THE TRUMP VARIANT

The longer a highly contagious virus loiters in an area, the more people are going to be infected with it. And the more folks come down with the disease, the more the virus is going to mutate. The more mutations come down the pike, the more likely it is that something really, really bad is going to happen.

Simple mathematics.

The virus doesn't have a plan. It doesn't know what it's up to. Mutations just happen. Every time a copy is struck, there's a chance something will go wrong and the code will change. As Forrest Gump once pointed out, you never know what you're going to get.

The next version of the virus could be ten times as contagious and twenty times as deadly. And there's a bonus: The more infectious it is, the more opportunities for future, even nastier mutations.

But viruses are not only example of this pattern. Take Donald Trump (please).

The man is an inept, corrupt, vindictive, lying bully. He mocks the ill. He mocks the disabled. He's so stupid, he thinks he's a genius. Take away his voluminous, gas-filled ego, he'd be nothing but a puddle of hairspray and bronzer. He's what they call a big fat nothing burger.

But he could be worse.

The man was the crappiest president we ever had, and after January 6—the culmination of the Big Lie—he became the crappiest American in the history of the country. And he's still going strong, dumping out lie after lie.

But it could be worse.

Folks are lining up to follow in his shaky footsteps, folks who want to be the next Donald Trump. Folks who desire not just to emulate, but to surpass the man in corruption and lunatic lies.

New, more destructive variants of Donald Trump.

The man has provided the model and molded the environment for an even deadlier strain of authoritarian leader.

Right now, Trump is willing to risk the destruction of this country to assuage his wounded ego.

His successor might be looking to sell the whole fricken planet down the river.

(And yes, I know: Trump, the climate change denier in chief, has already taken an arrogant shot at that target.)

As I like to say, if it ain't one thing, it's five things.

Buckle up, boys and girls. It's going to be a bumptious future.

MURDER CAPITOL

Mitch McConnell has constructed a blind to hide Republican fingerprints on a bill to raise the debt ceiling. Ten GOP Senators will vote with the enemy on a bill to allow the Dems to raise the ceiling all by themselves with 51 votes: Democratic votes only.

I wonder if McConnell understands what he's asking his caucus to do.

Republicans who vote for Democrat-backed bills (for any reason) are in for a lot of crap from GOP hotheads. Nasty calls. Screaming rants. Death threats, and so forth. Some Republican family might be missing Dad (or Little Susie) at Christmas dinner this year.

If so, they have only themselves to blame.

Republicans have quite deliberately constructed a monster and filled it with damnable lies designed to elicit violent action. And to make the game more interesting, they've loaded their creature up with lots of constitutionally-approved guns. Lock and load, everybody!

That sounds like fun, but can they be sure they know how to control that conspiracy-crazed beast?

There is nothing on this planet more dangerous than a human being who knows he's about to do God's work. Humans can't be wrong, you know. Being right, about everything, is baked in by evolution.

Doesn't matter what nonsense has been shoe-horned into your noggin, by definition it's certified golden, God-given truth. Get busy putting your solution into action: sharpen your knife, load your mags, get your camo-panted butt to Washington and let 'er rip.

Donald Trump mini-me Matt Gaetz was on the teevee the other day, rhapsodizing about how things will go when the GOP blasts its way back to power in 2022.

Forget about weak-ass work like legislating. That's off the table. He's looking for wall-to-wall investigations into the Dems' nefarious election steal. He's going to get to the bottom of that fictional well and suck it dry.

Such manic operations are like lightning storms in the sky above the tall rock walls of the laboratory, force-feeding raw power into the skin of the monster, energizing its limbs, packing its Abby Normal brain with incontestably divine motive to unleash the inevitable righteous rampage to come.

Break out the blood flag, Hans, there's a new mission coming in on the hot line.

TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT

At last count, some sixty-six million Americans eligible for a Covid vaccine have not gotten one. And many of them have no plans to do so. Often, these never-vaxers cite "personal liberty" as the reason they will not be coerced into getting the jab.

They simply refuse to be told what to do.

Now, with job-related vaccine mandates popping up all over the place, these people are forced to make a stand. They will lose their jobs, lose their homes, lose everything they hold dear, rather than give in.

Personal liberty, baby!

And I'm all for personal liberty. Nobody should make you do anything you don't want to do.

Your country mandates you drive on the right? Drive on the left and see what fun that can be!

Your school board says your kids have to be vaccinated for measles and whatnot, forget about it! Home-school the hell out of the little rug-rats!

(As a bonus, your precious shorties won't be subjected to indignities like having to hear President Obama address the student body. I remember one mother in tears over this criminal misuse of presidential power.)

Seriously, if you want to take risks with your health, go for it. Eat fruit without first washing it. Rip the tags off your mattresses. Mix beer and wine, or whatever it is that's supposed to eff you up the most. Smoke dope from a baggie you found in the street. Roll the dice, man!

Jump out of an airplane without a parachute. Fine with me. It's your friggin' life. Just don't land on anybody. You don't have that right.

Not willing to take the vaccine? Great. Just go home and stay there. Someone will let you know when it's all over.

Because if you're unvaccinated, and you're out and about, attending anti-vax rallies and so forth, unmasked (because it's all the same stuff, right?), the chances are pretty good you're going to get sick.

And I get it: That's jake with you. You can take it. Maybe it's not so bad. Maybe you have few or no symptoms. It happens that way. You're going strong, feeling fine. Or toughing it out, as you do, pushing forward! Hero stuff, right?

You do that, Big Guy, and you're going to infect somebody else.

And they're going to spread it farther. And the new guys will spread it, too, in ever widening circles, ripples in the pond, expanding outward, gathering up more folks, more infections, more new cases.

When that happens... (And why would it not happen? Are you convinced the whole thing is a hoax? Just more damn Fake News?) When those cases multiply, somebody is going to die.

Maybe an old guy, or somebody with immunity problems, or just some very unlucky middle-aged shlub. Somebody is going to die. And it's going to be your fault. Like you put a bullet in his head.

Maybe that's what you really want: the personal freedom to kill people.

Double-O status, baby!

Look, nobody knows when this thing is going to end, but we can be pretty sure the longer it goes on, the more variants are going to pop up.

The current mortality rate is a bit under two percent. Are you willing to bet there will never be a variant with a greater punch? How about twenty percent?

Or a twenty-percent survival rate?

The longer the pandemic goes on, the worse it could be, and anti-vaxers will inevitably prolong this nightmare.

