707 Comments

In my opinion ,he should be in jail.

Jane Bouvier

Expand full comment

Yes! And " Justice delayed is justice denied"'. No wonder tfg's "Lock her up!" was more of a rallying cry than "Fair trial with sentencing delayed many months" would have been. 😏

Expand full comment

Absolutely correct! As Robert, I worked in or for Federal government my entire life. Government employees would have been jailed or fired. Under Republican control, lawlessness prevails and justice does not exist. I never would have said this of the GOP before 1990.

Expand full comment

Yes, but even now, when Democrats ostensibly hold at least part of the federal power, including the executive, we see little to no justice being applied to occupiers of high level government positions.

Expand full comment

The method of conviction is "bottom up," for good reason. Lesser offenders agree to "come clean" in order to get little or no punishment, which leads to factual investigation of those further up the rungs, who also cave for less time, and help indict the next level upward, all the way to the top. By the time you get to the top (or center) the few in the final position have nowhere to go. This takes time, but it's the best way to do it.

Expand full comment

Sandra B. ; At this point, we are at war. Our children are being massacred in schools, We debate about gun laws and seem blind to the headlines that should exist everywhere ; We know who the perps are! GET THEM and STOP THEM!!! tRump said so many incriminating things right out in the open; even before getting into office! They still lecture us about the law and how important, and difficult it is to 'prove intent'. COME ON! this guy is a liar and a racist, sexist, rapist, tax dodging criminal who loves PUTIN and thinks he is a genius! Free speech my foot ; He should be allowed to scream from his jail cell all he wants, but not to destroy our country!

Expand full comment

I have written an entire book about how to have an educational approach that will instantly make kids 95 percent safer—and less frightened, and allow totally individualized curriculum, even with the same teachers, if they choose to stay. But it's very different from what we have now, and you have to abandon all your illusions about school. The classroom is obsolete; build the village learning environment; take charge of your kids' pathways; establish more love in your family; abjure indoctrination. Teach them how and where to learn for themselves. Worship and cultivate natural curiosity and satisfy it in all its variations. Abandon standard testing. Every child brings herself to the table. Every child unique. No required curriculum. Shut down the classroom for good. It Takes the Whole Damn Village. This will solve many problems.

Expand full comment

Who also has a serious "bromance" with the No. Korean dictator.

Expand full comment

No argument about the steps of the judicial process. But the repeated assertion that we just have to be patient is getting ridiculous. The evidence for several charges has been gift-wrapped and handed to Garland on a silver platter, who in turn has passed it to Jack Smith. Two years is more than enough time to get the indictments underway. Enough with the tip-toeing around!

Expand full comment

We'll see if that actually happens this time. Government officials at the higher levels keep getting away with corruption, crime & treachery, so until it actually starts happening to them, I will remain skeptical

Expand full comment

Jaime ; I agree!

Expand full comment

Jaime:

Your comment prompted me to investigate the history of Federal prosecutions of Federal officials. An article from Wikipedia on "List of American federal politicians convicted of crimes" (Reference 1) I found this article quite informative. A few supporting facts:

1. Federal investigations and prosecutions are conducted through the DOJ and not Congress.

2. The DOJ investigates, charges,and prosecutes according to U.S. Law.

3. Congress can impeach people in certain Federal jobs except for members of Congress.

4. House Representatives and Senators can only be censured by their colleagues and not impeached.

People in Federal positions have been investigated, charged and convicted of crimes. These have occurred under several Presidents of different political affiliation. Even under Joe Biden, Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE) was convicted of one count of scheming to conceal and falsify information and two counts of making false statements to Federal investigators (Reference 2). He was forced to resign from Congress with support from both major parties. On June 28, 2022, he was sentenced to (note that he wasn't jailed) 2 years' probation, 320 hrs of community service and a $25,000 fine. Also, interesestingly, the DOJ prosecuted 5 former and current Federal government employees during Trump's tenure: Steve Stockman (R-TX), Chris Collins (R-NY), Duncan Hunter (R-CA), Steve Bannon, and Michael Flynn. Trump pardoned all upon leaving office (Reference 3). Shows the respect that Trump has for the rule of law in this country. In fact, Trump's complete disregard for the law can be seen in many other prosecutions. Although, he did pardon some people for real injustice including a posthumous pardon for Susan B Anthony.

