The Tremendous Trump Thread - Etterspill (Les førstepost)

[frohmage]

Subara skrev (1 time siden):

Kanskje han burde signere den også for å fremme salget.

At han har tatt med utdrag fra grunnloven må da også være en gulrot for villige kjøpere. Kan ikke tenke meg hvilke utdrag det er..

[toreae]

frohmage skrev (1 time siden):

At han har tatt med utdrag fra grunnloven må da også være en gulrot for villige kjøpere. Kan ikke tenke meg hvilke utdrag det er..

Må være det at (x)presidenter som heter Donald Trump ikke kan straffes. Dette pga. at de aldri gjør feil.

[Markiii]

jjkoggan skrev (6 timer siden):

At du ikke ser forskjellen mellom  John Bolton og Donald Trump og sin utenrikspolitikk er et problem som indikere et lite nyansert forståelse av begge to.  Bolton ville invadere Iran og Trump ville stanse  Irans angrep på K1 Air Base i Irak.  Uansett hva du kaller det, det er en ganske stor forskjell. 

Trump valgte seg jo ut nettopp John Bolton til administrasjonen sin. Og hva er relevansen av forskjellen mellom de to? At Bolton er krigshisser gjør ikke Trump til noe mindre av en krigshisser.

[jjkoggan]

Markiii skrev (13 timer siden):

Trump valgte seg jo ut nettopp John Bolton til administrasjonen sin. Og hva er relevansen av forskjellen mellom de to? At Bolton er krigshisser gjør ikke Trump til noe mindre av en krigshisser.

Isolationism vs Interventionism.    De er ganske forskjellige.  En isolationist er ikke nødvendigvis imot bruk av militærmakt, og kan bruke makt til å hindre krig.  En isolasjonist ønsker aldri krig unntat når hans interesser trues.  Sjansen at det blir krig med en isolationist leder er mye lavere enn med en interventionist som Bolton

Trumps tilhengere ser en isolasjonist som ikke er redd til å bruke makt når det gjelder amerikanske interesser men ikke når konflikten gjelder primært andre lands interesser.

Endret 28. mars av jjkoggan

[jjkoggan]

For de som ønsker en mer nyansert forståelse av konservativ religion og politikk i usa.  

Over 40% of self-described evangelicals go to church once a year or less.

[JK22]

Vi må definitivt finne ut hvorfor amerikanerne har gullfiskhukommelse. Dette er uholdbart. 

Resurfaced Trump interview about Tiananmen Square massacre shows what he thinks of protests | The Independent | The Independent

"A blueprint for a Trump autocracy": Authoritarianism expert on which global dictators Trump models (msn.com)

"they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength. Our country is right now perceived as weak.” 

Denne setningen var fra 1990. Hvordan kunne en amerikaner uttrykke slike antidemokratiske holdninger allerede den gang uten å bli husket? Da dette hentes fram under presidentvalget i 2016 synes det å være snakk om gammel fortid i manges meninger, men i dag er det nå klart at Trump har meget usedvanlige seige tiårsgamle holdninger og ideer han hadde aldri sluppet tak på, helt siden hans ungdom. I sammenligning ser man at det amerikanske folket sliter med å huske. 

Hungary provides a blueprint for a Trump autocracy—smash the civil service, upend the judiciary, gerrymander elections, award media outlets to your business cronies.

Der tar forfatteren Jacob Heilbrunn feil; dette er en strategi de republikanske kontrarevolusjonære hadde stått i bresjen for, med flere hundre involverte - deriblant McConnell i senatet - helt opp i toppen, helt siden Reagan vant presidentvalget i 1980, men intensiveres som respons på Obamas valgseieren i 2008. Trump bare vil snu det om fra parti til person. 

Over til den føderale høyesteretten; 

Dissensbevegelsen er i ferd med å bli sterk, artikkel etter artikkel i mediekanaler, intervju etter intervju i TV, radio og nett, personerklæringer fra ledende politiske, intellektuelle og juridiske skikkelser dag for dag. Dette intensiveres etter den sjokkerende høyesterettsavgjørelsen den 19. mars i "United States v. Texas"-saken om å ikke annullere den ukonstitusjonelle loven - alle tre liberale dommerne stemt mot å returnere den til lavere rettsinstanser, som de konservative anført av Roberts tvunget gjennom. 

Mange begynner nå for alvor å bli dypt bekymret over at de konservative dommere kan gi Trump absolutt immunitet selv om dette ikke dekkes av 1789-konstitusjonen. Som alle folkevalgte representanter og offisielle representanter har presidenter en immunitet mot konsekvenser av disses handlinger innenfor forvaltning og makthåndtering slik at disse ikke kan saksøkes eller anklages selv ved maktmisbruk så lenge det amerikanske lovverket respekteres. Dette er en immunitet som ikke beskytte mennesker mot alvorlige lovbrudd. Absolutt immunitet betyr i praksis at man står over loven, og dette har man ikke tradisjoner for i USA siden 1783.

Fears grow over Comstock Act, Justices Thomas, Alito (msn.com)

Dessuten har abortpillesaken tatt en vending til det verste, for Alito og Thomas under forhøret hadde tatt til orde for å gjenopplive den kontroversielle "Comstock Act", en lov som forbyr postfrakt av “obscene, lewd, [or] lascivious,” materiale som prevensjonsmidler, medisin som abortpiller og pornografi - til å begynne med. Denne loven var lagt død i flere tiår, helt siden 1970-årene da bluferdighets- og anstendighetslover elimineres over hele USA. Aktuelt var loven sist benyttet for over hundre år siden. 

