DemocracyMouse
DemocracyMouse's JournalA blood curdling parallel: Trump is the ghost of Andrew Johnson
To save our country, I sincerely believe we must become a (non-violent) army of democracy nerds, beginning with this great article in Mother Jones:
IMPEACHMENT
Trump’s Not Richard Nixon. He’s Andrew Johnson.
Betrayal. Paranoia. Cowardice. We’ve been here before.
TIM MURPHY
JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2020 ISSUE
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/12/trumps-not-richard-nixon-hes-andrew-johnson/
It’s not hard to think of a historical precedent for President Donald Trump’s attempts to trade military assistance to the Ukrainian government for actionable dirt on his chief political rival. The pathetic desperation of the crime itself, the bungling attempt at a cover-up, the incriminating transcript—“it really is stupid Watergate,” one Democrat told the Washington Post in September. The similarities to the scandal that forced Richard Nixon from office in 1974 extend to the people talking about it. An attorney on Nixon’s House impeachment committee, Bill Weld, is running for president. John Dean, Nixon’s White House counsel, and Carl Bernstein, who helped break the scandal, are CNN contributors. A Nixon dirty trickster, Roger Stone, recently went on trial for doing more of the same for Trump. And of course there’s Trump himself, channeling Nixon’s appeals to the “silent majority” and “law and order,” and pillorying the “enemy” press. There’s even an attempt to cover up a break-in at the Democratic National Committee—read the partial transcript of Trump’s call with the Ukrainians and you’ll find the president floating a cheese-brained conspiracy theory absolving Russia of its 2016 hacking of the DNC.
But coverage of the Trump fiasco is focusing on the wrong impeachment. The best parallel to Trump isn’t Nixon; it’s Andrew Johnson, a belligerent and destructive faux-populist who escaped conviction in the Senate by the thinnest of margins. Yet for more than a century, the official narrative of the first presidential impeachment has been butchered and distorted, reduced to a historical curiosity, a showdown between two irresponsible factions in which voices of reason ultimately triumphed. You were likely taught (if you were taught at all) that the 1868 fight to remove Johnson from office centered on an obscure and dubious law, the Tenure of Office Act, and that “Radical” Republicans—their influence inflated in the aftermath of the Civil War—overstepped their bounds in a quest for even more power.
Andrew Johnson was a sort of anti-Lincoln—a stumpy, vengeful, subliterate tailor who rose through the ranks of the Democratic Party in East Tennessee by railing against elites. In 1861, he was the only Southern senator to stay loyal to the Union, leaving him not only without a state but largely without a party. Lincoln appointed him military governor of Tennessee, and later, hoping to shore up his support ahead of his reelection campaign, added Johnson to the ticket. Johnson showed up drunk to his own swearing-in, then hid out at a friend’s house in Maryland, ashamed to show his face. A few weeks later, Lincoln was murdered and Johnson was president. As the historian Brenda Wineapple explains in her lively 2019 book, The Impeachers: The Trial of Andrew Johnson and the Dream of a Just Nation, the road to impeachment began in the violence and political turmoil that followed the assassination, as Johnson wrestled with Republicans in Congress about what postwar Reconstruction should look like. The impeachment process was rife with bumbling and paranoia, but nonetheless centered on a profound question: whether the nation would continue on its path toward a pluralistic democracy or revert to the white supremacist state that had existed before Fort Sumter.
Alarm bells began to sound early on. Johnson was erratic. He was wavering. Frederick Douglass met with him at the White House and came away disturbed. In the meeting, the president had suggested deporting millions of freedmen and appeared not to know that Douglass had been enslaved. Johnson granted mass amnesties to Confederate soldiers and appointed ex-Confederates to key posts. In the spring and summer of 1866, a wave of racial pogroms broke out in the cities of the former Confederacy, targeting African Americans—34 killed in New Orleans; 46 killed in Memphis. Why hadn’t Johnson done anything to stop it? Why was he suddenly blocking every effort by Congress to bring white supremacist violence in the South under control? People who had once seemed enthusiastic about the project ahead were beginning to talk about the I-word.
Authoritarian Surveillance for Christmas
This isn't a Russian disinformation scare tactic. It's our 3rd world-caliber unregulated tech industry:
December 20, 2019 By Common Dreams
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/12/our-jaws-hit-the-floor-why-a-shocking-new-report-on-cellphone-tracking-is-absolutely-terrifying/
The New York Times‘ on Thursday sparked calls for congressional action by publishing the first article in its “One Nation, Tracked” series, an investigation into smartphone tracking based on a data set with over 50 billion location pings from the devices of more than 12 million people in the United States.
The data, from 2016 and 2017, “was provided to Times Opinion by sources who asked to remain anonymous because they were not authorized to share it and could face severe penalties for doing so,” explained reporters Stuart A. Thompson and Charlie Warzel. “The sources of the information said they had grown alarmed about how it might be abused and urgently wanted to inform the public and lawmakers.”
