End of the United States Constitution

The war on the United States Constitution is now on full display. President Donald Trump is the leader of the war. Being no fool, Trump is chipping away rather than a full declaration that the Constitution is obsolete.  Why doing his plan this way he appears to believe he can accomplish his goal without an uprising of most people.  He is succeeding!

Trump’s attack on the free press began as he was running for his second term. The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times owners nixed their editorial boards endorsements of Kamala Harris. The Times went even further than the Post when it canceled its editorial board. Why did they block the endorsements? They feared the attacks that Trump would bring to their businesses if he was elected that they were anticipating.

Now that Trump has been elected that same fear is being felt among the communication corporations.  ABC, NBC, CBS are Trump’s targets and they too have decided that it is better to accede to Trump’s demands.

From todays news:

  • President Donald Trump suggested that the federal government might revoke the licenses of broadcast television networks that are “against” him.
  • Trump’s comment came a day after ABC suspended airing the “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” show because of comments its host made linking the alleged killer of Charlie Kirk to Trump’s MAGA movement.
  • Trump said it would be up to FCC Chairman Brendan Carr to decide whether to cancel networks’ licenses.

First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So what is next? Laws about religion?

Trump is succeeding.

Charlie Kirk’s supporters have declared him a ‘martyr.’ Some want vengeance.

  • The shooting death of conservative activist Charlie Kirk has triggered a range of reactions, from mournful sympathy to religious conspiracy theories.
  • Kirk spoke of what he called a “spiritual battle” being waged in the United States between Christians and Democrats.
  • Experts on faith and far-right extremism say they are troubled by the religious glorification of Kirk in an era of increased political violence.

In life, Kirk spoke of what he called a “spiritual battle” being waged in the United States between Christians and a Democratic Party that “supports everything that God hates.”

In death, Kirk, one of the Republican Party’s most influential power brokers, is being hailed by conservative evangelical pastors and GOP politicians as a Christian killed for his religious beliefs.

Kirk — who rallied his millions of online followers to vote for Trump in the 2024 election — declared that God was on the side of American conservatives and that there was “no separation of church and state.” He was also known for his vitriol against racial and religious minorities, LGBTQ+ people, childless women, progressives and others who disagreed with him.

Kirk called transgender people “a throbbing middle finger to God.” He said the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was “a huge mistake” and called the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. “awful.” On his podcast, he called with a smirk for “some amazing patriot out there in San Francisco or the Bay Area [who] wants to really be a midterm hero” to bail out of jail the man who attacked then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband with a hammer in their home in 2022.

Where Charlie Kirk stood on guns, the LGBT+ community and the future of the United States

Is this the country you want?

Kirk was known to be a gun owner himself and regularly spoke out on the issue, including on behalf of the National Rifle Association in the aftermath of the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, in February 2018.

At a Turning Point event in Salt Lake City in April 2023, he said, “It’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment.”

Kirk adopted a traditional Christian conservative stance in his approach to many contemporary issues, telling an audience at a Trump election rally in Georgia last fall that Democrats “stand for everything God hates” and adding: “This is a Christian state. I’d like to see it stay that way.”

He also lashed out at the gay community, denouncing what he called the “LGBTQ agenda,” expressing opposition to same-sex marriage and suggesting that the Bible verse Leviticus 20:13, which endorses the execution of homosexuals, serves as “God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matters.”

Generally Kirk was loyal to Trump, whom he saw as key to establishing the conservative Christian America he wanted to help realize, one in which abortion is heavily restricted to cases of medical emergency in which the mother’s life cannot be saved by any other means, women enter higher education to find husbands and “woke” ideologies play no part in public life.

Political analyst Matthew Dowd lost his contributor role at MSNBC because of comments he made about Charlie Kirk after the young right-wing activist was murdered Wednesday.

Shortly after Kirk was shot to death while speaking on stage at Utah Valley State University, Dowd told MSNBC anchor Katy Tur that “hateful thoughts lead to hateful words which then lead to hateful actions.”

The angry reaction on social media was immediate after Dowd’s comments suggested that Kirk’s history of incendiary remarks led to the shooting.

Kamala Harris Doesn’t Blame Herself for Losing the 2024 Election

Harris’ book — “107 Days” — recounts the shortest presidential campaign in modern U.S. history. All the reviews of the book which is her story of why she lost the election she appears to blame everyone but herself.

“ ‘It’s Joe and Jill’s decision,’ “ Harris wrote. “We all said that, like a mantra, as if we’d all been hypnotized. Was it grace, or was it recklessness? In retrospect, I think it was recklessness. The stakes were simply too high.

“This wasn’t a choice that should have been left to an individual’s ego, an individual’s ambition,” she went on. “It should have been more than a personal decision.”

Ms. Harris dismissed any notion that Mr. Biden was not mentally or physically fit to serve as president.

“But at 81, Joe got tired,” she wrote. “That’s when his age showed in physical and verbal stumbles.”

107 days was too short a period to run a presidential campaign and Harris knew that. But there was more to her failed campaign than that. While Donald Trump was holding rallies that drew large crowds and his willingness to give interviews Harris hid from the press.

She lacked the courage to speak truth to power.

With no primaries Harris was the assigned candidate.

The Democratic Party is to be blamed for the loss of our Democracy.

WE ARE NOW IN A FASCIST DICTATORSHIP

What to do about this? I like Option 3

Raul Maseda

WE ARE NOW IN A FASCIST DICTATORSHIP, BUT THERE IS YET HOPE

Edited For Brevity

By Raul Maseda

“In 1933, German conservatives thought they could control Hitler. Two years later, they were being executed in their own homes. I spent weeks researching this question, desperately looking for counter-examples, for hope, for any time in history where people successfully stopped fascists after they started winning elections.

