Ghastly miscalculation

I'm trying my best to keep current events in perspective, but then I realize I don't know how to measure perspective.

I thought my high school civics classes would help, and then I thought dabbling in the humanities (the interpretation of human expression) in college might offer some guidance. It's one reason why I ended up with a degree in Liberal Arts English. I wasn't a particularly serious student in college (much to my current regret), but I did enjoy my Shakespeare class, as well as those art history and introductory music history classes (I once wrote a paper on The Beatles classic Abbey Road album. I wish I had it now, just for laughs). And, of course, I relished all my critical and creative writing classes.

Dad ended up being a Moravian minister, so whatever theology might have rubbed off on me became a part of my overall exposure to the humanities. Hopefully, I learned how to think, to communicate and to do so with empathy.

The humanities are usually course curriculum because they are designed to help a person gain perspective into points of view other than his own. It might be why I still carry elements of the hippie movement with me, which I also fostered in college. Make love and not war is never a drag, man. In fact, it's far out.

Humanities is also why I find myself in my particular conundrum today.

Why is our country in an illegal war against Iran? Did Vietnam not teach us anything? Or is it because the baby boomers  – whose war in Vietnam defined a generation – my generation – is aging and dying off without passing on the bloody history? It was a forever war. It had no purpose outside of feeding the military industrial complex. It killed, maimed and poisoned many of us.

This time, we're being led by into a war by an egomaniac – a pedophile president who is a convicted felon – with no end in sight. The only real conclusion we can logically make is that he is trying to distract us from the Epstein files, where his name appears many thousands of times. In fact, how much have you heard of the Epstein files the past couple of weeks? I rest my case.

I don't know what the answer is. Even if Trump ended his military misadventure at this hour, I suspect Iran is pissed off enough to continue an accelerated terror campaign against this country. Will we feel safe in our high-rises? Or crossing bridges? Or flying to distant destinations? Or even breathing the air?

Talk about a forever war. What a grievous miscalculation this was.

"Cry 'Havoc!' And let slip the dogs of war." – Julius Caesar, Act 3, Scene 1.

"And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make." – "The End", The Beatles, Abbey Road.

 

 

 

 

Children in charge

There's a lot that gets me wound up about this completely unnecessary war with Iran. You can start with convicted felon president Donald Trump first, because he can't construct a clear, incisive yet simple sentence together without sounding like a 12-year-old seventh grader trying to deliver a report for school.

And I don't mean to insult seventh graders. Sorry.

But the war briefs we are getting from him are absurd propaganda and you get a sense that they are lies anyway. That could have something to do with the character he's shown us the past decade or so (Epstein files, adjudicated rapist, fraudster).

Rght now one of the worst is Pete Hegseth, a graduate of both Princeton University and Harvard Law School (pretty elitist there for somebody who often disparages the elite set), as well as a major in the Minnesota National Guard who served as a counter insurgency instructor in Afghanistan for eight months.

Last year he was appointed by Trump to be the Secretary of Defense, but Hegseth, in all of his misguided arrogance, has renamed his office the U.S. Department of War with himself as the Secretary of War (methinks you need Congressional approval to do that, but this administration seems to think the Constitution is a list of half-baked suggestions instead of actual law.

In Hegseth's latest press briefing from the Pentagon on Thursday, he sounded like an entitled child. Six American soldiers have died in the conflict, three American F-15 fighter jets (at $90 million apiece) were lost to friendly fire, and put us in a conflict that is costing this country – get this – a million dollars a day.

Sorry, but we have no money for health care. Check back later. 

Since hostilities began, the Straight of Hormuz has been closed, through which 20 percent of the world's oil passes. We are seeing the results at the pump, where gas at one local station jumped to $3.09 (from $2.79) in the morning and then to $3.19 in the afternoon.

At least a dozen nations have been attacked by Iran in response to Trump's war as the conflict spreads. Did the administration see that coming? Oops.

Meanwhile, Hegseth burped, "The dumb, politically correct wars of the past were the opposite of what we're doing here. They had vague objectives with restrictive, minimalist rules of engagement. No more. Our authorities are maxed out. Our capabilities are overwhelming and gathering still, as are those of our Islraeli partners. Our munitions are full up and our will is ironclad, which means our timeline is ours alone to control as long as it takes..."