Readers and fellow journalists quickly turned to social media to draw attention to the reporting. Laura Rosenberger, director of the Alliance for Securing Democracy, tweeted: “This is the most important article you should read today. Period.”
Aaron Zitner of the Wall Street Journal concurred, writing on Twitter: “This is surely the most consequential piece of journalism published today, and its presentation is the highest form of storytelling. Think of what an authoritarian state is already doing with this technology.”
It's label time. The screaming Republicans are now plainly a unified phenomenon with only one name:
And they shall be called:
CLOWNS of MOSCOW
And the Heavens shall rain down the label upon the people that they shall have an accurate, meme-friendly phrase to repeat with joyful voices. Instead of warriors (which they like to think of themselves as, justifying belligerence and endless lying), they are nothing but Clowns of Moscow.
A Pledge for Journalists
A Pledge for JournalistsWhenever I am producing any sort of media on the topic of Trump, I solemnly swear to preface any and all statement's along these lines:
Donald Trump, a known criminal still occupying the office of the President and supported by a majority of the Republicans, many of whom are known to receive support from Russia, an enemy of the United States, said today... ______________.
A Patriot's Pledge
If and whenever I am speaking to the press or producing any sort of media, I solemnly swear to preface any and all statement's about Donald Trump thus:
Donald Trump, a proven criminal still occupying the office of the President and supported by a majority of the Republicans, many of whom are known to also receive support from Russia, an enemy of the United States, said today _______________________.
Warren's "Blue New Deal" is way too useful and smart
...for Republicans.
But it might actually motivate a groundswell of intelligent, concerned Democrats to get to the polls. In other words, convincing Trump's minions is futile... but a Blue New Deal for a Blue Wave sounds pretty reasonable to me. Millions of younger voters who give a fuck about having a future will eat this proposal up like M&Ms on a licorice stick. It might even peel off some independents.
The Democratic presidential hopeful is betting offshore wind and new seafood policies can win her votes.
By Alexander C. Kaufman
12/10/2019
Huffpost:
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5deec17fe4b05d1e8a568b5c?test_ad=evaluate_mobile_moments
Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren unveiled a proposal for a “Blue New Deal” to revitalize coastal economies by building climate change-ready ports, spurring new markets for sustainable seafood and reshaping the offshore energy sector to tap more wind and curtail oil drilling.
The nine-page plan adds to more than half a dozen campaign planks the Massachusetts senator has put forward to lower planet-heating emissions and adapt the United States to the changes already baked in from more than a century of unchecked fossil fuel burning and industrialization.
The proposal stands out as one of the most comprehensive plans yet to emerge to specifically target working waterfronts. Coastal economies were considered a blind spot in the Green New Deal movement that emerged over the past year and calls for a federal climate policy that guarantees good-paying jobs and rapidly transitions the country off fossil fuels. The resolution introduced in Congress in February outlining a Green New Deal made only a passing mention of oceans.
The focus on waterfronts comes as the United Nations climate summit in Madrid pays what activists would call overdue attention to the ways global warming is affecting oceans, which generate at least half of all oxygen in Earth’s atmosphere and have absorbed an estimated 93% of excess heat from emissions.
“While the ocean is severely threatened, it can also be a major part of the climate solution – from providing new sources of clean energy to supporting a new future of ocean farming,” Warren wrote in a campaign memo outlining the policy. “That is why I believe that a Blue New Deal must be an essential part of any Green New Deal – helping us fight climate change, protecting our health, and creating good, high-wage union jobs in the process.”
The campaign said the proposal did not include new investments beyond the $3 trillion Warren pledged to spend so far on climate efforts. Instead, the Blue New Deal outlines a suite of executive and regulatory actions.
When does it stop? When do white people actually join their suffering fellow citizens?
My heart is a mess of angst and frustration. My last post about police brutality got barely a nod from people in this forum. Is anyone listening? Can we rise to the occasion and SERIOUSLY start working hand-in-hand with the citizens whose ancestors PHYSICALLY BUILT this country — without compensation?
The families of Botham Jean and Atatiana Jefferson were drawn together by tragedies that have become all too familiar in the United States.
By Hayley Miller
10/29/2019
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5db855bae4b036b6a16755f0
NEW YORK ― On a mild fall evening, two strangers bound together by unimaginable tragedy at the hands of those sworn to protect and serve met for the first time in Manhattan.
Ashley Carr and Alissa Charles-Findley never wanted the spotlight. But their families were thrust into it when Texas police officers, in separate incidents roughly a year apart, opened fire on their siblings in their own homes.
In the days and weeks that followed, each woman, like so many other members of Black families who have been victimized by systemic police brutality, would join the frontlines of a national movement they had once supported from a distance.
Hours after their first meeting, Carr and Charles-Findley stood beside each other in Foley Square as keynote speakers at a National Day of Outrage protest against police violence, led by Until Freedom, a social justice organization. It was Carr’s first rally, but the words flowed easily.