Nobody knows what level of vaccination (or survival of the disease) will lead to herd immunity. Seventy percent? Eighty? Ninety? Ninety-nine percent?

It seems a lot of people are willing to take that risk, for the sake of their God-given personal liberty.

If humans were by and large smart and responsible, legal mandates for proper behavior would not be necessary.

Unfortunately, we live in a world populated by a-holes and eff-heads. Turns out we humans always have what we consider excellent reasons for all our disastrous actions, all our stupid decisions. Our ability to rationalize the crap in our heads defines us. And that will never change.

Until something comes along and wipes us out.

Maybe Covid will step up to do the job.

LESSONS NOT LEARNED FROM 9/11

On this twentieth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, I was tempted to put up a blog post called "What We Learned From 9/11" and follow the title with a couple blank pages.

But that goes for most events in human life: Nothing of importance is ever learned as a result of surviving some crucial moment.

See, humans don't learn stuff.

We don't have to. We already know everything.

(Or so we think, anyway.)

So, what should we have learned from 9/11? Two things:

First: For some time now the US has operated around the world in a way that benefits us, both financially and politically. No surprise there. And it's not just us. For centuries, most western countries have reached out across the globe in quest of economic gain. They call their little foreign footholds colonies.

It's getting harder to do, though. The natives are getting wise. They want a bigger cut of the action. Maybe they want all of it, naive people clinging to the notion they actually own the stuff.

For years the US rattled around the Middle East in an arrogant and greedy fashion, and our aggressive behavior has not gone unnoticed by the folks who live in places where we seek to liberate the natural resources.

(Mostly oil.)

These folks often take it personally.

And when the agitated country is packed squeaky tight with deeply religious critters, the inhabitants tend to take our harmless meddling as a assault on their religion.

Muslims, especially, seem touchy on the subject. They conjure up a need to defend their faith, to fight back, even against the Big Dog.

High-handed adventures perpetrated by the US, like reinstalling the Shah in Iran (which took two trumped-up "insurrections" to make stick), led directly to events of asymmetrical warfare, the sort of stuff we like to call "terrorism." (Because it suggests the attacks have come out of the blue, without rhyme or reason.)

To some extent, then, American policy triggered the events of 9/11.

Nobody over here wants to acknowledge this annoying fact, which means that in so far as it's a lesson, we will always fail to learn it.

For instance: We reacted to 9/11 by invading two Muslim countries, as if that would ever lead to a lessening of tensions. Before 9/11, folks in the Middle East claimed we were in a war against Islam. That forced them to attack us.

We responded by proving them right.

(As far as they know. Remember, they're humans, too, and just as mentally defective.)

Second item not learned: As I mentioned, our grim new enemies are deeply religious folks. They fight even harder against what they see as specifically anti-Muslim actions. The lesson we have failed to learn (or even notice) is that being deeply religious is never a good thing.

(See, now I'm attacking your religion, whatever it might turn out to be.)

Humans are precisely goofy enough to accord religion a highly respectable position in society. There's even a saying: A man never stands so tall as when he gets down on his knees to worship God.

This is rank nonsense, of course.

Religious thought is not only ridiculous, it's bizarrely ridiculous.

That is a statement nobody would object to, as long as the religion in question is not his own personal faith. His guys are all right; it's those other a-holes who cause all the trouble.

Tens of thousands of years of human nonsense and hundreds of "gods" later, there is still only one true statement you can make about God:

Nobody knows anything about God.

You don't know if he exists or not, or should he happen to exist, you have no idea what his (or her) defining qualities might be.

Protector? Punishing monster? Clueless wanker?

All you "know" is what your parents told you when you were a kid. And you can teach a kid anything. The little buggers are completely helpless, mentally.

(As are their parents, it turns out.)

Deeply religious people have little constraint. They know what they have to do, and they do it. In fact, doing what they do absolutely reinforces the divine mandate to do it.

A few days after the fall of the Twin Towers, a Muslim cleric went on TV to explain that those buildings could not have come down unless God wanted them to come down. Because everything is God's will.

Isn't that comforting?

To recap on 9/11: The attacks didn't come out of the blue; we made them happen (the attacker would surely say). And religion, deeply held, unquestioned religion, was the fuel that powered the attackers' flight.

If we could learn to stop pissing folks off, that would be good.

If we could learn to knock religion off its unearned pedestal, that would save lives in many ways.

Like, maybe a girl could learn to read in a Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.

THE BIG GUY'S JUNK

Events are moving fast in Afghanistan, now that the exit of US troops is nearing its end. It may, in fact, be too late to evacuate many American citizens, let alone the Afghans who assisted our military for the last twenty years.

Expect a bloodbath, and so forth.

It's all a reminder, really, of what a mistake it was to invade the country in the first place.

We were in pursuit of one guy, Osama bin Laden. That was the mission. Took us ten years to get him, but we made it happen. In Pakistan.

Did we invade Pakistan to do it? No. We just choppered in and blasted the man.

Why did it take that long? Probably because we were distracted by getting bogged down in Afghanistan, undoing Taliban restrictions, trying to transform the joint into America Light.

Oh yeah, and we had also invaded Iraq for no legitimate reason. We were very nicely bogged down there, too.

It was a two-fer. Afghanistan and Iraq, both invaded for bogus reasons, the US having learned nothing from our ten year adventure in Vietnam.

Now the blame game is cranking up. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says this is all on Biden. Trump reduced troop strength in the country and nothing like this happened.

Sounds like pure dumb luck. Or maybe the Taliban didn't trust Trump to follow through and actually pull out the troops.

Folks complain we ought to have decided to stay longer. Maybe a lot longer.

The reality is, the Taliban are deeply religious folks in a country where it is a good thing to be deeply religious. They hold the moral high ground. They have no doubt they're doing God's work on Earth.

One critic pointed out the women and girls of Afghanistan are about to take a rocket-ride back to the Ninth Century.

I believe it. About all the US can do about it is try to smuggle some of them out of the country. It's a token project.

So, what could we have done differently? (I mean, aside from not having invaded the country in the first place.)

We could have elected to stay. For a long time, in great strength. Maybe a million troops, willing to hunker down for a few thousand years, to stay in place until the very concept of Islam has faded from the world.

Because make no mistake: This is a religious war.

As long as religion rules the roost, matters will suck in Afghanistan (and many other countries). There's no way around that.

It's a human thing. We've released the Kraken.

Absolutely doesn't matter that the Kraken is an imaginary creature. Making stuff up and then murdering people over it is what we do here.