[JK22]

House wracked by dysfunction as members plot exits (msn.com)

The House continues to hemorrhage membership as it struggles with infighting, dysfunction and a lack of productivity that has infuriated lawmakers in both parties.

Why it matters: A string of early Republican resignations has brought the chamber to the brink of flipping to Democrats. It may not stop there.

* One House Republican told Axios they have "heard a few" colleagues muse about leaving early, quipping, "Heck… even I'd have to consider."

* "Most all of us are contemplating leaving," said another GOP lawmaker.

Between the lines: Retiring members point to both the recent chaos and a longstanding drop in productivity and bipartisanship, with House Republicans privately complaining about their more bombastic colleagues.

* "We are sacrificing time away from family and making more money in the private sector for the vanity of a few people (on both sides) that want to raise money and their media profiles," said one House Republican.

* "The vast majority of members came to make a difference. We understand the utility of posturing and politics for the goal of governing. That's not what's going on anymore though. The inmates are running the asylum," the lawmaker added.

* "Some of these folks prefer the ease of being in a minority. No need to govern," another House Republican said.

The other side: There is no shortage of anger within the House Republican conference towards those who have opted to leave early.

* "Any Republican elected official who voluntarily leaves office prior to the end of their term (unless for health reasons) is putting America in a very dangerous position," Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said in a text to Axios.

The latest: Rep. Annie Kuster (D-N.H.), the chair of the powerful New Democrat Coalition, is the latest to announce her retirement after more than a decade in Congress.

* While Kuster listed numerous reasons for leaving in an interview with Axios – a natural endpoint as she nears 70 years old, a desire to let younger members shine – she acknowledged the recent chaos as a factor.

* "Of course, the dysfunction impacts our lives," she said, noting the 10 straight weeks lawmakers were in D.C. last year as they scrambled to keep the government funded and fill a speaker vacancy.

* Kuster also pointed to retiring Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.): "She has dozens of bipartisan bills backed up in our committee that she cannot get to the floor."

By the numbers: More than two dozen House Democrats and House Republicans, roughly a dozen each, are leaving Congress this year without immediate plans to run for higher office.

* Another dozen Democrats and five Republicans are leaving as they seek, or unsuccessfully sought, higher office.

* Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.), after announcing plans to retire, decided to cut his tenure short and resign last week. Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wisc.) will follow suit next month.

* Republicans will be down to just 217 seats to Democrats' 213 when Gallagher leaves, with Democrats poised to pick up another seat in an April special election.

Zoom out: Kuster pointed to Jan. 6 – and the subsequent distrust between Democrats and Republicans – as an inflection point. "Since that day, the dynamic has changed," she said.

* "We are witnessing the demise of the Republican Party, certainly as we've known it in my lifetime," she added, arguing Democratic leadership will get "the House to function again" if they take the majority.

* "I mean holy smokes," Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) said of Buck and Gallagher. "I think it's a lot when members who have spoken ... against things that are happening within their conference are not just retiring at notably young ages, [but resigning]."

Total nedsmelting. 

[Dragavon]

 

[Dragavon]

Lurer på kor lenge det går før broke Don eksploderer over dette utsagnet?

Sitat

 

De siste månedene har også Biden trappet opp pengeinnsamlingen og har nå et stort forsprang på Trump før høstens presidentvalg. Torsdag innrømmet også Trumps egen valgkamporganisasjon at de ikke vil klare å ta igjen gapet.

- Vi kommer aldri til å være i stand til å samle inn dollar mot dollar sammenliknet med Biden, sa en av Trumps rådgivere i en telefonkonferanse med journalister, ifølge Reuters.

 

https://borsen.dagbladet.no/nyheter/innrommer-klarer-ikke-a-matche-biden/81188604

[AveMORphine]

 

[JK22]

JK22 skrev (På 28.3.2024 den 5:47 PM):

den sjokkerende høyesterettsavgjørelsen den 19. mars i "United States v. Texas"-saken om å ikke annullere den ukonstitusjonelle loven - alle tre liberale dommerne stemt mot å returnere den til lavere rettsinstanser, som de konservative anført av Roberts tvunget gjennom. 

Disse dommernes advarsler er i ferd med å slå til; det meldes at flere republikanskledede delstater er i ferd med å forgripe seg på den amerikanske konstitusjonen ved å presse gjennom lovforslag basert på SB 4-loven fra Texas som betyr at de kan pågripe og deportere immigranter fra andre land uten føderal innblanding. Intet land - heller ikke Norge - vil akseptere dette, da en delstat i realitet er IKKE en nasjonalstat, ved å være et internt område i et internasjonalt anerkjent land. 

Another red state moves a step closer to enacting Texas-style anti-illegal immigration bill (msn.com)

 Louisiana, Iowa, New Hampshire, Tennessee og Oklahoma vil ha deres egne immigrasjonslov som disse ved lov er forbudt fra å ha, ettersom det kun er lovlig å arrestere immigranter ved lovbrudd, ikke for disses status - som da er underlagt føderal lov ved at bare USA som nasjonalstat kan arrestere, dømme og deportere immigranter og folk med fremmed statsborgerskap fordi dette falle under det mellomstatlige feltet. Intet land vil tillate deportasjon - og heller ikke arrest - av immigranter fra et lavtstående administrasjonsområde man simpelt ikke har et mellomstatlig forhold med. Dette var den føderale høyesteretten helt innforstått med helt siden 1789.