The pattern is so consistent it’s almost funny if it weren’t so terrifying. Every single time it goes like this: Conservatives panic about socialism or progressives or whatever. They ally with fascists as the ‘lesser evil.’ Fascists take power. Fascists immediately purge the conservatives who helped them. Then it’s 30-50 years of dictatorship. This happened in Germany, Italy, Spain, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Greece, Portugal, Croatia, Romania, and Hungary.

Want to know how many times conservatives successfully ‘controlled’ the fascists they allied with? Zero. Want to know how many times fascists purged the conservatives after taking power? All of them. Every single time.

And here’s the part that breaks your heart. Violence works. For them. Fascists use violence while claiming to be victims. They create chaos that ‘requires’ their authoritarian solution. Then they purge anyone who opposes them. Meanwhile, democrats keep insisting on following rules that fascists completely ignore. They file lawsuits. They write editorials. They vote on resolutions. And fascists just laugh and keep consolidating power.

The Supreme Court declared Trump above the law. He’s threatening to arrest political opponents. He’s already sent the FBI after elected officials when they haven’t committed crimes. Congress is his. Most state governments are his. Billionaire oligarchs openly coordinate with him.

So let’s start talking about what you do when fascists already control the institutions but haven’t fully consolidated power yet. Because historically, nobody’s been here before, not like this.

But that also means the old rules about what’s possible might not apply.

Option 1: The Blue State Coalition

California’s economy is bigger than the UK’s. New York controls global finance. The blue states collectively represent over 60% of America’s GDP. They could, theoretically, make the federal government irrelevant.

Imagine if California, Oregon, Washington, New York, Massachusetts, and others started coordinating directly. Ignoring federal mandates. Creating their own interstate compacts for everything from climate policy to civil rights. They already started this with climate agreements when Trump pulled out of Paris. But I’m talking about going much further.

State-level cryptocurrency to avoid federal monetary control. State-funded healthcare systems that ignore federal restrictions. State-level immigration policies that simply refuse to cooperate with ICE. Make the federal government have to physically enforce every single policy, stretching their resources to breaking.

The precedent? The way Northern states nullified fugitive slave laws in the 1850s. The way states are currently ignoring federal marijuana prohibition. But coordinated and comprehensive.

Option 2: Selective Compliance and Irish Democracy

The Irish called it ‘Irish Democracy’ when they were under British rule, the silent, dogged resistance of millions who simply ignored laws they found illegitimate. Don’t protest. Don’t riot. Just don’t comply.

Red states need blue state money. Blue state taxes fund red state governments. What if millions of people in blue states simultaneously decided to claim exempt on their W-4s and simply… stopped paying federal taxes? Not as protest but as a coordinated ‘forgetting.’ Overwhelm the IRS. Make enforcement impossible.

Doctors in blue states could ignore abortion restrictions. Teachers could ignore curriculum mandates. State police could refuse to enforce federal laws. Not dramatically, just… incompetently. ‘Sorry, we couldn’t find them.’ ‘The paperwork got lost.’ ‘Our systems are down.’

Make every single act of authoritarian control require physical enforcement, then make that enforcement impossibly expensive and difficult.

Option 3: Secession

We already have two incompatible visions of what America should be. One side wants a multi-ethnic democracy with a social safety net. The other wants a white Christian ethnostate with unlimited corporate power. These cannot coexist indefinitely.

What if blue states started seriously discussing secession? Not threatened as political theater but actually planned. Constitutional conventions. Referendums. Negotiations for national debt division. Military base transfers. Currency agreements.

Yes, the last time states tried to leave it caused a civil war. But that was over slavery, with clearly defined geographic boundaries and two relatively equal economic systems. This would be the economic powerhouses leaving the welfare states. What would the red states do, invade California? With what money?

The mere serious threat might be enough to force structural changes. Quebec nearly left Canada twice and got massive concessions both times just from credible threats.

We’re past normal. The fascists already won round one. They control the institutions. They have their judges. They have their media ecosystem. They have their army of true believers who will excuse anything.

But they don’t have the money. They don’t have the cities. They don’t have the educated workforce. They don’t have the young. And most importantly, they don’t have legitimacy in the eyes of the majority.

The historical record says once fascists gain power, they stay for 30-50 years. But the historical record doesn’t have examples of fascists taking over a country where their opposition controls most of the economy, technology, and cultural production. We’re in uncharted territory, which means we need unprecedented responses.

The German conservatives who said ‘we can control him’ were all dead or fled within two years. We’re just months into our version of this story. The question is: are we going to be the first generation that finds a new way out, or are we going to be another cautionary tale future historians write about?

At least we’re finally asking the right questions.”

– Chris Armitage

Is Trump the Inside Mole?

A mole is a spy that is buried deep inside a society to the point it is very unlikely he or she would ever be identified as a spy.

For those of you following the news about Ukraine and the impact of Russian President Vladimir Putin on President Donald Trump consider these reported facts

*President Trump said Monday he would renew his assault on mail-in voting after Russia’s autocratic leader, Vladimir Putin, told him to do so at their meeting in Alaska last week.

*Trump interrupted his talks in Washington with European leaders to call Russian President Vladimir Putin, an EU diplomat told Reuters on Monday. What did Trump say to Putin and what was Putin’s response?

*The US president said he felt there is a “warmth” between him and Putin, which was felt at the summit between the two leaders last week. He also said he didn’t talk to the Russian president in front of European leaders yesterday because he felt it “would be disrespectful” to Putin.

Why is Trump so willing to support Putin rather than Western allies?