It's our deal, our sacred duty. We are, after all, God's Penis on Earth.

VOYAGE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA

The GOP is now a death cult.

Republicans have lashed themselves to a massive anchor and tossed it into the waves above the deepest abyssal trench. With a whoop and a holler of joyful defiance, these folks are riding that anchor down to the bottom of the sea.

The name of the anchor is of course Donald Trump, and he assures his followers the only reason they might have trouble breathing underwater is because the Democrats have somehow rigged the ocean.

Stop the Drowning! (Only Donald Trump can fix this!)

Water-logged folks are again clogging our hospitals, Covid patients gasping for air, the vast majority of them unvaccinated.

Trump says the reason many people in this country are reluctant to take the Covid vaccine is because they distrust the Biden administration. They know that impostor is not the legitimate president.

(They know because the Anchor told them so, over and over and over...)

At a recent CPAC meeting it was announced Joe Biden had failed to achieve his goal of a 70% vaccination rate by July 4th. The crowd erupted in cheers.

Come with us, everybody, to the Bottom of the Sea! Down, down, down...

The election in 2020 was one of the most crucial is American history. But it didn't fully get the job done. Donald Trump has yet to have a wooden stake driven into his cholesterol-sodden heart.

These days it's 2022 that flashes on our radar screens. It may be harder (Republican state legislatures are literally working overtime to make it harder), but the Dems must prevail like never before.

Traditionally, the party that loses the presidential election regains control of Congress in the next mid-term contest. This time, for the future of this nation, that tradition must be demolished.

In 2020, Republicans gained seats in the House, but that wasn't the most recent election. The Georgia special Senate elections in January 2021 must be made the harbinger of coming events.

Democrats need to operate a Stop-the-Steal backlash movement to crush Republicans wherever possible. As a bonus, state legislatures may be reset, so those new draconian voting laws can be overturned.

Self-righteous Republicans will howl with indignation that their demonic program to corrupt American elections has been thwarted by the monster Dems.

Ah, Children of the Night! What music they make!

THE END OF DEMOCRACY

America's experiment with democracy may be drawing to a close.

And maybe that's for the best.

It's been a long time since true representative democracy has been active in this country. It's becoming more and more clear that so-called "representatives" only pay attention to national party leaders, not to the folks back home.

Mitch McConnell, minority leader in the Senate, instructed his caucus to vote NO on the For The People voting rights bill, and his guys came through for him.

McConnell said the bill was a "bald-faced" attempt to shut down the Republican party. And he's right. Holding fair elections in this country is an existential threat to the GOP.

Republicans succeed (on the state and local level) by lying and cheating on a massive scale, mostly by gerrymandering districts and suppressing the vote. If they get blocked from doing this, they're toast.

The only other way a minority party can get by is to broaden its appeal, to attract more people and convince them to vote for their candidates. That's not only a hell of a lot more work, there's no guarantee it will succeed.

(Last time they tried, they got Donald Trump elected. After which he hijacked the party outright, a mess that has yet to be resolved—another existential threat for Republicans.)

Meanwhile, traditional lying and cheating has a sweet track record. Why mess with it if you don't have to?

What McConnell is accusing the Demos of doing is akin to a crook taking issue with the police for attempting to jail him for his crimes. It makes sense, in a limited, self-serving way, but the position is not remotely defensible.

Dismount from that high horse, McConnell, before you fall off. And mind how you go: It's a long way down to the ground.

The main problem with American politics is of course politics itself. It's an upstart sideshow to government that has taken over, like Donald Trump muscling his way through a crowd of international leaders to stand front and center for a photo op.

Most folks don't even seem to understand how representative government is supposed to work. They quiz candidates to learn their opinions on hot topics. What does the guy think about abortion? What does he think about immigration? What does he think about climate change?

Who cares?

The job of a representative is to do whatever the majority of the folks in the district wants him to do. His opinion on any given subject is irrelevant.

Is there a way around this nonsense? Maybe.

We now have the technology to abandon representative government in favor of direct government. Folks would log onto usgov.gov (or the equivalent) and vote directly on the bill in question. No need to worry if the monkey they sent to Washington is going to do his job. You do his job!

And I get it: Making sure all those votes are legit would be a bitch. But it's no doubt a problem of technology that will yield to hard work. The new system can be made secure.

Unfortunately, there is a much bigger stumbling block: Making sure the people who vote are not completely full of crap. This country is busting at the seams with conspiracy-theory believing ding-dongs:

Folks who think Donald Trump won the 2020 election (by a landslide, no less).

Folks who drool over the latest dribblings from the mysterious Q.

Folks who are convinced that Nazis and other White Supremacists have many good lessons for America to learn.

Folks who refuse to be vaccinated against Covid-19—or follow any anti-virus mitigation procedures—because it's a violation of their personal liberty.

Folks who are convinced George Floyd was murdered by the cops.

(Those guys are a subset of folks who know that Black Lives Matter got it right: White cops kill black guys for no reason—and are happy to do it in front of cameras if that can be arranged.)

Folks who deny there was any sort of insurrection at the Capitol on Jan 6. (And therefore no need to investigate, right?)

Folks who love/fear God and are awaiting the return of his slacker offspring.

In short, folks who know what they know and can't be wrong, however crazy-pants their thinking is on every issue.

So, what do we do about this? The people we need to stand at ground zero of government are massively defective mentally. How the hell do we fix that?

Maybe be applying the same fix as for presidential candidates.

You may recall I proposed a three-part vetting procedure for anyone who wanted to be a candidate for president: 1. Pass the test immigrants have to pass to become citizens; 2. Be evaluated by mental health professionals to make sure the person is mentally and emotionally stable; and 3. Pass an FBI background investigation to see if the potential president is worthy of a security clearance.

What if we put potential voters through the same process?

And yes, I can already hear the tortured screams of the Constitutionally violated! Talk about voter suppression! The country would be in the hands of a few thousand very qualified people!

(Is that so very bad? The number would certainly grow over time.)

What do you think? Would fully vetted voters be more likely to be Democrats or Republicans?

Beats me, but what if they rejected all political parties as an unnecessary impediment to good government. That would be a pleasant change.

So, anybody up for a new experiment in democracy?

DEATH TO REELECTIONS

Donald Trump recently stated the election fraud shenanigans that forced him out of the White House was THE CRIME OF THE CENTURY.

And as long as Republicans in Congress are convinced they need Trump's approval to get reelected, they will have to go along with whatever nonsense it might be that escapes from the man's power-haunted cranium.

