Look on the Bright Side of the White House Ballroom

 Well, look on the bright side of Donald Trump's demolition of the East Wing.  

If he is going to undertake a major construction project, he is in for some reminders about just how much the construction industry depends on immigrant labor.  Maybe he will once again start thinking about carving out exceptions.

Why I Think the Democrats Should Cave on the Government Shutdown

 

Yes, I get that if you make any concession to Donald Trump at all it will simply whet his appetite for more.  And I realize it is a very bad idea to reward hostage taking because you encourage more of it.  And I understand the Trump and Vought are just using the shutdown as an excuse to do things they were going to do anyhow.

But I still think Democrats should extend funding for a few more weeks.   

Why?

Well, first of all, it is not as though they are extending a full year, or even a few months.  It is just a matter of weeks.

Second, I really don't understand the politics underlying the shutdown.  Yes, I get that Democrats have chosen to take their stand on the area where they have the greatest advantage over Republicans -- healthcare subsidies.  That makes some degree of sense.  Only, this approach makes no sense at all.  Democrats are essentially trying to save Republicans from their own folly by extending the subsidies before anyone feels any pain.  Look, guys, you will never get any credit at all for the disaster you stopped from happening.  People will just go on with their lives and wonder what the fuss was about.  If anything, it will make you look like Chicken Little saying that the sky is falling when the subsidies are extended and nothing happens.

Third, I get that you are trying to bring pressure to bear on Republicans.  Hot news flash: It isn't working.  But you know what will put real pressure on Republicans?  People actually seeing their premiums spike. It is my understanding that after Hakim Jeffries and Chuck Schumer talked to Trump, they came away with the impression that he had no idea what is One Big Busted Budget was about to do.  AOC has also said that when she asks Republicans why they aren't concerned about spiking premiums, they say they don't really expect it to happen.  Well, actual premium spikes should clear all that up.  Touch a hot stove and all.

Health insurance premiums also have the advantage of being the issue that is easiest for Trump to cave on.  He won't yield any ground on ICE because they are his secret police.  He won't give way on tariffs because that is how he avoids Congress's power of the purse.  And he won't back down on rescissions and impoundments because that is how he punishes jurisdictions for voting for Democrats (along with ICE blitzes, of course).  While I find Trump's anti-vax approach to be baffling, there is at least some political sense to it.  He is trying to broaden his base by creating a MAGA/MAHA alliance.  I think he will alienate more people than he wins, but apparently Trump has a different calculation.

But Trump gains nothing -- nothing whatever -- by people's health insurance premiums spiking.  It hurts his popularity while doing nothing to advance his power.

A one-year extension would create a great issue for Democrats in the midterms (assuming you believe in the midterms).  They could point to the chaos that broke out when the subsidies lapse and warn that a one-year extension means a repeat unless you elect Democrats to make the extensions permanent.

The interesting question is going to be what happens when premiums jump.  Up till now, we could be sure that the Republicans would splinter, disagreeing on what to do and the more sane members would have to cut a deal with Democrats to get an extension.

What appears to happen now is that Donald Trump decides what to do and cracks the whip and all Republicans will fall into line, no matter how much they hate it.  I have no idea what Donald Trump will decide to do when premiums spike.  I don't think Trump knows either

Will There Ever Be Another Democratic President?

 

Even before Team Trump moved seriously to shut down the opposition altogether, I have seriously wondered whether it will ever be possible for a Democrat to be President again.  

Last time a Democrat won, Trump tried every trick he could think of to overturn the outcome.  He sued.  He pressured Republican election officials to throw out the results.  He pressured Republican state legislatures to appoint alternate sets of electors.  He suggested having the military, or Homeland Security, seize ballot boxes and do a "recount."  He asked the Department of Justice to declare fraud.  He persuaded many Republican members of Congress to vote against certification, but Democrats had the majority in the House.  So he pressured his Vice President to unilaterally reject the electors from states he lost.  And when all that failed, he incited a mob to march on the Capitol.

He was thwarted by heroic Republicans like Brad Raffensperger and Rusty Bowers, who insisted that election results must be respected, and by members of the "deep state" who insisted on following the law.  Does anyone believe Republican election officials will stand up to Trump this time?  And, even if they do, he now controls the Deep State, and can order it to do anything, up to and including a military coup, to keep him in power.

To my mind, the chances of a Democrat ever being President again will depend on two separate and seemingly unrelated, but actually closely related factors -- Trump's health and the health of the economy.

Assuming Donald Trump does not shut down the Democratic Party altogether and allows it to run a candidate in 2028, it seems a safe assumption that he will be the Republican candidate if his health allows.  Trump has not let himself be bound by any other laws, so why should he respect the 22nd Amendment?  And if he runs and loses, there is no way that Donald Trump would not overturn the result.