Holy crap.

First off, what is a politically correct war? Seems to me Vietnam started off as a politically correct war, and look how that turned out with 58,000 American lives lost. And what exactly was accomplished other than seeding doubt in our own government. Were the two Gulf wars politically correct? Was Afghanistan?

One wag suggested the use of "politically correct" and "war" in the same breath were oxymorons, delivered by a moron.  

Secondly, what is the objective of a war with Iran? To stop its nuclear capability? I thought we did that last June. To effect regime change? I thought we didn't do regime change. Now Trump wants to be able to pick Iran's next leaders?

And what does Hegseth mean when he says "No more" to "restrictive" rules of engagement? No rules of engagement? So it's OK to commit war crimes? I guess that makes blowing up a girls' elementary school early in the conflict nothing more than collateral damage. Surely it's not a war crime.

Clearly, Hegseth is trying to control the narrative.

"When a few drones get through or tragic things happen, it's front-page news," said Hegseth. "I get it. The press only wants to make the president look bad. But try for once to report the reality. The terms of this war will be set by us at every step." 

Here we go again. Blame the press. But Hegseth's statement is highly offensive to the families of the six service members who died. In fact, it's pretty offensive to any service member who's died in any conflict. Somehow, Trump has managed to make this conflict about himself because the deaths make him look bad.

Like wearing a stupid baseball cap during the dignified return of the bodies. 

This is a souless administration that lacks dignity. Or compassion. Or intelligence.

 

 

 

War president

OK, let me get this straight.

The pedophile/rapist/liar/convicted felon who is serving as our president woke us up Saturday morning –wearing a decidedly unpresidential baseball cap – to tell us that he just bombed the crap out of Iran, ostensibly to make the world safer by decapitating the murderous and horrific Khamenei regime.

Remarkably, Iran's nuclear program – which Trump declared obliterated in last June's airstrikes – somehow managed to resurrect itself in less than a year and needed further tending to. Not so obliterated, apparently. 

Soooo, in the midst of current negotiations over Iran's nuclear program – which seemed to be making some headway – Trump couldn't resist from unleashing the huge military buildup he'd assembled in the Mediterranean and ordered the surprise airstrikes Saturday morning. He did it without Congressional approval, a violation of the Constitution. Bombs away. One of the first things destroyed with all this precision weaponry was a girls' school. Reportedly, more than 50 children were killed.

Yes. I feel safer now.

Trump has advertised himself as the "peace president" and claims that he has (arguably) resolved eight wars in the past year and thus can't figure out why he can't win the Nobel Peace Prize without cajoling one from a rightful recipient. Meanwhile, if you're keeping count, Trump has bombed seven countries – Iran, Somalia, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Nigeria and Venezuela – in the past year alone. End a war, start a war. Peace president, my ass.

Repercussions are already here. Iran has retaliated with missile strikes against Yemen, Bahrain, Qatar, Dubai, Jordan and Kuwait City. The strategic Straight of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world's oil passes, is now closed. All that $1.98 gas Trump talked about in last week's State of the Union Grievance Address is fantasy now, or soon will be. 

There's a lot of talk here about a through line to the Epstein files and an apparent cover-up that seems to be growing every day in an effort to protect Trump, whose name is mentioned at least 38,000 times (if not more) in the files. Is the attack on Iran just another distraction? Could be. Trump once said that Obama would start a war in an effort to get elected. Now here we are just months from midterm elections and Trump is dealing with plummeting poll numbers. If Democrats gain control of the House of Representatives, Trump is likely facing another impeachment. Or at least investigation.

The big social media debate right now is: So what if Trump didn't have Congressional approval? Obama bombed the crap out of people, too (Obama Derangement Syndrome arises). 

I walked myself through a mental exercise yesterday, wondering if Trump acted without Congressional approval, then would the military be following illegal orders to execute this attack? One friend suggested that it might require a Judge Advocate General (JAG) to make that decision. It'll probably ever come up, but I though it was an interesting idea.

Here's the deal. A president can authorize military strikes without the approval of Congress under Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, which designates the president as Commander-in-Chief and allows him to direct the armed forces to defend the U.S.