The problem, of course, is that Trump is an ignorant lunatic with a zeppelin-sized ego. He's never going to be right, but he's never going to find that out.

But there is a way to loosen his grip on slightly less imbecilic Republicans: remove the destructive allure of reelections.

Just look at all the crap reelections engender:

Congress critters have to raise money for future campaigns—from whatever compromised source. They have to genuflect before powerful, nation-warping lobbies like the NRA and the Christian Evangelicals. They have to support volumes of embarrassing political jibber-jabber erupting from random former presidents or party leaders.

All because they desire a career in Congress that can be instantly short-circuited by a rocky path through uncertain reelection.

So, how can we rid ourselves of this existential threat? Term limits.

One term, and hit the road. No reelections, ever.

How can such a paradise be achieved? With great difficulty. What sitting House or Senate member would vote to dynamite their only path to political nirvana?

One way, maybe. They might vote in term limits if the new restrictions are designed to have no effect on them personally.

Get it? Term limits for the next guy!

And to make them even more palatable, the limits could be applied gradually. A three-term limit now, a two-term limit later, leading to the one-term wonder in the great beyond. It would take years and years to achieve the desired effect, but it could be done.

The good news: Nobody currently in power would be touched by it.

But there might still be opposition from those looking to the future of their party. Just like Trump tried to avoid prosecution by taking measures designed (he said) to protect future presidents from vicious attacks by opposition parties bent on destroying the country.

So here's an alternate to one-term and hit the road:

One term, and enjoy the ride. Forever.

One single term that goes on and on and on: life-time terms, like in the Supreme Court. Once you're in, you can stay as long as you like. Leave for personal reasons, if you want. Or resign your seat in the House to run for another, theoretically more comfortable one in the Senate.

Or quit Congress to run for president.

There would always be that element of sacrifice—you can run for another position, but if you lose there will be no safe haven waiting for you in government. You have to give up your seat.

But in the meantime, glory in the everlasting here and now: No reelections to worry about, ever. No fund raising, no campaigns, no kowtowing to special interest groups, no rubber-chicken dinners with the pious glad-handers.

Just do your job and you're good.

But there's the other rub: You actually have to do your job, which—according to the Constitution—is to pay attention to the folks back home. When you take a seat in the big room, you have to do what the people in your district want you do. No exceptions.

And that means you have to do what all the people want, not just the ones who voted for you. If the political landscape shifts around back there, you'll just have to roll with it. Don't forget, your opinion on any given subject is irrelevant. You represent those people, not yourself.

That also means you can't hang on every word your party leaders mutter. Your job is not to toe the line for party unity. Too much of that, and the folks back home can un-elect your ass.

Do your job and you're good. Is that too much to ask?

LIE VS LIE

Donald Trump has been banned for life from Twitter. That's a done deal. And a couple days ago a Facebook review board upheld his ban on that platform for at least another six months.

Nevertheless, the man continues to get stuff out there. In a blog posting last Monday, he proclaimed: "The Fraudulent Presidential Election of 2020 will be, from this day forth, known as THE BIG LIE!"

Which is interesting, because the phrase "Big Lie" has been quite in use on selected TV news shows since (and before) the January 6th uprising at the Capitol. But in those cases, the lie referred to is that Trump won the election (by a landslide, and everybody knows it.)

This attempt to subvert the meaning of simple words is positively Orwellian.

I wonder if he knows that?

In Maricopa County, Arizona, a QANON-linked security firm called Cyber Ninjas is conducting yet another recount. It's taking a long time. A spokesman recently pointed out they have to use a special camera to photograph each ballet, looking for "bamboo."

Seems there is an allegation (they're not saying from whom) that forty or fifty thousand fake ballots were shipped in from China—and counted. Apparently these fakes were so potent they turned the tide for Biden not only in Arizona but all across the country.

(Otherwise, why bother uncovering them?)

Oddly, even though the clever tricksters who printed these ballots were able to copy the sacred document with superhuman precision, they simply couldn't figure out how to buy American paper on Amazon.

More election fraud news:

The Number Three Republican in the House, Lynn Cheney, is likely to lose her position for the crime of not believing Donald Trump when he said he won the election. Maybe it makes sense. Some seventy percent of Republicans apparently do believe the man. She is definitely on the wrong side of Republican history here.

As is Mitt Romney, who got booed by a room full of Republicans when he suggested he might have some issues with Trump's character.

Believing Donald Trump's lie has become the gold standard, the litmus test for proper Republican behavior. Folks have to listen to him and believe.

And it's not just adhering to party mythology. Trump still raises a crap-load of money from rabid supporters. (Sometimes with "opt-in" boxes pre-checked to perpetuate contributions month after month or week after week.) As for Congress critters, he credibly threatens to "primary" Republicans who won't toe the line.

(Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska faced something like that in 2010, pre-Trump. She lost the primary, but won the general election in a write-in campaign. Not an easy thing to do.)

A substantial number of states are writing or planning to write new election security laws to keep what happened in 2020 from happening again. (Republican controlled states don't want any more Democratic victories.)

These new laws can be gotten around by following the letter and overwhelming the system with perfectly legal votes. It's just going to be harder.

And if traditional (read: older) Republican supporters can't decode the trumped-up voting prohibitions, the party may be shooting itself in the foot. But that's their problem.

The Republican leadership in Congress has aligned itself with making sure no Biden-based policy passes into law. And it's not even a question of the president's legitimacy. They just think his agenda is socialism.

They reject that agenda, even as the majority of the country supports it.

That means we no longer have representative government in America. We have strict party rule. The party in power makes the rules, and representatives from all states must follow the party line.

At least, as long as that party is Republican.

(Would Democrats act the same way? Maybe. Humans always do what they know to be the right thing. And they always know what the right thing is. Or think they do. And that's good enough, right? What could go wrong?)

Even though they are not in control, Republicans want to run everything in Congress by passive-aggressive behavior. They think that plan will lead to gaining actual control in future elections.

And it might.

All they need to do is blame Biden and the Democrats for any logjams in Congress. If voters buy that, they might put the GOP back in power.

But that seems like a losing strategy. I think Republicans may be confused by the smokescreen of Trump's election fraud claims. The majority of the people actually did vote for Biden and like what he's doing. It's going to be hard for the Party of One Hundred Percent Opposition (Mitch McConnell's words) to blame him for his failure to continue doing it.

