* * *
The President’s ‘Slush’ Fund
While the insurrectionists to which Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment refers were those who rebelled against the United States in the Civil War, its language is also applicable to any other insurrectionists, including those who attacked the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The President and his supporters cannot rewrite history, which always provides precedent, legal or otherwise; here are the words from that Amendment:
“… neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States … but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.”
 |
| Janurary 6 Insurrectionists in Action |
On January 6, 2021, Donald Trump’s supporters violently invaded the Capitol in order to prevent the counting of electoral votes for president. Some Capitol and local police suffered physical injuries in defending the Capitol; several died as a result of this insurrection as did at least one insurrectionist. Anyone who claims that was not an act of rebellion nor insurrection is blinded by the President’s thoroughly disproven claims that the 2020 presidential election was ‘stolen,’ and is at best a misguided fool.
Any attempts to compensate these convicted insurrectionists, even after the President pardoned them (pardons affect sentences, not convictions) are forbidden by the Fourteenth Amendment. Even a hard-headed Republican should understand that.
JL
* * *
A Message to Democrats
Democrats are struggling to identify the reasons they lost the presidency in 2024.
I blame it on two things;
First, President Biden (and his advisers) ignored his aging and his apparent knocking on the doorway to senility. But of course this was not true of observant Republicans and those Americans who were watching and listening and found it difficult to consider giving him four more years as president. His dropping out in favor of his vice-president came months, if not years, too late. That was his fault.
Secondly, Kamala Harris quickly found the horse given her to ride to be a lame one, hobbled by ‘identity politics’ that brought with it not only well organized support, but well organized opposition as well, making the election into a choice between her supporters’ menu of positions and Donald Trump, who while probably not on top of the issues, at least had previously filled that position four years previously.
Democrats failed to recognize that the country was looking to elect a president to be a leader and not to participate in referendums on gender identification, climate change, health care, abortion rights, gun violence, energy sources, immigration, and such issues, which while popular with significant groups of Democrats, also unified opposition to some of them.
It only took opposition to one of such issues to lock in a voter for Donald Trump. His campaign was spearheaded by opposition to the Democrat’s infatuation with politics aimed at those identifying with such ‘identity’ groups.’ More cautious Republicans, meanwhile, only had to stress traditional G.O.P. patriotic and kitchen table values, and make promises, soon to be revealed as impossible lies once Trump was elected in 2024.
Today, as we approach the mid-term elections, and look ahead to 2028, the Democrats must recognize three things:
1.The people want change and may be willing to accept seemingly radical solutions to bring it about. What we have now is not working well. Nobody is in love with the Electoral College; we should not fear change within the limits provided in our Constitution.
2. Democrats must be willing to espouse positions with which not all Democrats agree. There must be tolerance of disagreement within the Party. (example: a supporter of abortion rights might not be bothered by the use of fossil fuels.)
3. In approaching these two aims, there must be an overriding sense of unity among Democrats, recognizing that ‘change’ and ‘disagreement’ must be harnessed together to bring about benefits for the entire American population.
Such unity is essential and must come first.
This sense of unity readily manifested itself in the 1930s through President Franklin Roosevelt’s ‘New Deal,’ a life preserver thrown to a country then struggling through an economic disaster. Thirty-five years later, in better times, President Lyndon Johnson’s ‘Great Society’ followed that model, aiming to serve the needs of the people in a country with a thriving economy. Most of his efforts still survive, despite unending Republican attacks on them. That is why a sense of unity is so very important to Democrats.
They must prioritize their efforts to attain that unity, and once that is accomplished, concentrate on change and tolerance for disagreement. Unity comes first, taking precedence over individual issues, ones that served as stumbling blocks in 2024.
(The above comments were written before seeing UCSD Professor Barbara Walter’s May 27 ‘Here Be Dragons’ column on this subject which you can find at barbarafwalter@substack.com. It is worth your attention. Also worth your time is Professor Heather Cox Richardson’s ‘May 27 ‘Letters from an American’ at https://substack.com/@heathercoxrichardson which sheds a historic light on today’s news.)