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 allows for urgent and limited actions, but requires the president to report to Congress within 48 hours. Unauthorized action is limited to 60 days.

Having said the above, presidents generally don't have authority for prolonged, full-scale war without Congressional approval. 

Here's where it gets a little dicey. The Department of Justice has argued in the past that a president can bypass Congress if the military operation does not rise to the level of "war." So a definition is required here. Constitutionally, what is war? I suspect the Supreme Court might get called in at some point.

Whatever it is, I think we're in the process of regime change in Iran. That's pretty clear with the death of Khamenei. What's not so clear is where do we go from here? Do we set up a provisional government? Install our own leaders? Institute a democratic republic instead of a theocracy?

What are the unintended consequences? What have we unleashed? 

More to the point, I don't think you complete a regime change with airstrikes alone. It usually requires boots on the ground. And that usually means body bags.

Are we ready for that? 

 

 

 

 

 

The astounding arrogance

I knew going into Wednesday's House Judiciary Committee hearings that there would be fireworks, but I didn't expect the explosion.

Or was it an implosion?

Attorney General Pam Bondi (center) ignores survivors.

 Attorney General Pam Bondi was grilled by a bipartisan panel of lawmakers about the Department of Justice's handling of the Epstein files. Playing to a crowd of one, Bondi tried her best to be evasive and, I think, deliberately contentious as she attempted to cover up the DOJ's obvious cover up over the mishandling of the release of the files.

Mishandling?

Not all of the files have been released. There is said to be at least three million more files still to be seen. Many are still redacted without explanation. All of this defies a recently-signed law to release the files in full by felon president Donald Trump, whose own name may appear more than a million times in the files.

So there's your motive for a DOJ cover up. That's especially true when you consider the DOJ is now working for Trump and not the American people.

The DOJ has yet to prosecute a single person related to the Esptein files. Meanwhile, Epstein survivors – some of whom were underage when they were being trafficked – are treated more like criminals than victims.

At times, the hearings turned into unbecoming screaming matches between Bondi and the lawmakers – especially toward the Democrats on the panel. Bondi would occasionally smirk, or laugh, or insult the members in a shocking display of uncivility. Her strategy, it seemed, was to deflect and obfuscate each five-minute segment of questioning from each lawmaker without giving a straight answer.

She had no answers. 

She even brought with her a "burn book" to which she could reference each (Democrat) questioner, bringing to the surface yet another potential scandal. Bondi and the DOJ are being accused of spying on the lawmakers as they reviewed the unredacted files on the DOJ's computers, which they are allowed to do. It's not clear if this surveillance of elected officials is legal or not. Even Speaker of the House Mike Johnson thought the DOJ's actions could be inappropriate, adding, "although it probably wasn't intentional."

Pfft. 

Perhaps the most dramatic – and disturbing – moment of the day came when Representative Pramila Jayapal asked Bondi if she would apologize to the 10 or so Epstein survivors who sat behind her during the proceedings. They have yet to meet with the DOJ after years of humiliation and pain.

Bondi, behaving more like a petulant child than a 60-year-old adult, would not even look at them. She then tried to shift blame to Merrick Garland, President Biden's attorney general and then theatrically told the panel that she "would not get in the gutter for her (Jayapal's) theatrics."

At one point in the hearings, Bondi absurdly referred to how well the Dow Jones stock market was performing under Trump, suggesting perhaps there was something more pressing to talk about than rape, pedophilia and human trafficking.

I'm not sure the survivors waiting for Bondi's apology would agree. 

 

 

Unhinged

Now what?

A day or two after convicted felon president Donald Trump suggested that maybe it's a good idea to federalize elections in a dozen or so blue states – which would violate Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution – he tries to evict the African American living perpetually rent free in the back of his brain by posting a racists meme.

It was pretty vile. It took me a moment to find it on Facebook because 12 hours after he posted it on his Truth Social (Untruth Anti-Social),platform, the meme came down. But I did find it. It was a picture of President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle – both African Americans – with pictures of their heads transposed over the images of apes.