Helt til 19. mars 2024 da John Roberts regelrett skjøt den føderale rettsinstansen i senk. Man hadde muligheten til å annullere SB 4-loven og det var dette de tre liberale dommerne hadde ønsket. Men Roberts valgt å la saken leve og returnere den til en lavere rettsinstans. Dette er et så grov brudd at det ikke kan forsvares. Nå hersker det kaos, og det er opprørsaktivitet bokstavelig talt fordi nasjonalgardister flyttes over delstatsgrenser uten presidentens tillatelse og Louisiana og Texas sitter med seriøse planer om "interstate compacts" - som er i brudd mot den føderale makten. 

I slutten må delstatene da internere de illegale innvandrere som ikke kan deporteres, og det kan ende med at ekte interneringsleirer må bygges og åpnes akkurat som med japanskimmigrantene som var arrestert og internert under 2.vk på et ulovlig grunnlag, bunnet rasistiske holdninger. Flere millioner kan bli internert før valget vil finne sted, og da snakker om man et skala av menneskerettighetsbrudd som ikke hadde vært bevitnet på flere generasjoner. 

Nå er presset på Roberts massiv. "Alle" har nå forstått at situasjonen er kommet utenfor kontroll. 

Dessuten er det pisket opp et voldsom hykleri mot den illegale immigrasjonen, at det nå snakkes åpent om å begå massedrap på kvinner og barn som krysser grensen! 

Endret 30. mars av JK22

[Dragavon]

 

[JK22]

JK22 skrev (På 25.3.2024 den 6:54 PM):

Helt uventet valgt domstolen å gi Trump en frist på ti dager og dette kom svært overraskende på de fleste, som gjør det klart at noe er meget seriøst galt med det amerikanske rettsvesenet i møte med Trump - og dette har vært sett i flere tiår. Istedenfor å betale med en gang eller går med på en plan hvor påtalemyndigheter kan ta i beslagleggelse hans eiendeler/eiendommer, valgt domstolens panel på fem medlemmer å gi etter på alle steder. I løpet av ti dager må Trump hoste opp 175 mill. dollar i kausjon og dermed kan utsette betalingsfristen - og hvis han lykte med det, kan ankedomstolen behandle saken.

Dette er et stort sjokk, noe er veldig galt her. Gang på gang har vi sett hvordan dommerne og lekfolk håndtere Trump så forsiktig og motvillig som mulig, som hvis han er et ekstremt farlig rovdyr. Annetsteds har det kommet ut at flere dommere og anklagere i forskjellige saker rettet mot Trump har opplevd personligendringer, uforstående atferd som førte dem ut i åpen strid med andre inkludert egne medarbeidere og så mye annet - som hvis de var utpresset, endog truet. Her er det åpenbart at det er noe som foregår, som må avdekkes. Så langt er det bare dommer Engoron som hadde oppvist karakterstyrke og profesjonell oppførsel. Til og med høyesterettsdommerne i den føderale høyesteretten virker skremt av Trump.

I forkanten var det lattersalver omkring Trumps oppførsel før ankedomstolen skulle avgjøre om Trump betale opp eller ikke den 26. mars. Mange som lo, stilnet i vantro og sjokk, da begynner det å danne seg en oppfatning om at noe er meget galt her i forholdet mellom det amerikanske rettsvesenet og Trump. Nå er dette i ferd med å manifeste seg fordi i nyere tid kom Trump med synlige trusler mot en dommer og hans datter (i Norge er dette 100 % forbudt pga. ærekrenkingsloven) i hans bruk av egne sosiale medier som nå brukes som et våpen mot lekfolk, politikere, militære og politi. 

"It's time for the courts to stop bending over backward to protect Trump. He's entitled to all the constitutional protections any other criminal defendant receives, but he's not entitled to more." Joyce Vance

Judges Must Take Action After Donald Trump's Latest Attacks: Attorney (msn.com)

Vance reagerte ikke bare på Trumps trusler mot dommerens datter, men også mot president Biden fordi en video på tjue sekunder vist hvordan Biden, bakbundet og liggende på en vei, skulle påkjøres med en lastebil deles av Trump selv - som kan oppfattes som en drapstrussel og ærekrenking også etter norsk lov. 

"Judges have the ability to compel good behavior from defendants on bond pending trial in their court," Vance said, "they should tell him he can't threaten the President of the United States.

Den amerikanske ytringsfriheten har tradisjonelt ikke åpnet for slik intimiderende retorikk i offentligheten, ennå har dette blitt misbrukt på et tidlig utenkelig skala av Trump som nå ifølge flere og flere observatører er i stand til å misbruke partiske mediekanaler, tankeløse mediekanaler og spesielt hans egne sosial medietjeneste for å påvirke og skremme vitner, advokater og dommere. Det merkelige utfallet av diskvalifiseringssaken mot Trump har fått mange til å reagere, det spekuleres på høy nivå om den føderale domstolen hadde blitt intimidert av republikanernes ukonstitusjonelle trusler og Trumps intimidasjonsatferd. Så opplever alle sjokket i New York da fire ankedommerne - som i ettertiden nektet å kommentere - valgt å gi Trump en seier. En dommer i Georgia som overlevd en skandale da hun var dum nok til å innlede et forhold med en assistent, har funnet seg under voldsomme angrep av republikanerne i hjemdelstaten og åpenlyse trusler i sosiale medier. Det er kommet bekymringsmeldinger om enorm mental påkjenning på dommeren som sitter med ansvaret for hysj-papirsaken omkring Trump. 

"If Trump can get away with threatening a judge's daughter, if he can do this to the President of the United States, then what's going to happen to them if they take the witness stand against him or vote to convict?"

She said judges are obligated to protect the integrity of the proceedings in their courtrooms and that if, "Trump can slash and burn his way through the system, there is an enormous risk that jurors and witnesses will feel intimidated, and may turn away from their duty out of fears about their own and their loved ones' safety."