References:

1. Wikipedia. “List of American federal politicians convicted of crimes.” Wikipedia, Jan 28, 2023. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

2. Wikipedia. “Jeff Fortenberry”. Wikipedia. Jan 28, 2023. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Fortenberry

3. Golding, B. “Trump’s pardons: Full list of clemencies granted during his presidency”. New York Post, Jan 22, 2021. https://nypost.com/article/trump-presidential-pardons-full-list/

Expand full comment

Amendment 14, Section 3 of the Constitution says that any member of Congress that breaks oath of office shall not remain in office unless 2/3 of each chamber votes to retain that member. That sounds pretty automatic but for that expressed exception.

Now I assume there must be some legal procedure to determine a member has betrayed one's oath even if it appears plain to the rest of us, & I suppose that could be the responsibility of the DOJ, but that should be prioritized & done promptly. That rule becomes meaningless if it takes longer than an election cycle to apply.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

It sounds like you are paying very close attention. It's always good to have input from specialists.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

First, I agree with you. Second, I am a paid member but try as I may to remind your staff, no one there will acknowledge it!

Expand full comment

Jane, good point! Raise hands if you think Donnie will ever be held accountable for anything. No hands? Mine is not raised either.

Expand full comment

Mine is raised. He's in this way over his head and though the press is mostly on his side painting him as an underdog, there are too many of those (legal and political) people against him. He doesn't have to necessarily go to jail. One conviction in Atlanta or New York will likely be enough to stop him. What I really want to see is Trump reduced to beggar.. And I believe that time is coming.

Expand full comment

He is already a beggar, except he calls it fund raising, everyone not fooled understands that it is a big CON.

Expand full comment
Jan 27, 2023·edited Jan 28, 2023

I want to see the tin cup in his hand as he walks up and down 5th Avenue in front of what used to be called Trump Tower doing his best Marlon Brando imitation... "I used to be somebody."

Expand full comment

Amen,amen,and a BIG AMEN!

Expand full comment

I think Lady Justice and Jack Smith are coming for trump. The tentacles of corruption are so deep and there are so many players, it's going to take years to investigate it all.

Expand full comment

The proof of the pudding -- is in the tasting.

So far, best is sanctions from a frivolous civil case that Trump initiated. The NY tax case, so far does not amount to much.

I can't understand why the low hanging fruit haven't been charged. E.G. perjury is easy to prove. Many henchmen lied to the House committee under oath, signed forged or altered documents, etc. Why haven't target letters gone out to some of those who admitted guilt? E.G. Navarro published it in a book!!!!

Expand full comment

DLM ; With all due respect ; I feel like the vulture sitting on the fence remarking to another vulture saying "Patience phooey! I'm going to kill something!" There is plenty of evidence and we know who the enemy is and his enablers! Demand Justice. Who is taking money from the NRA!? If you're not part of the solutions, you're part of the problem! I never liked Romney anyway! and he is just one of them, He gets the most money from them. Gotta start somewhere!

Expand full comment

How about Fani Willis and Tish James,these ladies are very good at what they do.

Expand full comment

Hand UP

Expand full comment

See my comments to Jaime.

Expand full comment

My hand is up, unless he dies before we get to him.

Expand full comment

Agreed, but be careful what you wish for. If he's in jail, he can't run, and if he doesn't run, another fascist like Desantis may take over.

Expand full comment

Well, if our justice system worked, DeSantis should also be sent to jail.

Expand full comment

Couldn't agree more,he's rotten,meanspirited and so full of himself he couldn't wear a cowboy hat!

Expand full comment

What would he be charged with?

Expand full comment

Mr Hutchison; How about not dispersing Federal Covid monies for intended purposes! Instead he used part of the money to ferry immigrants from another state to his state, and then on to Martha’s Vineyard. Cost about 2 million, last figure I heard.

Expand full comment

State money too! Didn't even prioritize a very severe housing crisis in the state

and picked a fight w/ Disney because the man spoke up.

Expand full comment

Sooo... don’t hold the traitor accountable because there might be another traitor waiting in the wings?