But say it works. What would Republicans do if they took power again in 2022 or 2024? Reverse Covid relief policy at a time when that policy is becoming (because of its success) less and less important to the country?  Would they tear down repaired bridges and jackhammer new roads? Yank child care away from American workers?

About all they could realistically do is reinstate low taxes on corporations and wealthy individuals, throwing the national debt way out of whack. And somehow blame the Democrats for that.

(Look what you made us do?)

Their problem is that the American people want a socialist agenda in place. They would just rather you stopped calling it socialism. That's all.

MAKING THINGS RIGHT

Say you're a white cop on patrol. You notice the car in front of you is weaving a little, maybe something wrong with their taillights or license plate.

Okay, here we go: light 'em up and make a traffic stop!

But when you walk up on the car, you notice there are only black folks inside.
You hand the driver a $1000 bill and wish him or her a fine evening.

Back in your patrol car, you document the incident and radio the guy's plate to the department, lest anyone else notice something awry and pull the car over.

All in all, cheaper in the end.

For the next few years, at least, white cops should probably refrain from interacting with black folks. If it looks like a serious matter, get on the radio and alert the black cops, let them handle it.

Of course, if nothing else happens (new equipment or procedures), it won't be too long before even black cops will have to back off trying to arrest black folks.

Too likely to end in the alleged perp's death by gunshot.

Since Derek Chauvin was found guilty on all counts of killing George Floyd, more black folks have been shot dead by white police. It's never ending.

Maybe there will be police reform enacted by Congress. And maybe it will help.

But if it does help, I got a feeling it might be an illusion.

Nobody is looking at the real problem, so any solution that seems to work is likely to be wishful thinking.

Will the bill prohibit white cops from attempting to arrest black people? If not, I see little chance for real progress. Black folks will continue to be shot dead. It's inevitable.

Outlawing choke holds on a federal level might be a start, but it won't do much good if every action that brings a cop's hand even near a black neck continues to be called a choke hold by bystanders and TV news programs.

Until cops have the technology to subdue perps without killing—or touching—them, matters will continue to look pretty much as they do right now.

Maybe we should just declare a One Hundred Year Purge for black folks, let 'em do whatever they please without interference.

Call it Reparations and be done with it.

I think a case could be made for something like this.

White folks will howl, of course. Nothing new there.
 

THE ADVENTURE OF THE ONE-LEGGED POLICEMAN

In the matter of the death of George Floyd, the Prosecution has now pretty much concluded its case against ex-police officer Derek Chauvin. I haven't been watching the live coverage, but I've seen recaps and excerpts.

No surprises, so far.

The Prosecution has pounded on two points: that what Chauvin did was not official police policy, and that his actions were the cause of Floyd's death.

One expert on police conduct concluded Chauvin used "deadly force" against Floyd, and then pointed out the force was not warranted by the situation.

Of course, calling the knee on the neck "deadly force" presupposed the knee caused the man's death, a conclusion not yet ruled on in court. But in effect, he was saying the use of a knee fell in the same category as the use of a gun.

And in that context, he was probably right when he said such force was not warranted. Mr. Floyd was not posing the sort of threat to the police for which shooting him would have been a reasonable response.

At least, not apparently. Was Floyd squirming under the knee? Was he resisting the knee on his neck? He may have been, which might mean continued use of the knee was indicated—so long as the knee was simple constraint and not "deadly force."

A 911 operator, who was watching city camera feed of the event, said there was so little motion in the image she thought something was wrong. News reporting of her statement seemed to suggest she meant she thought the cops were doing something "wrong" to George Floyd. But I think it was clear she meant she thought the video feed was locked up. A technical issue.

Here's what happened: After a long discussion, the arresting officers succeeded in getting Floyd into the police SUV, but things went south right after that. The man went nuts in the car and had to be removed. The cops pulled him from the passenger side of the vehicle and laid him out on the ground just outside—the minimum amount of effort. (Floyd was a big guy.)

Most of the struggle ended there, as far as one could tell from the video. It is not known if Floyd was lifting up against the knee on his neck. Mostly, one concludes the cops kept their position atop Floyd to prevent him from wandering away after his erratic behavior in the car. I suppose you could fault the police for not easing up off him and running that experiment.

But an ambulance was on the way, so they kept their positions.

One medical expert (Dr. Martin J. Tobin) testified about the amount of oxygen in Floyd's body as the hold-down continued, noting (somehow) the precise moment when that oxygen was completely used up—as if he were observing medical monitoring equipment. He also concluded Chauvin's knee was the critical player.

At one point, the expert pointed out photographic proof that the toe of Chauvin's boot had left the ground, saying something like: "Now his entire body weight is on the man's neck."

Which is a reasonable statement, had Chauvin been a one-legged man. But he possessed another leg, and another knee to take up some of his body weight. Maybe most of it. The only way to decide how much weight was actually going onto Floyd's neck is by concluding it was enough to strangle the man.

Again, something not yet determined in a court of law.

But folks know what they know. Almost all "thinking" stems from a conclusion already "on the record" inside the human brain. It's how we roll.

Apparently, the Defense plans to show Floyd died from something other than Chauvin's knee on his neck: drug use and an underlying heart defect. No mention, as far as I know, of the fact Floyd may have been suffering from an anxiety or panic attack.

Panic attacks may feel like dying, but they're not suppose to be fatal. On the other hand, if you add various drugs (fenyanyl and methamphetamine) and a pre-existing heart defect, a panic attack might prove deadly after all. (Both drugs are known to cause or increase anxiety.)

Or maybe Chauvin's knee strangled the man to death, and whatever else was going on just made it easier. Maybe killing the black man (because he was a black man) was Chauvin's plan all along, and his only worry was that the ambulance might arrive too soon to get the job done.

I don't know, and I don't think anyone else does, either. (With the possible exception of Chauvin.)

But if the body-cam audio transcripts are accurate, I think it's clear something was going on with Floyd. He appears to be mentally altered. Maybe his condition didn't lead to his death—or even contribute to it. But Floyd said "I can't breathe" seven times before anybody touched his neck.

Which leads directly to reasonable doubt that Chauvin knew putting his knee on Floyd's neck caused the man to say "I can't breathe."

Chauvin doesn't need to intend for Floyd to die in order for felony murder to be proved, only that Floyd died during the commission of a felony (aggravated assault). But Chauvin's felony has to include intent—he has to know he is hurting the man—or the whole package falls apart.

As far as I am aware, the Defense has not disclosed they plan to use this information. I think it would be an ineffective defense if they leave it out.

