Wednesday, December 21, 2016

Build The Trump Presidential Library Immediately

The much larger, much worse reservoir of Trump vulgarity and abusiveness contained in the outtakes from The Apprentice were withheld prior to the election. People who had them were afraid of Trump's famous vindictiveness, and assumed like all rational people that he would lose anyway. There was a million dollar confidentiality threat written into all the contracts on the show and not everyone in show business is brave. Tom Arnold (Trump's retaliatory tweets about Arnold write themselves) has described the rapid fire vileness of Trump's tantrums in the Guardian and elsewhere. Such a rich trove needs to be preserved for our history, before our history comes to an end.

I think we need to build and stock the Trump Presidential Library right now. Now isn’t soon enough. It seems (at least to rational people, which may not be a good predictor) that Trump’s presidency might not last very long. It’s been solemnized by the college of party loyalists who decided to ignore the evidence of treason.

The reason the Trump era might end prematurely could be this treason suddenly blooming like a tropical corpse flower (but the aroma is already in the air and it hasn’t deterred the Republicans.)

The reason could be disgust at what we know about him. (That wasn’t enough to keep a near majority from voting for him.)

Or disgust at what more we learn, like his screaming vulgarity and racism and abuse on The Apprentice (which were edited out for public consumption the way the English language edition of Mein Kampf was expunged of the fuhrer’s promises to destroy the Jews and conquer Europe.)

Or it might be his corruption. The transition is already rife with it. The new corruptions outstrip the ones Trump has already boasted of from his sordid business career. Newt Gingrich has suggested that we rewrite our ethics rules to conform to Trump’s more flexible and capacious idea of right and wrong. (Reported by Politico, but the interview is everywhere.)

You could not write a political satire with enough irony and hypocrisy to compete with what we are watching unfold right now. This is where reality beggars fiction. George Orwell predicted some of this but didn’t have an imagination large enough or vulgar enough. This is the region of Roman emperors. This is Caligula and Nero material. We need a Suetonius or a Robert Graves. People have called the Trump juggernaut “Nixonian.” But Nixon was minor league by comparison.

I’ve been re-reading the Nixon years since November 9th. I read Evan Thomas’s BEING NIXON, which explained how Nixon developed the enormous chip on his shoulder. I’m reading John Dean’s BLIND AMBITION now. It reads like a novel, a mixture of Harold Robbins and Dostoevsky and Dickens. The machinations, the rationalizations, the dirty deals brokered to get money to cover up the earlier dirty deals, the vendettas, the rivalries. A chronicle of the intrigues and betrayals in the worst kind of Bourbon or Tudor or Byzantine court. But Nixon’s men were trying desperately to maintain a facade of respectability and legality; there is no indication the Trump court knows what respectability or legality are. Their hero is Putin, who murders his rivals and critics by remote control while scooping the profits and rake-offs and bribes and monetary ransoms from every part of Russia into his pockets.

This would make good television. Good bad television. Some enterprising producer may already be developing a Nixonian drama for one of the cable networks. (The profanity, clean by Trump standards) would require that it be cable. Like that review of the new Hitler biography that appeared in the New York Times, everybody would know immediately that we were being served Trump dressed as Nixon.

It’s a shame nobody is brave enough to produce a fact-based bio-drama about Trump. Trump would sue. Trump would phone Putin and ask for advice on icing his critics. (“Hey, Vlad, can I borrow an assassin?”)

The Trump Presidential Library might be the safest repository for all the hideousness, because Trump doesn’t read.

He might have the attention span to review his own outrages from The Apprentice, the “c-word”s and the “n-word”s and the ranting vulgar abuse of his children and his producers and his show assistants. He likes watching himself on TV. He wouldn’t see anything wrong with what he said or did. His response wouldn’t be suppression or a burning of tapes, like Nixon contemplated. Trump’s response would be “So?”

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Trump Ushers In A New Era Of Bold Dishonesty

Falsehoods, lies. deliberate deceptions.