Dette er under normale omstendigheter ikke tillatt etter amerikansk lov, men Trump hadde klarte å tvinge seg til unntaksrett ved å misbruke det andre grunnlovstillegget omkring ytringsfrihet, da dommerne hadde først ønsket å sette munnbind på ham for å unngå intimidasjon av vitner, dommere og anklagere og bevismanipulering. Ved en feil hadde grunnlovsfedrene som trodde på borgerlige verdier, gjort ytringsfrihetsbestemmelsen altfor vag. 

it's time for the people with authority to do so to deal with him."

[JK22]

Trump’s Bible Just Might Earn Him Eternal Damnation (thedailybeast.com)

Meget voldsomme  reaksjoner fra kristne autoriteter i USA for tiden. Da Trump reklamere for en bibel - "God Bless the USA Bible" - i påsken - var det mange som ikke kunne tro sine egne øyne og ører. 

Donald Trump har begynt å selge sine egne bibler med navnet «God Bless the USA Bible». Tittelen er inspirert av countrysanger Lee Greenwoods patriotiske ballade «God Bless the USA», som Trump ofte bruker i sine valgmøter.

– God hellig uke. La oss få Amerika til å be igjen. På vei mot langfredag og påske oppfordrer jeg dere til å skaffe dere et eksemplar av «God Bless the USA Bible», skriver Trump på sin egen Truth Social-plattform, og henviser til en nettside som selger boken for 60 dollar.

På nettsiden står det at boka er «den eneste bibelen som er støttet av «president Trump». I tillegg er den «lettlest» med «stor skrift» og «inviterer deg til å utforske Guds ord».

Dette er hva som vises i norske medieomtalelser, som raskt kom i glemmeboka fordi Norge er et sekulært land med en kristensekulær bevissthet - men i USA er dette betydelig langt mer alvorligere. En bibel for eksempel koster langt mindre enn 60 dollar som er mer enn vanlig bokpris i den dyre Norge, i et land hvor enhver bolig og hotell har en bibel. 

I have vivid memories of then-President Donald Trump standing in front of St. John’s Episcopal Church, right across from the White House, using the Bible as a prop. Ironically and revealingly, Trump looked uncomfortable handling the Holy Scriptures and ended up holding the Bible upside down. Had he actually read the Bible, it might have turned his worldview upside down.

And now he is hawking his new Bible—the Bless the USA Bible—for $59.99 (more than most Bibles cost). Of course, he gets all the proceeds. He launched his new venture in the middle of Holy Week for Christians in the lead-up to Jesus’ Friday crucifixion and Sunday resurrection. In the commercial video Trump made to sell his new Bible, he spoke explicitly about Holy Week, Easter, Jesus, God, and Christian values more than we have ever heard him do before.

Donald Trump has gone from using the Bible as a prop to turning our Holy Scriptures into a commodity. Words no longer suffice for the things he says and does with the most common word for his personal, political, and presidential behavior being unprecedented.

But I have some better words—religious words. I and many other faith leaders are willing to accuse Donald Trump of two more things.

The first is idolatry—false worship. The White Christian Nationalism that Trump proclaims, directly names the problem. First, the most inclusive and welcoming message of the gospel of Jesus Christ is made white by the marketer-in-chief of racial grievance. Second, the word Christian is distorted beyond recognition. Service, sacrifice, and love are replaced with control and domination with Trump’s religious disciples unapologetically aiming for control in their “Seven Mountain Strategy”—with right-wing Christians ruling government, business, media, education, family, arts/entertainment, and, of course, religion. And in direct contradiction to Jesus' instruction to his followers to make disciples in every nation, Trump’s faith will be nationalism, not just positively loving your own country, but asserting the power of one nation over others. Trump’s Bible features the documents of one country and puts the words “God Bless the USA” on the cover. That is idolatry—the false worship of a nation.

The second word is heresy, which means drawing Christians and others away from Christ. Donald Trump and his MAGA movement deny the truest and deepest teaching of Jesus in places like his Sermon on the Mount. Trump’s worship of wealth and utter disregard for the poorest and most vulnerable brings the judgment of Jesus in Matthew’s gospel Chapter 25, “As you have done to the least of these you have done to me.”

And the life of lies that Donald Trump has led and deliberately spread to the damage of our nation completely contradicts Jesus’ words in the Gospel of John: “You will know the truth and the truth will make you free.”

“To invoke God, Mr. Trump, in the making and selling of your Bible is a very dangerous thing—not only for the soul of the nation but also for yours.”

While Trump has led the political trajectory of fear, hate, and violence in our public discourse, Jesus says in the Beatitudes, “Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God.”

And all the efforts of the Republican Party, which Donald Trump now firmly controls, to suppress and subvert the voices and votes of people of color is a direct assault on the image of God, the imago dei, laid out in the first chapter in the first book of the Bible in Genesis 1:26. “Then God said, ‘Let us make all humankind in our image and after our likeness.’” Are Donald Trump’s white evangelical followers really ready to own up to their chosen party’s plans to suppress the voting rights of their Black and brown brothers and sisters in Christ—even at Black churches as polling places?

The divinely created equality of all of God’s children is so much larger than the small world of Donald Trump, who wants to take over our political nation. To invoke God, Mr. Trump, in the making and selling of your Bible is a very dangerous thing—not only for the soul of the nation but also for yours. You once said that you never have felt the need to ask God for forgiveness in your life. You might want to reconsider that now.