Arguing about cause of death is a murky business. Did this or that cause death? Or contribute to death, under complicated circumstances?

Who the hell knows? People tend to hold onto whatever opinion they first formed. (Probably from the video.)

But establishing reasonable doubt is legal bedrock. Failure to do so in this case would be dereliction.

ONE STEP FORWARD, TEN STEPS BACK

Human beings are the people who think they know things. It's a delusion. Turns out, humans don't actually know things after all. At least, not the important things.

Unfortunately, we never find out how amazingly ignorant we really are. And that makes for a lot of problems down here on the Planet of Dunces.

See, knowing what we (think we) know, we create certain expectations. We can predict the action of the world based on what we know is true about the world. But when we're wrong about how the world works, our predictions often fall short. Or full-on explode in our faces.

When that catastrophic event occurs, we are forced to concoct a new theory of how things work. What are the chances we're going to be right this time?

Slim to none, as usual. But we never know that.

We theorize based on odd data, and go from there to even odder conclusions.

For instance, suppose some people come to me and say, "M.J., your feet are weird. Your toes are very, very long. They're just like fingers!"

And I notice they're pointing at my hand.

"That's not my foot," I say. "That's my hand."

The fact is, my feet might very well be weird, for one reason or another. But mistaking my hand for my foot is only going to muddy the waters. Your conclusion is based on an error.

Either you think my hand is my foot, which is a fundamental mistake of perception. Or you have some cracked-brain theory you think can predict abnormalities of the feet based on the appearance of the hand.

In either case, you're out on a limb with your conclusion, and only an examination of my actual feet can begin to correct the matter.

(Assuming you don't look at my feet and discover "evidence" of plastic surgery designed to correct the original condition of weirdly elongated toes.)

Which naturally brings us, once again, to the matter of George Floyd.

We've all seen the video: White cop with his knee on Floyd's neck, Floyd saying he can't breathe. Eight minutes later, the man is dead.

Conclusion: The white cop strangled the man to death with his knee.

The trial of that white cop is getting under way right now. Since the city has already agreed to pay $27 million to the family of George Floyd, the result of the trial is pretty much a foregone conclusion.

The family is seeking justice, that's all. I foresee problems.

Earlier posts on this blog have chronicled my thinking on the matter. (Torching The Truth, Take Off The Cuffs, George Floyd III)

Based on the police body-cam audio transcripts, I concluded Mr. Floyd was likely suffering from an anxiety or panic attack. Saying "I can't breathe" came from that, not the knee on his neck.

(Probably. The key words are: reasonable doubt.)

Justice will result in acquittal of all charges.

But because everybody already "knows" what happened, that verdict will be rejected. And folks will erupt into the streets.

How can we avoid this? Simple. Don't admit the audio transcript into evidence. Let the jury decide everything based on the video.

The police officers will be found guilty, and life will go on.

Black Lives Matter will have proof the system is responding positively to their message. Progress will have been made. The police will have to submit to reforms, etc.

This may or may not result in better race relations.

It may, in fact, be the beginning of a major set back. Progress based on nonsense might well fall apart in the end. And things could get worse.

The problem is, all those videos showing white cops killing unarmed black guys are not evidence of police brutality, let alone police racism.

(If you have something to say about my feet, don't base it on the appearance of my hand.)

When folks fight the cops in an attempt to avoid arrest, the outcome is likely to be the death of the perp. The cops simply lack reliable non-lethal tools to subdue the people they wish to arrest.

There may be all manner of police racism in this country, but these videos don't show it. Any action taken on the basis of these videos will be subject to backlash and violent reaction.

Violation of reality will always come back to haunt us.

Fortunately, we have the ability to construct a new set of nonsense to explain what just happened.

And off we go.

BUSINESS AS USUAL

President Biden's Covid Relief package passed the House with no Republican votes. Now the Senate is taking it up. (Barely: The Republicans voted not to consider the bill; VP Harris had to vote to break the tie and move things forward.)

A Republican Senator (Ron Johnson, Wisconsin) made a motion for the entire 628-page bill to be read aloud. It took 15 hours.

This action will have no effect on the passage of the bill. I imagine he just did it to be divisive and obstructive, like all good Republicans are supposed to be these days. And to prove he can be a major dick when he really puts his mind to it.

Another Republican Senator (Mike Braun, Indiana) says the required reading is just a "warm-up session" in the process of delaying the bill.

Our government in (lack of) action.

The relief bill is supported by an overwhelming percentage of Americans, both Democratic and Republican. But don't expect any Republicans to vote in favor of the bill. That smacks too much of "representative" government, which is something we've apparently given up in this country.

Republicans say the bill is too expensive. They didn't have that problem when they passed Trump's even bigger tax break bill, mostly benefiting corporations and wealthy individuals. Democrats stayed away from that bill when it was their turn to vote.

All of this is apparently business as usual in the Senate. Does it have to be that way?

The reading of the bill took all night. Was Ron Johnson there for the whole thing, paying strict attention? I rather doubt it. Senate rules require only one Republican to be on the floor during the reading.

It's a tag-team event, folks swapping in and out as required.

They should change the rule and make the guy who requests a reading remain present and alert the entire time. Hell, the senator's whole caucus ought to be present and alert for the reading.

And if anybody nods off, or goofs around, or passes notes, grinning like apes at one another, the reading should be called off.

If we are to be stuck with nonsense, let it be well-disciplined nonsense.

IS DONALD TRUMP A GUILTY PLEASURE?

So far as I know, Donald Trump has yet to characterize his impeachment acquittal as a "vindication and full exoneration" of the incitement charge.

Maybe he's held back by the fact that seven Republicans voted guilty, spoiling the claim that the entire episode was yet another vicious attack by Democrats in yet another stunning exercise of partisan party politics.

Also troubling for Trump is the fact that a number of those Republicans who voted to acquit (including former majority leader Mitch McConnell) suggested afterwards that Trump was definitely guilty of the crime, but a legal technicality prevented them from voting that way.

McConnell, the man who delayed the trial until after Biden's inauguration, says Trump couldn't be convicted because he was no longer in office at the time of the trial. He helpfully points out that all other legal remedies to nail Trump for his criminal behavior are still on the table ("until the statute of limitations has run").

Trump released a statement excoriating McConnell as a "hack" and suggests the Republican party would be mistaken to follow this guy into the future.

Several Republicans who voted to convict have been censured by their state party machines. One party boss says they didn't send that guy to Congress to "vote his conscience."

Which almost makes sense.