These are the tools Russia deployed against American democracy via trolls and bots here and in old Soviet satellite countries (via the Intercept, reporting on Trump's troll allies in former Soviet bloc), and it was eagerly embraced by the Republicans. Why? Because lying to the public is also key to the Republican strategy. It has been for a long time, reported by MotherJones.

James Fallows has an excellent piece at the Atlantic covering the dangerous and difficult landscape we are entering, where truth and honest detail are going to become much harder to find. Trump realizes what the public doesn't know can't hurt him. Which is why he hid his tax returns. Sadly the news media aided him by not reporting on the corruption that existed in plain sight.

The U.S. has entered a time when news reporting is based on wild accusations rather than evidence, as this Storify essay explains.

BBC reporting on Trump's baseless accusations about voter fraud. Once again the accusation without evidence. The millionth Republican voter fraud accusation, based on no evidence yet useful in distracting Americans from the real problem, voter suppression.

From ThinkProgress, this essay explains how when the public is made unsure of the truth power becomes the only thing that matters. A totalitarian reality. An end to democratic thinking and an end to democracy.

From Politifact, we see how Trump's closest advisors are also engaged in the business of hoaxing and deceiving the American public by misleading the president elect. They will keep him focused on the false narratives that keep him wildly entertaining.

From Motherboard, a backgrounder on Trump's top advisor, white supremacist hoaxer Steve Bannon, who has a history of reshaping evidence to fit his own prejudices and interests. He was the one who rigged BioSphere to create a result he wanted. He will likely double down on the "climate change hoax" narrative. Watch for the mass firings of scientists from NASA and other government departments.

A respected former CNN anchor (from CNN's more admired heyday) an article about what the news media must do to sort fact from propaganda in Trump's America.

From Quartz, this article describes Trump as the editor-in-chief of fake news.

From The Intellectualist, this article explores the punishments Trump's junta promises to mete out to anyone who fails to bow down to his majesty. This has been a theme of Kellyanne Conway's in recent weeks. Surrender or be jailed. The intellectuals this magazine writes for have become an endangered species.

Media Matters, a frankly pro-Clinton media watchdog, describes in rich detail how the Republican technocrats are busy selling off and burning down the remaining institutions of good government, starting with Social Security and Medicare. The pro-Clinton bona fides of Media Matters shouldn't discredit their reporting. We are looking at a war between the Honest and the Dishonest here. Bias in favor of honesty is not something to apologize for.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, October 31, 2015

The Fine Print We Just Signed Has Nullified Our Legal Rights

A very disturbing article in the New York Times explains how corporations have nullified our legal rights. It's all there in the fine print at the bottom of the agreement we just signed.

I can’t decide if this is Orwellian or Kafkaesque. Maybe it’s both.

Why don’t corporations write contractual language saying we agree to allow them to commit crimes against us? If it’s written into a contract’s fine print which we must sign to complete a purchase of something we need, I guess the corporation whose product we need owns us body and soul. They can do with us as they wish.

If something is in a contract we sign is it automatically legal? Can a lawyer legalize murder in a properly written contract? Can a contract absolve a company of all responsibility for its deeds or its products? Apparently. There are arbitrators, but arbitrators need the corporations’ business. They are bound to them as firmly as we are, and will do as the corporations wish.

Our grandparents used to say “they have you over a barrel.” You’re helpless to resist. You can’t say No. You can’t fight it. Surrender. Give up. Give in. The contractual language of everyday life has put us over a barrel.

Somewhere in the fine print our corporate masters have nullified our legal rights. They have deleted their legal responsibilities for anything that might happen, for anything they might do. They have blocked our access to the justice system forever, nullifying one of the three branches of our constitutional government, at least as far as ordinary citizens are concerned.

How can this possibly be legal?

The point is, it’s not for us to say what is legal. We are nobodies. Our legal rights were suspended when we signed the agreement on our last online purchase.

If the document said we were now the legal property of the lawyer who wrote the fine print would we even know?

(One step toward removing arbitration clauses from consumer agreements.)

Labels: , , , , , , , ,