No, that’s giving into exactly the typical bully threat that Trump and Republicans have been making. Essentially “If you try to hold me accountable, my followers will rise up and cause violence again, so don’t dare hold me accountable.“

Expand full comment

Can't run from jail? Check your history. Eugene V. Debs did just that in the 1920 election. Didn't win, of course, but prison did not stop the campaign

Expand full comment

DeathSantis will be ANNIHILATED in the __umplican primaries! Bunkerboy has a better chance of doing a SITUP than him playing president.

Expand full comment

I am not sure he can't run if in jail, not an expert on the law by any means but I think a minor candidate has in the past. I do think the GOP will dump him if convicted, but then again there is a lot of stupid in the GOP.

Expand full comment

Only if he's allowed,there are such things as special circumstances,perhaps.

Expand full comment

In my opinion, DeSantis isn't nearly the menace that drumpf is. True, Ronnie is smarter than Donnie (a very low bar), but Donnie has a low cunning and one superpower that none of the other lords of the MAGA crowd seems to possess--a charisma, if you will, or a a certain sort of connection with his cultist enthusiasts that none of the other far-right Repubbies can apparently get a handle on. I just don't see DeSantis as being able to capture the level of enthusiasm outside of his home turf that Donnie does--or used to.

Expand full comment

Governor Youngkin in Virginia is oozing with charm. Just because the national press doesn't cover him like DeSantis Doesn't mean he isn't a threat.He could be a real challenge for Democrats to Beat in 2024.

Expand full comment

Would it matter? If not DeSantis it would be another and another after that.

Expand full comment

You're right, and they're all fascists. What I meant was, if Trump stays out of jail, either he is the Republican nominee - in which case he will lose bigly, because, inter alia, he has lost the evangelicals; or he runs as an independent, in which case he splits the GOP vote. Finis GOP.

Yes, I want to see him go to jail, but there is an upside if he doesn't.

Expand full comment

Vetting candidates while they are under oath might help weed out the Trumps and the Santos types.

Expand full comment

Do oaths have any effect on pathological liars like Trump & Santos?

Expand full comment

But wait till the folks find out what he's about,he;s another dictator wannabe,learned from the old scuzball himself.

Expand full comment

Detector check.

Donald Hodgins <silencenotbad@gmail.com>

11:51 AM (0 minutes ago)

to

In my younger days, I spent time working for a plumbing company that operated in conjunction with a fire suppression company. The sprinkler systems the branch company installed had one vital element that had to be in place in order for the final OK to be given by the head inspector. This device was called a "detector check." Its main function was to alert the local fire department in the event of a system failure that would cause the dispensing of water to any location within the building. Under normal conditions, an alarm would sound signaling a fire somewhere within the structure, and personnel from the fire department would be dispatched post hast. This device was like a sleeping guard that would awaken in the event of an emergency. The other day 5 uniformed police officers beat a man and the injuries he sustained from the encounter eventually led to his death. Tyre Nickols was stopped for what was reported to be a reckless driving violation. The officers that apprehended Mr. Nickols had no active leader within the group, so I've been led to understand. This apparent lack of leadership was directly related to the unrestrained beating of a man that deserved little more than a traffic ticket for his indiscretion. I understand Mr. Nickols attempted to evade the police but in earnest, I feel he ran due to an overwhelming impulse of self-preservation. The fact that the officers on site had no actual leader that could turn up or shut down the physical abuse Mr. Nickols was being subjected to, directly led to the array of injuries suffered by Tyre Nickols during the confrontation which lasted 3 non-stop, incomprehensible minutes.

On-site, there was no central figure of authority the group could turn to for direction, like the fire suppression system without a detector check the group reverted to a gang mentality. Among the members a subconscious need for leadership would emerge, this is a common equation where the most dominant personality would eventually raise to take control. They repeatedly beat Mr. Nickols as they waited for a member to signal enough is enough. If all personalities housed the same levels of depravity Tyre Nickols never stood a chance. In every instance of operation, a group needs a leader to act as a detector check, giving the body a sense of public decency and professionalism. The "Tennessee 5" failed in all aspects of proper police behavior. Gang mentality took precedence over accepted police procedures and a man died because of a lack of leadership that was due to the absence of a simple detector check being in place. Sad!

Expand full comment

Bad recruiting, bad policy setting by superiors and bad training. These cops likely had all 3 things going for them hence they weren't just cops. They were an out-of-control mob armed with government authority. Rot always starts at the top. So watch how everyone in these cops chain of command do their utmost to wiggle out of the blame for a crime they abetted.