Representatives are expected to vote the way the majority of folks in their districts wants them to vote. Otherwise, they would be very poor representatives, in violation of both the letter and the spirit of our democratic form of government.

But maybe not in the case of an impeachment trial. Senators take additional oaths to follow the evidence and render an impartial verdict.

As a result, the requirement a given Senator should vote according to the folks back home (assuming the majority agrees with the party bosses) might be construed as jury tampering. (Barring a ruling from the Supreme Court.)

If this had been a real trial, one would certainly expect Donald Trump to be re-arrested for that very crime: jury tampering.

He holds the collective balls of all Republicans in his sweaty grip and threatens by pressure alone to convert those excellent nuggets into diamonds.

(Well, industrial diamonds, at least. And Republicans hoping for a piece of the action when Trump sells those diamonds are likely to be disappointed. Those are Trump's diamonds, okay? Because those balls belong to him now.)

The former president's hold on Republicans is based on his ability to disrupt their future re-elections. He can "primary" those guys by supporting Trump-loyal candidates in the primary, preventing troublemakers from ever getting on the final ballot.

Of course, this power comes entirely from the very concept of re-election. Term limits (one term and out) would effectively remove that power.

In addition, because Trump is a vindictive thug, Republicans have to consider the possibility that displeasing the man might cause him to say something out loud that could send violent supporters to a guy's home to murder him and his family and burn the house to the ground. As a warning to others.

Following the events of January 6th, that "power" is no longer theoretical. Trump's enemies can and will be targeted by his more adventuresome followers.

Those people have the ability, the guns, and the willingness to act, as well as plenty of time on their hands.

But it makes me wonder: Do some folks support Trump just for the drama?

TWO SOLUTIONS

The Democrats under Joe Biden want a major Covid relief bill, but Republicans are not willing to go that far. They have proposed a much more modest bill.

It looks like the Dems are going to try to go it alone, through a process call budget reconciliation, which only requires a simple majority to pass.

This appears to me to be a major mistake on their part.

In the past, with Obama's economic stimulus project, and later on the Affordable Care Act, Democrats wasted a great deal of time trying to get bi-partisan support for legislation. The process required many serious compromises, and in the end the Republicans still wouldn't vote for those bills in significant numbers.

Democratic leadership in the Senate, especially, has made it clear that mistake won't be made again.

But there's an obvious solution: Do what can be done with Republican support. Do it fast, because it needs to be done fast. Get Covid relief passed, even at a lower level than hoped for. Just get it done!

Then pick up the pieces that fell on the cutting-room floor and create a new bill that Republicans have said they won't go for. And pass that bill using budget reconciliation.

Why cut Republicans out of the parts they're willing to do? Is it that the Dems don't want to give them credit for anything if they're not willing to go all the way?

If Republicans are allowed to be involved in Covid relief, they might be willing to cooperate in other areas, like immigration reform and infrastructure repair.

I can imagine a situation where a bill has two main parts, one part wanted by one side, the other wanted by the other side. As long as the opposite sections are not a deadly poison to either side, both can be passed in a bi-partisan manner.

Why not? This is the way most things get through congress.

(I mean, back when stuff could be done at all.)

Now, it may be the Republicans (especially) don't want to do anything that might tend to make the other side look good. After all, that man in the White House stole the election—and everybody knows it, according to Donald Trump.

But that's a recipe for stalemate. And the country suffers.

The basic problem, of course, is that governing the country has become an extremely partisan enterprise. It wasn't supposed to be this way.

One major solution: term limits. One term and go home. No re-elections, ever.

Remember, for congress critters, re-election is Job One. And it makes sense. Whatever they hope to accomplish in congress, nothing can be done if they are not in congress to do it.

You gotta get in that room and stay there.

The unfortunate side effect of this is general gridlock. In a zero-sum world, you can't just win—the other guy must also lose. And if you have to spend every waking moment to make that happen, so be it.

In a world where congress is a viable career path, everybody suffers.

Republicans are currently controlled by a single toxic personality. This control would be greatly reduced if people weren't worried about losing their jobs.

With term limits, there is no career path in congress, and nobody can quash your re-election hopes—because nobody has re-election hopes.

Another solution: ban political parties.

Government can be divisive. Political parties are designed to be divisive.

Since when is tearing the country apart a good thing?

Political parties exist largely so lazy humans can make one decision in their lives and forever after vote the party line. That might be a good thing if the result was not the destruction of the entire country.

Are human beings stupid enough to do something like this?

I think by now you know my answer.

RIDING THE SPECTRUM

Let's review: Human beings are the stupidest and meanest creatures in the universe, as far as anyone knows.

We're also delusional.

Our main delusion is that we're not stupid, that we're good at knowing stuff, so good in fact we know the unknowable (e.g., God). Our second delusion is that everything in our heads is literally true.

We're all riding the SMC spectrum (stupid, mean, crazy). As a result, most of us are full of crap, but have no way of knowing it.

Another benefit of being human: We can never be wrong, as far as we can tell. We're full of crap and willing to kill folks to prove we're not.

(Not that we need to prove anything.)

We always do the right thing: go on crusades, shoot up abortion clinics, storm the Capitol, vote for any Trump on the ticket.

There is no fix for this. Stupid, mean, and crazy. It's our way of life.

If you doubt any of this, just look at other people. Examples abound. The hard part is realizing you yourself are also caught up in it.

The Republican party is now in the hands of the Always Trumpers. It's also plagued by the horror-movie nonsense of QAnon. One is a cult of personality, the other a cult without visible personality.

Once this stuff gets into your head, you're doomed, because you can prove to yourself it's true just by glancing at the world. (Do the work.)

Knowing nonsense to be true is the natural state of the human being. We're also the only source of nonsense in the universe (AFAAK).

The most powerful nonsense is the corrosive stuff that confirms our darkest prejudices. This lovely material is also the most welcome in the haunted labyrinth of our minds.

Mitt Romney says we have to straighten out the TRUMP WON folks by telling them the truth. How can that possibly work? They already know the truth.

Good luck changing someone's mind. To a close approximation, humans don't have minds. We have imaginary minds, where we do imaginary thinking.

Nonsense builds on nonsense, upping the ante.

Tell yourself that God requires Trump to remain president and you'll likely never be satisfied with any other outcome.

In one recent poll, five percent of Democrats think Trump won the election.

The power of repetition. Let's hear it for the Big Lie.

Unfortunately, it's not over.