JL
* * *
Trump's Endgame in Iran IS Surrender
Via Simon Rosenberg’s ‘Hopium Chronicles,’ here are two excerpts from Robert Kagan’s new Atlantic magazine article, ‘Trump’s Endgame is Surrender.’
Rosenberg wrote: ‘One of the ways things are going to get worse for Trump and the Republicans is is that soon it will become impossible to deny that Trump has lost in Iran, has committed arguably the biggest mistake by an American President in our history, and left America in a far, far weaker position in the world. That he is, simply, an historic failure.’
In the article, the outlines of President Trump’s endgame in the Iran war are now emerging. In a phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the other day, Trump reportedly explained that the United States was negotiating a “letter of intent” with Iran that would “formally end the war and launch a 30-day period of negotiations” on Iran’s nuclear program and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. The purpose and effect of such an agreement should be clear: The United States is walking away from the crisis. Trump may launch another limited strike to look tough and satisfy the demands of the war’s supporters, but it would be a performative gesture. ‘Endgame’ in this case is a euphemism for ‘Surrender.’
Here are two excerpts Rosenberg quotes.
……..
‘Trump no doubt hopes that he can slip away without Americans noticing the magnitude of this defeat. The financial markets may stabilize if it is clear that oil will eventually start flowing again through a reopened strait, even if under the new Iran-controlled system. A major strategic setback for the United States need not affect Wall Street. The president may also hope that he can change the subject by launching another military operation, this time against the government in Cuba. And the news media have indeed begun writing more about Cuba than about the unfolding disaster in Iran.’
……..
‘According to one U.S. official, Netanyahu’s “hair was on fire” after the call with Trump—for good reason. The Iran war may end up as the single most devastating blow to Israel’s security in its brief history. On the present trajectory, Iran will emerge from the conflict many times stronger and more influential than it was before the war. It will exercise leverage with dozens of the richest nations in the world, all of which will have an acute interest in keeping Iran happy. They will be unlikely to take Israel’s side in any conflict that it has with Tehran or with its proxies in Lebanon and Gaza, because Iran will have the means to punish them if they do. Israel will emerge more isolated than it has been at any time in its history—and not least from its only reliable protector, the United States. When Trump turns his back on Israel, as he must do to implement this policy, MAGA will gladly follow. The bipartisan anti-Israel consensus in the United States will grow and harden.’
* *
This is not news to those who have followed the actions of President Trump. Anything he does or says is for his personal benefit, directly or through his family. He views the presidency as just another business venture, like his bankrupt casinos, his phony university and airline, and his real estate ventures that have failed, all debacles from which he was able to escape relatively unscathed. Being found to be a felon on 34 counts concerning his businesses’ practices by a New York court is meaningless to him; he has even named his personal attorney in that case as our nation’s acting Attorney General.
Trump has never been reluctant to turn on his supposed supporters when it serves to make him look good. The latest sucker to be in that position is Bibi Netanyahu, who joins Bondi, Noem, and innumerable Republicans tightrope walkers who thought their supporting him protected them from his selfish wrath. Texas Senator Cornyn fits that description too.
Sitting ‘on the fence’ in a relationship with President Trump ignores the fact that the top of that fence may be filled with spikes that ultimately can impale a fence sitter where it hurts most.
But conceivably, this time there just might be sufficent backlash to return Trump ‘to the vile dust from when he sprung, unknown, unhonored, and unsung’, as the poet Sir Walter Scott wrote. He is losing the support of some Republicans in Congress who at last are beginning to see him for the self-serving ‘nonentity’ that he is and always was, with just enough skill to successfully ingratiate him to a gullible American public that failed to pay attention! But in the 2026 and 2028 elections, surrendering to Iran, attacks on our Constitutional rights, and undisguised corruption might be too much, even for them to swallow, strengthening Democratic candidates.