Det siste bibelverset i artikkelen er essensielt for den amerikanske folkesjelen i en immigrasjonsnasjon - Genesis 1:26 har vært meget viktig for den amerikanske nasjonalbevisstheten som først var om de inkluderte, deretter om hele befolkningen medregnet de fargede, minoritetsfolk og forskjellige grupperinger som kom fra fjernt og nært. Dette er slagordet for de amerikanske slavemotstandere med Abraham Lincoln i spissen i 1800-tallet. 

Og det avslører nok en gang at Trump er en dumrian av den verste sorten. 

Endret 31. mars av JK22

[JK22]

"Congress is broken,"

'We are in danger as a nation': House and Senate aides consider leaving 'broken' Congress (msn.com)

Det er ikke bare de folkevalgte delegater - kongressmedlemmer og senatorer - som vurdere om de burde forlate kongressen, (det må huskes at republikanerne vil få flertall senere i våren, mai/juni) hele HALVPARTEN av "aides" - som i praksis betyr rådgivere, assistenter, støttefolk etc. som delegater er dypt avhengig av for å holde kongressen gående - sitter med seriøse planer om å pakke sammen og reise hjem. 

"Congress is broken," the nonprofit Congressional Management Foundation (CMF) stated in its 2024 "State of the Congress" report. The report noted that nearly half of senior aides in both chambers of Congress are considering leaving their jobs because of "heated rhetoric from the other party."

"Only 12% of Democrats and 31% of Republicans agreed that 'Congress is currently functioning as a democratic legislature should,'" the group wrote. "There has been no change or improvement of this metric since 2022."

Despite measures in recent years to increase the budgets of the 535 congressional offices from roughly $500 million to more than $800 million per year — thus increasing the pay of the most senior-level staffers to roughly $200,000 per year (elected members themselves have been making the same $170,000 salary since 2009) — tensions remain high. Nonprofit congressional resource Legistorm, which tracks hiring in the House and Senate, reported that staff retention rates are still at near-record lows this century despite a slight 4% year-over-year increase.

An identical number of staffers for both Democratic and Republican members of Congress said that the mental and emotional toll from their jobs was also a significant source of stress. Kane wrote that four in 10 staffers frequently experienced "direct insulting or threatening messages" while on the job.

"The physical and psychological toll of this place cannot be understated," an unnamed senior aide to a House Democrat told CMF staff. "We are in danger as a nation."

Congress' lack of productivity could also be a contributing factor to staffers' weariness of their jobs. In January, ABC reported that the 118th Congress is on track to be the least productive meeting of the federal legislature in decades, with fewer than three dozen bills passed in its first year. 2023 marked the first time since the Great Depression that a meeting of Congress passed so few bills in its first year.

"This is the most ineffective congress that we have seen," Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Illinois) said at the time.

According to Ballotpedia's count, a whopping 50 members of the 118th Congress have announced they will not be seeking another term in office. This includes eight US Senators (five Democrats, two Republicans, one independent) and 42 members of the House of Representatives (23 Democrats, 19 Republicans). The latest departures are Rep. Annie Kuster (D-New Hampshire), and Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wisconsin). Gallagher not only announced he wouldn't be running for another term, but would leave the House entirely on April 19.

Dette betyr i praksis at det amerikanske politikersystemet har blitt lagt i ruiner, for hvis halvparten av alle kongressansatte som arbeider på frivillig basis skulle gå, vil det sende kongressen ut i kaos. Spesielt demokratene er utsatt. Hvis president Washington i 1790 hadde bevitnet dette, er det helt sikkert at han ville ha holdt en tordentale og deretter truer med å gjøre det samme som kong Karl 1. av England hadde gjort; å sende soldater inn. Eller mer presist, tar MAGA-representanter i arrest og få dem hengt uten barmhjertighet. 

[JK22]

No, Donald Trump, fraud is not protected by the First Amendment | Opinion (msn.com)

On Thursday, former President Donald Trump’s lawyers appeared in court in Fulton County, Ga., to argue that election fraud is protected by the First Amendment.

Trump’s counsel described Trump’s efforts to overturn his electoral defeat in Georgia as “core political speech” entitled to heightened legal protection. In Trump-speak, when he called Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and pressured him to “find” 11,780 votes to change the election’s outcome, Trump was merely engaging in protected political expression.

Trump’s counsel argued before Fulton County Superior Judge Scott McAfee that “Criminalizing President Trump’s speech and advocacy disputing the outcome of the election, while speech endorsing (Biden’s win) is viewed as unimpeachable, is blatant viewpoint discrimination,” prohibited by the First Amendment.

While it is legally accurate to say that political viewpoint discrimination is a prohibited form of content discrimination, words of advocacy intended and likely to incite imminent lawless action, are not — and have never been — protected under the First Amendment.

As to fraud in particular, the Supreme Court has recently held that:

* The “First Amendment does not shield fraud”

* Fraudulent representations through speech for personal gain are “not protected by the First Amendment”

* The “prevention and punishment of” fraud has “never been thought to raise any Constitutional problem”

It's the same rationale under which hiring a hitman, inciting a riot, inducing fraud, impersonating a government official or promoting a Ponzi scheme — although typically done with mere words — are not protected under the First Amendment. Trump would have the Georgia court protect his words by divorcing them from their meaning.

Enter the Bible grift

Coming from a presidential candidate shamelessly hawking Bibles for $59.99 (plus shipping and handling), Trump’s manipulation of the First Amendment should come as no surprise.

The First Amendment has carefully guarded Americans’ core freedoms of religion and speech since it was adopted in 1791.

After the Constitution was ratified three years earlier, the First Congress of the United States proposed 12 amendments to it. First among them was the preeminent guarantee that the government would stay out of religion — forever — by neither establishing nor prohibiting its practice.

