadist group he propped up for years to avoid negotiating with its secular, more moderate alternative. Can you really trust this compromised, ineffective man to protect the Jewish state? Or to conduct a strategic war with accountability for Israeli hostages, Palestinian non-combatants and a coherent post-war plan?
Underneath his political brilliance and wily rhetoric, Netanyahu is a repeat failure. And one-man wrecking crew. He has strengthened Israel’s greatest enemy, enhancing Iran’s nuclear, ballistic and proxy capability while cementing its alliance with Russia and China. Simultaneously, he weakened Israel’s crucial U.S. alliance, damaged Israel’s international reputation and provoked anti-Semitism globally. He’s even stealthily continuing the judicial coup that led to extraordinary nationwide protests against his corruption and illiberalism.
We should urge Netanyahu’s replacement now despite the ongoing war in Gaza, knowing every decision he makes is tainted by self-interest, not always Israel’s best interest.
The generals in the War Cabinet don’t need him and any of his rivals from the non-extremist right, center or left could do a better job tomorrow.
If this Pharoah won’t let his people go, they need to let him go!
I propose a new song of liberation for this year’s Haggadah. It draws on a popular Seder song about gratitude that lists all the great deeds God performed for the Jewish people, answered by “Dayenu,” meaning “it would have been enough” (had he only done this one thing for us). But in the contrarian spirit of this new song for change, celebrants compile a list of many awful things Netanyahu has done and declare our ingratitude to him. And we remind ourselves each bad act alone should have been enough to eject him. The list culminatesin theunmitigated disaster of October 7 and the equally disastrous war since.
How many of Bibi’s iniquities can you list for this year’s Seder?
But Israel’s haters and anti-Semites beware. This new song aims to strengthen the Jewish state and the Jewish people, not weaken them.
It’s a song for Jews who celebrate freedom and reject oppression. Palestinians and faithful Muslims must do their own reckoning with the despotism, debauchery, and fanaticism of Hamas. If the Jews need a new Moses to show them a more tolerant, transformative vision of the Promised Land, Palestinians need a new Mohammed who can free them from the bondage of Hamas and promote the Islamic virtues of peace and reconciliation.
There has been too much suffering and death on all sides. Israel must replace Netanyahu and re-establish its long-term security and its moral standing while moving beyond the 57-year occupation of the West Bank and the siege of Gaza. Palestinians must replace Hamas and choose new leadership that upholds both their struggle for autonomy and their ethical values.
No progress is possible without both internal and external liberation.
Dayenu. Enough already!
As we approach the first Seder on this first night of Passover, Jews around the world are searching for their Haggadahs, making brisket, chopping liver and doctoring gefilte fish while waiting eagerly to welcome guests to their homes.
But in these fraught times, when even friends and family might be on opposite sides of the political spectrum, do you really know how the Seder you’re attending will go. Will your host breakout the classic Maxwell House Haggadah first printed in 1932?
Or, will you ask the four questions according to Taylor Swift? (I kid you not!)
So, the question this year, the one before the “Four Questions/Ma Nishtana” will be: what kind of Seder will you be attending this Passover in the year 5784? Is it possible that you will be attending a “Republican Seder?” And, how will you know?
A good friend sent me this guide. And while this guide might have been circling social media unbeknownst to me, I thought you’d like to see it in any event.
10. They refuse to answer the Four Questions without a subpoena.
9. They demand a recount of the ten plagues.
8. They defend not increasing the minimum wage on the grounds that according to Chad Gadya it still only costs two zuzzim to buy a goat.
7. The afikomen is hidden in the Cayman Islands.
6. They refuse to open the door for Elijah until they see his immigration papers.
5. They attack Moses for negotiating a deal with Pharoah because why should we negotiate with our enemies?
4. They don’t understand why the Egyptians didn’t cure the plagues with hydroxchloroquine.
3. They omit the parts about slavery from the Haggadah because it reminds them of Critical Race Theory.
2. They keep saying “when do we get to the miracle of the Jewish spacelasers?”
1. They end the Seder by singing ”Next year in Mar-a-Lago”
Let me close on a more serious note. No matter what kind of Seder you’re attending, as a host or as a guest, you might to add this prayer to your service:
Courtesy: Rabbi Naomi Levy, founder of Nashuva and the author of “Einstein and the Rabbi.”
Chag Pesach Semeach!
In my last post, Thoughts on the war in Gaza, I wrote that my next two stories would be devoted to the current state of U.S. politics, including the upcoming presidential election and the near and present danger of Donald Trump. While I have plenty of material for both, two segments I saw MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” show seemed to be all I needed to sum up both topics.
The first clip from “Morning Joe,” titled, BILL BARR SAYS HE’LL VOTE FOR TRUMP AGAIN, is an interview former attorney general Bill Barr gave to Fox the other day,
Watch and weep, but pay attention Barr’s key points:
– “…pick the person who will do the least harm to the country and that, in my mind…I will support the Republican ticket…” (note, he could not actually utter the words “Donald Trump!”)
– “The real danger to the country is the progressive agenda…”
And this incredibly tone-deaf choice of words given Trump’s bromance with Putin:
– “…Trump may be playing ‘Russian Roulette’ but continuation of the Biden administration is national suicide…”
At least one thing from this interview is true: Bill Barr remains in the running for the biggest political hack of the current age.
But as this next clip will show, he has lots of competition. Watch as GOP leaders including governor of New Hampshire Chris Sununu, South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham, Florida senator Marco Rubio, Kentucky senator Rand Paul, former Speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy and former Trump press secretary, Kayleigh McEnany embarrass themselves doing the Trump flip-flop.
After watching Barr and his GOP cronies in action – and remember, these are so-called “mainstream” Republicans, not congressional nut-cases like Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, Matt Gaetz and others – the one takeaway is that the GOP is no longer a political party, it is a cult, the “Cult of Trump.” And these people didn’t even have to drink the Kool-Aid to join.
Around the Block