Let’s get something straight though. Donald Trump is NOT the problem. If it weren’t him, there would be someone else like him. He is what he is. To pin down the problem, look to those who voted for him and his supporters in Congress, who for a variety of reasons such as greed, desire to appeal to bigots, pseudo-patriotism, or plain old fashioned ignorance, fall for his carnival midway salesman’s pitch. They are the ones Democrats must somehow reach.
JL
* * *
Republicans Made The Bed In Which We Lie
Here’s an excerpt from an New York Times opinion column by David French that appeared online on May 27.
“Trump is a profoundly unpopular president who still enjoys the deep devotion of his base. This puts Hill Republicans in a terrible position — as we’ve just seen in Indiana, Kentucky and Louisiana. If they defy Trump, they lose their jobs. If they obey Trump, they defend the policies and practices that are hurting the country and courting electoral disaster for the G.O.P.
But I have zero sympathy. If they’d done their duty in 2021 and convicted Trump in his impeachment trial, then Trump would be a private citizen. They made their bed, and must lie in it, but they made our bed also. We’re all paying the price for the decision they made. May history treat their failure with the contempt it deserves.”
The lesson: Other than during the presidencies of Lincoln, Grant, and Theodore Roosevelt, Republicans have not been on the side of the people. Remember that when you vote.
JL
* * *
Housekeeping on Jackspotpourri
Your comments on this ‘blog’ would be appreciated. My Email address is jacklippman18@gmail.com.
Forwarding Postings: Please forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it (Friends, relatives, enemies, etc.) If you want to send someone the blog, you can just tell them to check it out by visiting https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com or you can provide a link to that address in your email to them.
There’s another, perhaps easier, method of forwarding it though! Google Blogspot, the platform on which Jackspotpourri is prepared, makes that possible. If you click on the tiny envelope with the arrow at the bottom of every posting, you will have the opportunity to list up to ten email addresses to which that blog posting will be forwarded, along with a brief comment from you. Each will receive a link to click on that will directly connect them to the blog. Either way will work, sending them the link to https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com , or clicking on the envelope at the bottom of this posting.
Email Alerts: If you are NOT receiving emails from me alerting you each time there is a new posting on Jackspotpourri, just send me your email address and we’ll see that you do. And if you are forwarding a posting to someone, you might suggest that they do the same, so they will be similarly alerted. You can pass those email addresses to me by email at jacklippman18@gmail.com
More on the Sources of Information in Jackspotpourri: The sources of information used by Jackspotpourri include a delivered local daily ‘printed’ newspaper (now the South Florida Sun Sentinel) and what appears in my daily email; that includes the views of many contributors, including the New York Times and other respected journals.
Be aware that when I open that email, I first quickly glance at and screen out those sent to my very old former email address and those considered ‘promotional’ by Gmail’s system as no more than advertisements or requests for donations.
Besides these sources, I also utilize the Google search engine where I can look up any subject I want. Lately, these search results have been headed by a very generalized summary clearly labeled as being developed by AI (Artificial Intelligence). On occasion I might use such search results, but when I do, I will say that I am doing so. Generally, however, I try not to use such summaries in preparing Jackspotpourri.
Following such ‘AI’ search results, there follows the other results of my search. Unlike the anonymous AI-generated summaries, the sources of these results are clearly indicated, giving them a greater credibility than any AI summary.
It comes down to who YOU want to be in the driver’s seat in seeking information: yourself or something else (Artificial Intelligence), the structure of which somewhere along the way had to have been created by others, with whose identity I am neither familiar nor comfortable. At least when I read a column by Timothy Snyder, for example, I know from where it comes, and to some extent, what to expect.
Caution should be exercised in using Artificial Intelligence. Always!
JL
* * * *
No comments:
Post a Comment