Cognizant of centuries of religious persecution, serious men of the First Congress did not stutter, demur or obfuscate. Their opening salvo in the First Amendment, now known as the Establishment Clause, declares that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

“Congress” in this context includes the federal government, since allowing the U.S. president or judicial branch to promote religion while prohibiting Congress from doing so would render the separation of church and state meaningless.

Trump is not so constrained.

To support his Bible sales, Trump’s three-minute promotional video says he wants to “Make America Pray Again” with a Bible “inspired by Lee Greenwood’s patriotic anthem.”

To solidify the symbolic merger of church and state, Trump’s Bible includes copies of the U.S. Constitution, Declaration of Independence and Pledge of Allegiance. His Truth Social promotion declares, “Religion and Christianity are the biggest things missing from this country… Order yours today! Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery.”

Who knew a country music singer alive today inspired the Bible? Or that Bibles could be monetized to pay royalties to Trump like his steaks, Trump University or gold lamé sneakers? If Christian Nationalism weren’t so dangerous, the swindle would be funny.

Weaponizing ignorance

Trump’s adversarial relationship with the U.S. Constitution demonstrates how he weaponizes the ignorance of his uneducated base. He gaslights them into believing up is down.

In late 2022, for example, Trump claimed that the 2020 election “fraud” — Biden won, of course — “allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.”

Trump either seeks to terminate the Constitution, or invoke it, depending on his needs. Ignorant of early American history, as well as world history where millions of people have perished in the name of religion, Trump and his MAGA base want to declare the United States a “Christian nation.” Trump and his un-Christ-like CINOs (Christians in Name Only) blindly seek power, and have calculated — perhaps accurately — that falsely claiming religious persecution is the surest way to get it.

Moving to dismiss Georgia’s criminal election fraud indictment as unconstitutional, his counsel argued that the criminal indictment “directly targets core protected political speech and activity,” meaning Trump’s words were just words and the conduct he tried to orchestrate was immaterial.

Extending the theory, Trump’s words didn’t march into the U.S. Capitol with zip ties to assault elected officials on January 6, 2021 — just like guns don’t shoot people, people shoot people.

Trump continues to argue he is above the law

Trump’s claim that he is free to engage in election fraud — a crime — comports with his belief that presidents can commit crimes with impunity because of presidential immunity.

Trump’s immunity argument, still outrageously pending before the Supreme Court, asserts, “A denial of criminal immunity would incapacitate every future President with de facto blackmail and extortion while in office, and condemn him to years of post-office trauma at the hands of political opponents.”

It is apparently lost on MAGA and Trump’s legal team that, for nearly 250 years, no president before Trump ever disseminated national security documents, tried to extort the leader of a foreign government, or incited a violent insurrection on hallowed Capitol grounds. Trump is generously taking one for the team by looking out for presidents of the future.

Applying Trump’s putative immunity in the Georgia case — under the First Amendment or otherwise — a sitting president would have the right to strongarm state election officials, advance a fraudulent slate of electors, impersonate elected officials, “find” 11,780 non-existent votes, and change the outcome of an election.

After all, to Trump’s legal team, them’s just words.

Sinnet mot Trump og MAGA er voksende. Og det blir sterkere og sterkere. 

US election workers face thousands of threats – so why so few prosecutions? (msn.com)

Shortly before midnight on 14 February 2021, James Clark tapped out a message on his home computer in Yarmouth, Massachusetts, that would change his own life and shatter the peace of mind of several others.

Clark, then 38, was surfing the internet having been drinking and taking drugs. Social media platforms were overflowing with heated debate around Donald Trump’s false claim that the 2020 presidential election had been stolen from him.

Five days earlier, Trump’s second impeachment trial had opened over his alleged incitement of the insurrection at the US Capitol. Over in the battleground state of Arizona the online debate was especially raucous, with conspiracy theories raging that the vote count had been rigged.

Related: ‘Democracy is teetering’: at ground zero for Trump’s big lie in Arizona

Though Clark lived 2,700 miles away from Phoenix, the Arizona capital, he felt driven to intervene. He found the contact page of the state’s top election official and typed: “Your attorney general needs to resign by Tuesday February 16th by 9am or the explosive device impacted in her personal space will be detonated.”

Then he signed the message “Donny Dee”, and hit send.

Clark’s bomb threat was discovered two days later, with instant seismic effect. Terrified staff fled from the state executive office building, sniffer dogs scoured several floors, and top state officials had to shelter in place.

Four months after the panic at the Arizona executive building, the US Department of Justice circulated a memo to all federal prosecutors and FBI agents. There had been a “significant increase in the threat of violence against Americans who administer free and fair elections”, the memo said.

The increase in threats amounted to “a threat to democracy. We will promptly and vigorously prosecute offenders.”

The memo announced the formation of a new unit within the justice department, the election threats taskforce. Its job was to respond to a phenomenon that had barely existed before Trump unleashed his 2020 stolen election lie – violent and abusive messages, including death threats, specifically targeting election officials and their families.

The taskforce was devised as a crack multi-disciplinary team bringing together experts from across the justice department and linking them with local FBI and US attorney offices. Its mission: to protect election officials from the intimidation let loose by Trump, by coming down hard on perpetrators.

As the November presidential election fast approaches, the taskforce faces its greatest challenge. With Trump back on the ballot, and with swing states such as Arizona continuing to be roiled by election denial, the federal unit is at the frontlines of what promises to be a combustible election year.

Much is riding on it. The Brennan Center, a non-partisan law and policy institute, has estimated that since 2020, three election officials have quit their jobs on average every two days – that’s equivalent to about one in five of those who run US elections nationwide bowing out in the face of toxic hostility.