It doesn't get any more racist – or vile – than that. Trump said the image that a staffer – but not he –  posted was that of Trump as the King of the Jungle full of Democrats and that it should not be taken out of that context. Why post it at all? 

And that he won't apologize for it. He knew what he was doing. 

A few weeks ago an apologist for Trump dared folks to find anything at all racist about Trump, as if Trump was the squeakiest clean person ever. But this particular meme by Trump is nothing more than a racist trope with roots dating back not only to Jim Crow, but to the era of slavery and beyond.

Part of the autocrat's playbook is to dehumanize your opponent to make them look weak or subservient. Equating them with animals is a time-tested way to do that.

There are other glaring examples of Trump's racist tendencies. In 1973, Trump and his company, Trump Management, were sued by the Department of Justice for housing discrimination against African American renters. Trump settled the case, but the stench lingers. Then there's the Central Park Five case where Trump said five African American teenagers were responsible for the 1989 rape of a white woman, even calling for their execution even after they were exonerated.

And here comes Obama again, living in Trump's brain, when he basically invented birtherism, claiming falsely that Obama was not born in the United States and thus was Constitutionally prohibited from serving as President.

As if that wasn't enough, Trump launched his 2016 presidential campaign in a speech where he said Mexico was sending criminals to the border, bringing drugs and crime with them. Scare tactics.

Then I started to think a little more about what's going on here, and how interconnected all of this stuff might be.

Everything – and I mean everything – serves as a distraction for Trump as he tries to justify his administration's mostly anti-Constitutional impulses.

There are a number of things Trump doesn't want to discuss, most prominently the Epstein files, in  which his name appears at least 38,000 times and thus implies he was engaged in pedophilia. So create a distraction. How about annexing Greenland? Striking Venezuela and seizing its oil? Or maybe nationalize the vote? Better yet, maybe invoke the Insurrection Act in response to the ICE protests in order to declare martial law? How about the government-sanctioned murder of protestors to distract from the Epstein files?

Could Nancy Guthrie's kidnapping be connected to the Epstein files? After all, her daughter, Savannah – who is an NBC co-anchor of Today – has been involved in covering and interviewing survivors of Jeffrey Epstein. Anything is possible, I suppose.

None of this is normal. None of this is a reflection of the American soul or of the American essence, even in our faults. We are not perfect. But we generally know what's right and what is wrong. We make our course corrections. It's in our DNA. 

Just not in Trump's.

 

 

Lemon aid

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 to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

                                    – The 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution

 

When I first heard Friday morning that journalist and former CNN anchor Don Lemon had been arrested and taken into federal custody for covering an anti-ICE protest in a church in St. Paul, Minnesota, my immediate thought was, "Uh-oh, here we go. Trump is going after the media big time now."

I don't think I'm wrong. 

Lemon and another independent journalist, Georgia Fort of Minnesota, were indicted by a grand jury on charges of interrupting a religious service at the Cities Church in St. Paul, where the pastor happens to be an Immigration and Customs Enforcement official. More on that later.

Lemon and Fort were once co-workers at CNN from 2017-2023. Both pleaded not guilty to the charges and released on their own recognizance.

Lemon was charged with one count of conspiracy against the right of religious freedom and one count of violating the FACE Act for interfering with the exercise of religious freedom. The indictment says Lemon physically obstructed a pastor and intimidated congregants. It also claims he planned the protest.

(The FACE Act of 1994 is the acronym for the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances. It was enacted to prevent violent or threatening conduct that hinders access to reproductive health services or religious institutions).

If you've seen the video of Lemon in the church, it becomes obvious how flimsy the charges really are. Lemon, an independent journalist, followed a group of protestors into the church where the protestors interrupted a service. Lemon, clearly announcing he was not part of the protest but there only to cover it, began interviewing participants about what was happening.

He was practicing journalism, as per the 1st Amendment, asking legitimate questions and nothing more. He was hardly an agitator.

Another indication of how weak this case is, is the fact that United States Attorney General Pam Bondi went through two prosecutors who refused to press charges before finding one who would. Bondi, a minion of president Trump, isn't practicing law. She's practicing her boss' retribution campaign.