Republican Senators have an opportunity to ditch Trump by helping to convict the man for his crimes. But to do so opens them up to scathing criticism from the ex-president, ignominious defeat in Republican primaries (by another, more Trump-loyal Republican), and gleeful mob murder (by freelance Trump supporters just doing the right thing on behalf of their anointed savior).

(Does the phrase "Hang Mike Pence" sound familiar?)

Being stupid, mean, and crazy doesn't affect you that much when things are quiet. You smash your thumb with a hammer. You poison your family with black-market meat. You screw up the installation of a new furnace and burn down your house. Small stuff.

But when times get hectic, and important decisions have to be made—and acted on—that's when the fan gets buried under a mountain of radioactive feces. And the entire country suffers.

It makes you wonder if human beings should be allowed to govern themselves.

On the other hand, who the hell is going to stop us?

Well, it can't be God (for the most obvious possible reason). But it could be one of our fellow human beings, some unprepossessing fellow appointed by God (according to the guy's closest supporters) to do the work of taking control of our chaotic lives.

Something to look forward to, I guess.

Remember the ancient Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times.

POLTERGEIST III - AMERICAN HITLER

Donald Trump released the following statement:

"I am so sorry for what happened at the Capitol. Things just got away from me. I wanted so badly to be re-elected, and I was so shocked to see that Biden had in fact won, that I allowed myself to believe any and all rumors and ridiculous nonsense that suggested I had been re-elected after all. People like Rudy Giuliani came to me and said there was indisputable proof of massive voter fraud—and I jumped wholeheartedly to embrace that baseless claim. I'm ashamed to say I repeated those lies many times when I spoke to the American people. I believed what I said when I said it, but now I realize it was all bunk. The fine men and women who conducted the elections around the country did an excellent job. The vote was proper and accurately tallied. There was no significant fraud. I was wrong, and I apologize for that. Turns out I'm not nearly as smart as I once thought I was. I am deeply sorry for all the damage my gigantic ego has caused this nation, and I will spend the rest of my life trying to repair that damage and heal the rift in the country I have created by pride and ignorance."

And then he said: "April Fool! Ha ha ha ha [...] ha ha ha! Eat my poo!"

Democrats (and some Republicans) are scouring the laws to find ways of getting Trump out of the White House without delay. Probably won't happen. You need a two-thirds majority in the Senate to provide either an impeachment conviction or a removal by 25th Amendment. Not very likely, even now.

Some say that since a self-pardon is founded on shaky law, Trump might resign in order for Pence to pardon him (as Ford did Nixon). Okay, but I don't think Nixon's rather speculative blanket pardon was ever tested in a court of law. Even so, it's probably better than nothing.

(Might be more fun to let him pardon himself, then let him discover when it's too late it doesn't work.)

Impeachment after he leaves office would still have teeth, stripping Trump of pension and travel budget and (maybe) Secret Service protection. And of course keep him from running again in 2024 or ever again.

If it can be done.

The next session of the Senate will benefit from a couple extra Democrats, but even that might not be enough. And it will be argued by Republicans that actions against Trump after he leaves office is nothing but vindictive posturing.

Here's another (somewhat fanciful) scenario:

Secret Service guys rush into the Oval Office, guns drawn, and say there's a crazy mob outside. They haul the president to the bunker for safe keeping. They turn off communications (don't want to bother the man), set the ventilators to low, and leave him there alone until his term is up.

After that, Trump is hooded, handcuffed, and renditioned to Mar-a-Lago.

An alternate ending: Because of a bizarre mix-up in White House maintenance work-orders, a crew accidentally bricks up the bunker's only entrance—with Trump inside. Nature takes it course, and the 45th president posthumously takes on the role of Phantom of the White House, haunting the place from this time forward, a poltergeist that breaks dinner plates and causes locked doors to swing open.

Donald Trump has already clinched the title of Worst American President. After the events of last Wednesday, he may now have taken matters to the next level: Worst American. Period.

Benedict Arnold, stand down. You've been relieved.

So, how can we hope to avoid having such a destructive personality in the White House ever again? We need new rules for potential candidates to follow. It's simply not enough to have been born in the country and be at least 35 years old.

If you want to run for president, you should have to pass the same test immigrants take to become citizens. You should be evaluated by psychologists to determine if you are emotionally stable. And you should have to pass an FBI background investigation to see if you are eligible for a security clearance. (That would include releasing income tax returns, and so forth.)

These hurdle would be tough to clear. The tests would be invasive and exhaustive and be made public.

Would it be difficult to find even one person per political party qualified to run for president every four years? I'm okay with that.

It's too dangerous to let the mob decide without much more restrictive guardrails.

POLTERGEIST II

It is very likely the flag-waving folks who stormed the nation's Capitol earlier today were not motivated by a desire to destroy democracy in America. They were there to preserve democracy, to rescue it from the lizard people and the Deep State Democratic pedophiles who had stolen it from Donald Trump.

Those good folks were not evil, simply misinformed. By Donald Trump.

As I have tried to point out in this blog, the human mind is a delicate hunk of defective aerofoam, bound into the skull with razor wire and duct tape.

Our minds are easily subverted, easily turned rancid by the quiet words of loud, ambitious people.

We humans can't help it. We're doing the best we can. Like the woman on a jury once said, the defendant was too drunk to be held responsible for driving his car into a construction zone and killing his passenger.

Humans are perennially "drunk" with mind-altering stupidity and delusion.

We are a stupid and mean pack of badly evolved animals buoyed up by delusions of knowledge and the glory of unearned righteousness.

Humans always do the right thing. Unfortunately, we are by nature incapable of finding out we're full of crap, that what we're doing is often exactly the wrong thing.

There's no fix for this.

During the height of the action today, the president released a video that reminded his followers he had won the election by a landslide (and everybody in the country knew it), and that his re-election had been stolen by folks bent on the destruction of America. Then he told them to go home.

Watching such incendiary rhetoric, I always have to ask myself: Is this man sincere? Does he really believe all this nonsense? He he genuinely consumed by nut-ball conspiracy theories? Is he being held hostage by Fox News?

Or is he just lying for political and financial gain?

If he's sincere, the man is stupid or crazy or both. He'd have to be.

On the other hand, if it's all just a pack of lies, that would help us uncover what MAGA really means: Make America Gape Again.

Sure, Trump loves America. But it's a tough love. And as we all know, the toughest love is anal.

It appears Trump wants to drive trucks through America's backdoor.

How can we hope to keep stuff like this from happening in the future?

Next time on WHAT'S WRONG WITH US, I promise.