“What the election threats taskforce does this year is going to be critical,” said Lawrence Norden, senior director of the Brennan Center’s elections and government program. “They have the biggest megaphone, and they need to use it to make clear that threats of violence against election workers are illegal and will not be tolerated.”

Day-to-day efforts of the taskforce are headed by John Keller, principal deputy chief of the public integrity section of the justice department’s criminal division. As the election year gets under way, his team is preparing itself for whatever lies ahead amid a collapse of confidence among some sections of American society in election results – and by extension, election workers – which Keller described as “incredibly concerning”.

Related: Overworked, underpaid, under attack: on the frontlines in a US election office

“Any criminal threat to an election official that seeks to intimidate them, or change their behavior or how they perform their critical functions, is a significant problem,” he told the Guardian. “The election community in the current climate feels attacked, they are scared, and the department recognizes that.”

As part of those preparations, the election threats taskforce is stepping up its contact with election administrators from coast to coast. Since its inception, the team has held more than 100 trainings and engagements with election officials and regional prosecutors to share knowledge on how to deal with hostile attacks.

Over the next eight months the taskforce will continue to hold a series of tabletop exercises in which federal experts and their regional partners role-play responses to possible worst-case scenarios, from serious death threats aimed at election administrators to bomb threats against polling places or other election infrastructure. Similar war games will act out what would happen in the event of a cybersecurity attack or attempt to bring down the power grid on election day.

At the core of the taskforce’s operations are criminal prosecutions of the most serious threats against election staff and volunteers. In almost three years, the unit has prosecuted 16 cases involving 18 defendants, two of whom are women.

Ten perpetrators have so far been sentenced, with punishments ranging from 30 days to 3.5 years in prison. A further three people have pleaded guilty, and five have been charged and are awaiting plea deals or trials.

Clark was sentenced to 3.5 years’ imprisonment earlier this month for his Arizona bomb threat. At his sentencing hearing in federal district court in Phoenix, a prosecutor from the election threats taskforce requested a strong deterrent punishment, pointing out that within minutes of sending his threat Clark had searched online for information on “how to kill” the then secretary of state.

Arizona is the ground zero of election threats, accounting for seven of the taskforce’s 16 prosecutions. On Monday Joshua Russell was sentenced to 30 months in prison in federal court in Phoenix for leaving a series of voicemails in 2022 for Katie Hobbs, the current Democratic governor of Arizona who was then acting as secretary of state.

He said: “Your days are extremely numbered. America’s coming for you, and you will pay with your life, you communist traitor.”

One of the striking features of the taskforce is the relatively few cases it has prosecuted compared with the mountain of hostile communications that has been dumped on the election community in the Trump era. In its early stages, the unit invited election offices around the country to forward all the offensive material to its Washington headquarters and was inundated with thousands of obscene, abusive and hostile messages.

But when it pored over the reports it found that up to 95% of them failed to meet the threshold for conducting even a criminal investigation, let alone prosecution. That standard was set by the US supreme court in the 2003 ruling Virginia v Black, which weighed the need to shield public servants from criminal threats of violence against the robust protections for political speech under the first amendment of the US constitution.

The court’s conclusion was that for a communication to be a crime it has to be a “true threat”. The justices defined that as a “serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence”.

Most of the messages reviewed by the taskforce were distressing and inappropriate, certainly, but in its analysis fell short of that criminal bar. They were indirect rather than direct, implicit rather than explicit, ambiguous and aspirational rather than an active statement of intent to carry out illegal violence.

“The difference between what is criminally actionable, and what feels like a threat to an election administrator on the ground, is an inherent problem in this space. What is potentially actionable is closer to dozens of cases, compared with the thousands of hostile communications we have received,” Keller said.

Despite the legal complexities of a “true threat”, some at the receiving end of the vitriol are calling for more urgent action. Adrian Fontes, Arizona’s current secretary of state whose office has been the target of several of the most serious threats, told the Guardian that in his view it was taking “monstrously long” for federal prosecutors to secure sentences.

He called for an increase in penalties, and a broadening of the scope of what constitutes a criminal threat against election officials. “I don’t know that the federal bureaucracy has been nimble enough. They’re not treating it like the domestic terrorism that it is,” he said.

Bill Gates, a Republican supervisor with Arizona’s largest constituency, Maricopa county which covers Phoenix, is quitting his job as a top election administrator after the November election in part because of the terrifying threats he and his family have suffered. He also called on the taskforce to step up the intensity of its operations at this critical moment.

“I’m grateful for what they’ve done, but we feel like they could do more,” he said. “We all feel that the January 6 prosecutions [over the attack on the US Capitol] have been very aggressive and well-publicized, and we’d like to see the same level when it comes to threats against election workers.”

The taskforce said that the 12- to 24-month gestation period for its election threats prosecutions was similar to any other federal case, from violent crime to fraud. Keller agreed though that deterrence was vital.

“The deterrent value of the cases is critical. Like most things in most spaces, I’m sure that we could do more and do better, and we are trying to come up with new ways to attract more attention to this work to maximize that deterrent impact,” he said.

It’s not just legal constraints that affect the number and speed of prosecutions, there are other technical hurdles that the taskforce has to negotiate. Identifying perpetrators who disguise themselves by using foreign internet service providers or burner phones can be a challenge, and subpoenas seeking the information from companies such as Facebook and Twitter or Verizon and AT&T usually take six to eight weeks.