It also seems a safe assumption that if Trump dies or becomes completely incapacitated between now and 2028, he will not be the candidate.  But what if he is not dead or comatose or barely verbal, just wholly incoherent.  (As in significantly less coherent than he is now).  My guess is that if the economy is doing reasonably well, this will be unmentionable and he will still be the candidate.  But if the economy is in serious trouble, my guess is that at some point people will start to notice that Trump is unfit for a third term and get him disqualified.

Again, assuming the Democratic Party has not been shut down and an actual contested election takes place, would a Republican not named Trump accept the results?  I will concede that up till now, Republicans not named Trump running for an office other than President who have lost have accepted the results.  Even if they lost by only a few hundred votes, and the shift came in late counting days after the election, Republicans have accepted defeat.  I accept the same to happen in this November's election.  I am skeptical that Republicans will accept defeat, at least at the federal level, in 2026, assuming a contested election at all.  But we will see.

But, assuming a genuine contested election in 2028 with a candidate other than Donald Trump, there will be the 2020 precedent that elections for President are only binding if the Republican wins.  What would persuade a Republican other than Trump to allow a Democrat to take power?

My guess is, only if the economy is such a mess that they decide it is better to step aside and let the Dem take the blame.

I guess we will see.

Congratulations to the Portland Protesters

 

In making recommendations to immigration advocates, I suggested a symbol and a song:

Make it something catchy and easily learned that becomes the signature tune of the movement. (The Civil Rights Movement had "We Shall Overcome.") Make it something that conveys moral authority. In the case of immigration, that means assuring people of your allegiance. For that reason, songs in Spanish, with a Mexican beat, are dangerous, just as the Mexican flag is dangerous. Make it something that comes from the heart. I get that these two things may be in tension -- a song vowing allegiance to the US may come across as insincere, especially given how the US is behaving now.

The Portland approach never occurred to me, but I have to say it checks all the boxes.

Cute, inflatable animal costumes are definitely catchy.  They solve the question of how to get people's attention without angering them.  They easily go viral.  They are memorable.  They certainly come from the heart and are sincere and authentic.

And they do convey moral authority.  When you see ICE beating someone in a cute animal costume, it will be hard to portray the person in the cute costume as the aggressor.

The only problem I can see is that the disguise may make it easy for provocateurs to infiltrate a protest.

Reichstag Fire Moment, Continued

Reichstag Fire

 It has been almost a month since I asked whether the Charlie Kirk assassination was our Reichstag Fire moment.  Since then I have been too paralyzed with fear to write any more.  And the answer appears to be that there are some very disturbing developments taking place below the surface, although most have not yet sprung into view.

The ICE blitz in Chicago actually began the day before the Charlie Kirk assassination and National Guard deployments have been delayed, so the most visible aspects of Trump's crackdown seem unrelated (though no less alarming for that).

Plans are being laid in Washington that sound very much like an attempt to shut down all opposition organizations, though it is not yet clear when this will come into view or how far it will go.  Stephen Miller is spearheading an integrated attempt to shut down donors and organizations the Administration defines as "terrorist" or "Antifa."  Naturally, anonymous officials insist that they are not targeting activities protected by the First Amendment, but Team Trump seems to regard the First Amendment as protecting only speech it approves of and treats all criticism as criminal incitement.  ICE is beginning to be directed to surveil opponents as well as immigrants.

Officials in the article cited deny targeting any specific organizations.  However the IRS has been given a list of specific organizations and individuals to target.  Ordering the IRS to target specific individuals or organizations has been a felony since the 1970's.  This is very much a thing I feared from the start.  I just misjudged how long it would take to implement.

ICE has been given a massive spyware contract that will allow it to bypass any warrant requirements on spying and go through tech companies instead.  It is hiring contractors to look into “individuals who pose a danger to national security, risk public safety or otherwise meet ICE enforcement priorities.”  In other words, it is being turned into a true secret police with powers to spy on political opponents.

And Ted Cruz -- who, to his credit, condemned government attempts to force Jimmy Kimmel off the air -- is calling for anti-Trump protests to be prosecuted as RICO violations.  In fact, Republicans all across the board were denouncing the No Kings protests as terrorists acts by Antifa.  (Once the protests finished without violence, Republicans are dismissing them as a bunch of out-of-touch old white guys).

These things are all in early stages.  But collectively, they look like an attempt to shut down the Democratic Party and all its donors and supporting non-profits.  In other words, to create a one party state.  

I will also note that within a month of the Reichstag Fire, the German parliament voted itself out of existence.  Given the importance of Congress's power of the purse strings, I would dismiss that out of hand here, except that Mike Johnson seems to be doing his utmost to prevent Congress from ever convening again.