What has amazed me throughout this episode is how a certain percentage of the population is celebrating the arrest of Lemon. I don't get it. Without the freedom of the press, how are you going to be an informed voter? Who is going to seek accountability from those in office?

It's also amazing to me how many people are suddenly experts in journalism without ever having tracked down a story, dealt with uncooperative subjects, or faced pressurized deadlines. Just because a story may not align with your own agenda doesn't mean it was faulty or malicious journalism. It's probably more likely that you are not open to different perspectives.

In Trump's retribution campaign, there's other stuff going on. Lemon and Fort are both independent Black journalists, an easy target for the convicted felon president because those journalists don't have the legal resources of a large media firm behind them. It's following the anarchist's blueprint to chip away at the foundations of our democracy.

Nevertheless, Trump is still attacking the 1st Amendment here in his painfully obvious Project 2025 shift toward autocracy and fascism. Although the case appears to be flimsy at initial glance, it isn't really the point. Instead it's Trump sending a chilling message to all media that the Constitutional protection provided to journalists (journalism is the only profession actually named in the Constitution. See "of the press") might only be a chimera. 

It's an attempt to stifle dissent.

It's a threat. On purpose.

•   •   •

When I learned that the pastor of Cities Church was also an ICE official,  the first thing that went through my head was "how can that be?"

What church actually supports deportation? Christian Nationalists?

I'm the son of a Moravian minister. And while I've admittedly lapsed in my devotions and Daily Texts, I still lean on some of the things I was taught by my parents as well as by the church. And one of the things I remember is that Jesus taught us to welcome the stranger.

I'm not a Bible thumper, but you can read all about it in Matthew 25:31-45. It's the passage where Jesus, speaking from the Mount of Olives outside Jerusalem, teaches that welcoming a stranger is equivalent to welcoming Him. 

 "Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me."

Jesus then admonishes those who did not feed and clothe the stranger.

"Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me." 

And here's a kicker for you: Jesus was a refugee from Egypt as a child.

I suppose in Trump's America, Jesus – a laborer (carpenter) with brown skin who doesn't speak English, and thus who fits the ICE profile – would be asked for his papers and deported anyway.

I wonder what it is they teach at Cities Church? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Again

Maybe that convicted felon in the White House is right after all. Maybe we can't believe what we see with our own eyes.

Because I swear to you by all that's holy that I thought I saw guys pretending to be federal agents push a woman to the ground. And then I thought I saw a guy come to her rescue, first to help her back to her feet, and then to serve as a barrier to further assault.

And for this act of gallant honor, he was pepper sprayed by the collection of masked goons that was coming to the aggressor's aid. And then the guy was wrestled to the ground by four or five of the ill-trained knuckle draggers from Customs and Border Protection (CBP), who apparently don't understand the concept of de-escalation. Or the constitutionally protected right to free speech and assembly. They said it was obstruction, although they were the ones who were bull rushing him for attempting to help the woman. One of the pretenders took the gun the now subdued man legally owned under Minnesota's carry and conceal laws, which unarmed him.

Then they shot him. Five times. Some said it was 10 times.

His name was Alex Pretti, and he was a 37-year-old ICU nurse working for the Veterans' Administration and an American citizen. 

So, yeah, I couldn't believe what I was seeing. 

Now here we are, two weeks after the murder of American citizen Renee Good by a federal agent from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), not believing what we are seeing with our own eyes. In America. In 2026.

I'm concerned to where all of this is heading. The Constitution is our (the citizens) protection from government overreach, but it only works if the government respects the law. Right now, that's an idea that's not easy to accept when the head of the government is a 34-time convicted felon who is also an adjudicated rapist. His chief subordinate is a wanna be anarchist named Stephen Miller who idealogically resembles Heinrich Himmler, the head of Nazi Germany's horrific SS.

So, yeah, that's where we are if we're murdering our own countrymen. 

Under the convicted felon, we've become the country that attacks it's own house of government. We've become the country that ignores due process in order to disappear immigrants, both documented and undocumented. We're the country that tries to seize the territory of sovereign nations. The country that pirates oil shipping. The country that blows up suspected drug runners in the Caribbean without evidence, and then murders any survivors.

We're losing our allies.

We're losing our dignity. And our honor.

And when we murder our own, we're losing our country.