Against such impediments, the taskforce is hoping to build up resilience against the anti-democratic onslaught by improving communications between the central justice department and the FBI’s 56 field offices and 94 US attorney’s offices around the country. Each FBI office has an election crime coordinator, working in tandem with the taskforce’s election community liaison officer.

The network has been used to share information about how to deal with growing problems such as swatting – hoax calls to 911 reporting crimes or fires at public officials’ homes. Lists are being compiled of potential swatting targets in sensitive areas like Maricopa county so that officers are aware that the emergency calls may be false as soon as they come in.

Norden of the Brennan Center said that as the election year hots up, relationships between beleaguered local election workers and the powerful federal hub will become ever more important. “The taskforce’s presence lets election officials know the federal government has their backs. That’s essential, because a lot of them, particularly in the immediate aftermath, felt kind of abandoned.”

Så den føderale høyesteretten er ansvarlig for at demokratiet kunne komme under angrep i USA; Virginia v. Black-saken som var avgjort i 2003, var en juridisk skandale fordi denne visket bort likheten mellom trusselhandlingen og den fysiske handlingen, likedan mellom intimidasjonshandlingen og den fysiske handlingen som har gjort situasjonen omkring Trump og rettsvesenet akutt, sendt kongressen ut i krise og skapt en alvorlig trussel mot valgordningen. Det som var så skandaløst med høyesterettsavgjørelsen, var at man rett og slett forsto ikke konsekvensene den gang, som sett med mange høyesterettsavgjørelser i 1982-2010 som i praksis fulgt til forverrede tilstander. Både konservative og liberale som hadde stemt for, trodd de bare "skjerper" betingelsene, uten å realisere at dette åpner for straffrihet for vag og utydelige trusler og intimidasjon - det blir rett og slett tillatt å skremme fordi terskelet settes for høyt. 

Fram til 2003 hadde man klok av skade en strenghet mot intimidasjonstaktikk, trusler som kampanjetaktikk og bruk av retorikk ment for å oppildne fram konflikter som motsetninger. DET ER INGEN TILFELDIGHET at polariseringen og intimidasjon som truende atferd blir politiske påvirkningsverktøyer siden presidentvalget i 2008. Det var et forbud mot Ku Klux Khan-markering fordi dette var en trussel, som er straffbart i de fleste land med fungerende lov. 

Det er minst et par dusin høyesterettsavgjørelser i 1980-2020 perioden som må annulleres for at USA skal overleve, det er blant annet lite kjent at politivold er konstitusjonelt tillatt - intet land, selv ikke Kina, har en "konstitusjonell lisens til å drepe" for sin ordenspersonell. Det var dette som fulgt til politivold, skillet mellom sivilist og politi, maktmisbruk og sosiale spenninger ikke bare omkring de fargede, men også white-on-white, flere 100 % hvite lokalsamfunn i de siste tjue år var i harnisk mot overivrige politibetjenter som drepte tilfeldige som anerkjente samfunnsdeltagere. Flere tusen politibetjenter kunne unngå det verste pga. høyesterettens feiltolkning som var et meget stort problem, spesielt i Rehnquist-tiden da han var høyesterettsjustitiarius i 1986-2005. Dessverre valgt Roberts å fortsette Rehnquits doktrine omkring teksttolkning og dypkonservative holdninger. Hva som var viktig, var at Rehnquit hadde arbeidet for en begrensning av statsmakten og dette rammet både delstater og den føderale staten, i "føderalismens navn". 

Staten får dermed ikke mange virkemidler som må til. Som i møte med Trump. 

[Dragavon]

Sitat

 

Mediehuset Forbes, som står bak verdens kanskje mest anerkjente rikingliste, har nylig forsøkt å besvare spørsmålet som er blitt stilt utallige ganger siden 2016.

Hvor rik er egentlig Donald Trump?

 

https://e24.no/naeringsliv/i/nQk10J/donald-trumps-formue-saa-mye-er-han-egentlig-god-for

[Dragavon]

Så begynner aksjekursen å justere seg mot reel verdi. Dette er berre starten for broke Don 🤡

Sitat

NEW YORK (Børsen): Aksjekursen til Trump Media and Technology Group, som eier Truth Social, stupte mandag med mer enn 21 prosent. Det skjer få dager etter at selskapet gikk på børsen og ble verdsatt til svimlende 8 milliarder dollar (om lag 88 milliarder kroner), melder flere medier, blant annet Reuters.

https://borsen.dagbladet.no/nyheter/kollaps-11-milliarder-forsvant/81199621

[Snikpellik]

Trump kom med svært rasistiske uttalelser i natt mens han stod sammen med politifolk på scenen.

Trump calls migrants 'animals,' intensifying focus on illegal immigration
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-expected-highlight-murder-michigan-woman-immigration-speech-2024-04-02/

Sitat

Donald Trump called immigrants illegally in the United States "animals" and "not human" in a speech in Michigan on Tuesday, resorting to the degrading rhetoric he has employed time and again on the campaign trail.

The Republican presidential candidate, appearing with several law enforcement officers, described in detail several criminal cases involving suspects in the country illegally and warned that violence and chaos would consume America if he did not win the Nov. 5 election.

In a later speech in Green Bay, Wisconsin, he struck a similarly foreboding tone, describing the 2024 election as the nation's "final battle."

While speaking of Laken Riley - a 22-year-old nursing student from Georgia allegedly murdered by a Venezuelan immigrant in the country illegally - Trump said some immigrants were sub-human.

"The Democrats say, 'Please don't call them animals. They're humans.' I said, 'No, they're not humans, they're not humans, they're animals,'" said Trump, president from 2017 to 2021.

 

Endret 3. april av Snikpellik

[Dragavon]

true colours shining through.......