Buckle up.

Is This Our Reichstag Fire Moment?

Reichstag Fire

So, is the Charlie Kirk assassination our Reichstag Fire moment?

For starters, we should really consider what the Reichstag fire moment meant.  

Hitler was named chancellor on January 30, 1933.  (Point of contrast: Donald Trump was sworn in as president on January 20, 2025.  So the two men's tenure is comparable).

Hitler promptly called for elections on March 5, which is doable in a parliamentary system.

In early February, Goering took over the Prussian police, deputized his Brown Shirts, and authorized them to shoot real or imagined Communists on sight.  (Street battles and intimidations between Communist and Nazi paramilitaries were common at the time).

On February 27, the Reichstag burned down in a fire apparently set by a Communist fanatic acting alone.  Nazis promptly blamed all Communists for the fire, declared it the opening salvo of a civil war, and denounced Communists in the most inflammatory of terms.  On February 28, President Hindenburg issued a decree suspending civil liberties and states' rights -- particularly state control of the police.  Goering promptly began mass arrests of Communists in Prussia.  Within two weeks, the Nazis had taken over all state police and made mass arrests of Communist and Social Democratic leaders, shut down their newspapers, and the like.

The elections took place on March 5.  Nazis won 44% of the vote, and rightwing parties won a  majority.  

The next day Nazis seized control of all state governments.  Opposition politicians fled for their lives.  The prisons were so overwhelmed by the number of political prisoners that the Nazis began a makeshift prison in an abandoned munitions factory, named for the nearby medieval town of Dachau.  Dachau opened on March 22, 1933. Widespread reports of torture and murder circulated by early April.

On March 23, 1933, the Reichstag met, under the intimidating presence of the Brown Shirts, and voted itself out of existence.  By July, all parties but the Nazis had been banned.

So what has happened with us?  It is really too early to say.  So far we have seen:

Right wingers have been declaring a civil war and using the most demonizing and inflammatory terms to condemn anyone who might be broadly defined as "left," blaming them for Charlie Kirk's murder.

The digital mob is on the loose, harassing and threatening, demanding the firing of anyone they deem disrespectful of Charlie Kirk.  An unknown number of people have lost their jobs.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr as threatened the licenses of ABC unless they fired Jimmy Kimmel, a blatant violation of the First Amendment.

Donald Trump is ranting like a complete dictator.  Administration member JD Vance, Steve Miller, and Pam Bondi are little better.  All are threatening RICO actions against who-knows-who.  Trump is designating Antifa a terrorist organization.

At the same time, Trump has beaten a tactical retreat from his plans to send the National Guard to Chicago.  Most of us are just waiting for the other shoe to drop.

So what should be expect?  I am expecting Team Trump to start doing what I feared, and what -- so far as we know -- it has not done yet, such as using the IRS to shut down organizations that oppose it, or sending FBI informants to infiltrate opposing organizations to disrupt them.  And now there are threat of RICO investigations against a very vaguely defined leftwing terror network and its funders.

I believe that many right-wingers really do believe their wilder conspiratorial ideas about organizations on the left -- that all the 2020 riots, and probably the January 6 riot, were organized and directed by Antifa.  That every organization that has ever received a donation from George Soros' Open Society Foundation is controlled by Soros.  That virtually all leftwing activists and protesters are paid and controlled by Soros.  And so forth.  

Certainly a RICO investigation will not turn up any such conspiracy.  But so what?

I do not know much of anything about RICO, other than that it allows any organization that commits two or more listed crimes to be declared a criminal enterprise, subject to extensive criminal and civil penalties.  The crimes include numerous types of fraud.  I imagine if you comb through any organization's books closely enough you can find at least two questionable transactions.  And that just might be enough to declare it a criminal enterprise and shut it down.

Scary stuff!

Spock's Brain

 

I changed my mind about "Spock's Brain."  "Spock's Brain" is the Star Trek episode that features a planet in which all the men, known as Morgs, live in the surface in paleolithic conditions and all the women, known as Eymorgs, live in underground caverns with a super high tech computer that runs everything for them.  (Not explained -- where little Morgs and Eymorgs come from).  When their computer wears out, they steal Spock's brain to take its place.

Clearly the episode is bad. It is agreed on all hands to be one of the worst, if not the worst Star Trek episode ever.  But I went too far when I said, "If there is anything of value that can be salvaged from that episode then I, for one, cannot detect it." 

Bad as the episode is, there is one thing about it that seems disturbingly prescient.  All the women (Eymorgs) have gotten so accustomed to having a computer think for them that they have forgotten how to think for themselves and are complete airheads.  While it is disturbing how often the series equates attractiveness in women with stupidity, it does raise some troubling questions about what happens when computers start doing our thinking for us.

We are starting to find out.