“This is something that could happen to anybody,” she told the crowd. “When does this stop? When are we able to just live, to be productive citizens like we were told to be?”
There is something deeply wrong with the police (as a whole) in this country
I'm sorry, but I've had too many ridiculous and unnecessarily negative encounters with American police. They are tense, impestuous and spreading divisive propaganda. Why aren't any of them fired for terrorising citizens with bastardized American flags with ominous black, grey and blue stripes? And why do police departments tolerate slogans like "Blue lives matter" which undermines the peaceful message of Black Lives Matter? Are they trying to reverse centuries of effort to dismantle police abuse? So they can go fascist??? Wake up America! These people support Trump. Trump kept a copy of Mein Kumpf by his bed according to Marla Maples, his ex. He promotes beating up journalists.
Why does the police leadership tolerate all this? The police are supposed to HELP citizens, not scare us into oblivion.
And below is a link to another instance of a f'd up cop KILLING a mere child WHO IS UNDERSTANDABLY FREAKED OUT BY THEM. Their well-established untrustworthiness is to blame for scaring that kid in the first place.... Oh, he had it coming??? No! He's a kid! Some kids run when they're scared. You. Don't. Shoot. Them.
Don't tell me there are far more "good cops" – why aren't they helping to properly hire and train better colleagues? Why do they allow the other abusive cops to remain?
And it's only getting worse. I was pulled over by one crazed cop last year for going 40 mph in a 30 mph road and he was shaking like he was on drugs. I thought he would kill me if I merely sneezed. And just the other day, when I pointed out that their orgy of strobe lights was making the center of town a driving hazard — it was BLINDING and not in the least bit serving its intended purpose — this one cop aggressively pointed at me and barked to move along. Do they train these asshats to bark? Are they all on drugs? Low IQ hires?
THIS IS ALL WRONG
And below we see, once again, a cop shooting a child DEAD for BEING A CHILD. Sorry it's Raw Story, but they were the first to bring it to my attention (and who freakin' cares about the messenger, our country is filling up with hateful cops on steroids).
I know the answer is love (and better policies), but THIS SH*T has to stop.
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/this-was-an-execution-outrage-as-video-shows-california-police-officer-shooting-unarmed-teen-in-back-of-head/
Warren unveils K-12 education plan that skewers unequal funding
I rather like much of this. The most significant is the effort to address the unequal funding that public schools get in wealthier districts.
The sweeping plan also takes aim at charters, suggesting they divert precious resources away from traditional public schools.
By Rebecca Klein 10/21/2019
Huffpost:
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5dacfaffe4b0422422c73a78
The detailed plan also seeks to equalize school funding between low and high-income areas and decrease the influence of police in schools. It proposes a new education grant program funded at a whopping $100 billion over 10 years — the equivalent of $1 million for every school in the country — for schools to use on programs or resources of their choice. Her plan would be paid for by a wealth tax on fortunes above $50 million.
However, her newly released plan is extensive, taking direct aim at some of the most entrenched sources of inequality in K-12 education... On the issue of school segregation ― a polarizing issue that even liberal politicians often shy away from ― Warren pledges to encourage states to use a portion of their federal funds on school integration projects. Under a Warren administration, the departments of Education and Justice will crack down on wealthier, whiter communities that try to break away from their more diverse school districts and hoard resources ― a phenomenon called school district secession.
“Broad public affirmation of the Brown v. Board of Education decisions in the 1950s and recent debates about historical desegregation policies have obscured an uncomfortable truth ― our public schools are more segregated today than they were about thirty years ago,” states the plan, titled, “A Great Public School Education for Every Student.”
Notably, Warren also pledges to “eliminate high-stakes testing.” High-stakes testing came to prominence during the Bush administration, after the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act, which tied schools’ test scores to a series of carrots and sticks. The Obama administration continued to center high-stakes tests as federal officials encouraged states and districts to tie teacher evaluations to test scores.... Warren’s plan represents a stark departure from this line of thinking. She pledges to ban test scores as a significant determinant in personnel terminations, school closures and other “high-stakes decisions,” noting that “the push toward high-stakes standardized testing has hurt both students and teachers.”
...Warren pledges to fight to ban for-profit charter schools, which represent around 15% of the sector. But she also goes after nonprofit ones, promising to end a federal program that provides funding for new schools and opposing provisions that allow them to sometimes evade the same level of transparency and accountability as traditional public schools. The plan seeks to ban nonprofit charters that employ or outsource operations to for-profit service providers and calls for the IRS to investigate these schools’ nonprofit tax status.
An astonishing quote from the New York Times:
...and we have already forgotten: Trump is a Russian asset...
"Buddy, our boy can become president of the USA and we can engineer it. I will get all of Putin's Team to buy in on this."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/us/politics/trump-tower-putin-felix-sater.html
Profile Information
Name: Mouse de la SoulGender: Do not display
Hometown: New Jersey
Home country: USA
Member since: Sat Dec 9, 2017, 01:41 PM
Number of posts: 2,275