Expand full comment

They can run but they can't hide.

Expand full comment

Unfortunately they tried both. How many people die because of a non-working smoke detector?

Until we have quality control for leadership, training, and ethics, we will always have these type of horrible incidences.

Expand full comment

Instead of body cameras that record, change to small units that send live feeds back to the precinct where cooler minds can direct the officers on site who might need professional assistance in dealing with aggravated situations. Knowing their actions were being evaluated in real time might curb inappropriate police actions. Just a thought from a concerned citizen.

Expand full comment

99% of all dysfunctional smoke detectors exist in that state because of dead batteries, due to homeowner neglect, not the fault of the product.

Expand full comment

I'm sorry? The killers of George Floyd followed their leader.

Expand full comment

The officer that was responsible for the death of George Floyd didn't intend to kill him. If Mr. Floyd hadn't told the offices he couldn't breathe after being placed in the back of the squad car they might have believed him when he said he couldn't breathe while he was on the ground with a knee on his neck. Mr. Floyd was complicit in his own death because of non-compliance.

Expand full comment

Non compliance (if even a factor) is not a crime nor subject to a summary judgement of execution by armed and dangerous government actors. Mr Floyd was an innocent civilian attacked by armed killers. Any attempt to spin this is a false and disturbing claim that might be reconsidered and removed.

Expand full comment

Non-compliance isn't a crime but because of my close contact with a number of police agencies when I was younger, if you want to get on the bad side of an officer non-compliance is a great way to start, the police hate being ignored. They're an edgy bunch to start with, why tempt fate. Simply do as you are asked, show respect, and you will live to see another day.

Expand full comment

Mr. Floyd had been on the ground for 20 or so minutes and had complained about not being able to breathe while he was on the ground. This strongly suggests that he was already dead when he was put into the car. You idea of him being somehow complicit is nonsense.

Expand full comment

You completely miss my point. Their leader was there; there was the voice of authority there, on the scene. Your earlier piece was insisting there be a leader on hand who could prevent the situation from going too far. This premise doesn't hold, on your end.

Expand full comment

I didn't miss it I just didn't agree with it. The Floyd death was a mess because there was no leader on site, to my knowledge. They were just on duty officers dispatched to the scene.

Expand full comment

It's been reported that 2 sheriff's stood by and did nothing!

Expand full comment

Not a surprise....the surprise would have been if they intervened

Expand full comment

So be it.

Expand full comment

Please don’t get distracted by Trump. The question is should antitrust laws be enforced to break up Facebook and Twitter? YES!!!

Maria Ressa, 2021 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, says, “ Facebook is biased against facts” and a harm to public safety (death threats) and democracy. When she confronted Zuckerberg about his responsibility because 97% of Filipinos used Facebook as their internet, Zuckerberg responded with what do the other 3% use? He wants total world domination without any concern for the consequences. Facebook spreads violent hate in India and genocide in Myanmar. Remember Cambridge Analytica, Robert Mercer, Steve Bannon and the Brexit campaign, the trial run for our 2016 campaign with Russian interference?

Expand full comment

Lat's chop them up! And Twitter needs to twizzle out.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Chuck Campbell : Why don't you go monopolize another forum?

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Chuck ; I see you as an insincere disruptor, working for those who are against Democracy and the rule of law or even decency. I will delete anything you direct at me.

Expand full comment

Good for you Laurie! Chuckie my boy, you are spouting proven facts as wrong information. As the news in the last few days has reported again, the incontrovertible facts of the Russian involvement have proven very much true. Sorry dude (not really).

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Your statements are categorically false. Kindly refer to yesterday's NYT story regarding Barr and his special counsel. Russia was deeply connected to the 2016 Trump campaign as outlined in Mueller's report, not the false cover of it that Barr published. Barr's political manipularions at Justice caused 3 senior prosecutors including his longtime assistant to summarily quit, the first distributing a warning of Barr's action to the entire agency. Check your facts.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Nose rubbing or threats not available. Any group of 2 or more people lie one way or another. You seem unable to contribute without attempting to provoke argument and seem to enjoy it. Perhaps you should focus elsewhere, as others have suggested.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

An orange jumpsuit would look stunning with his orange makeup.

Expand full comment

Go on FB and follow him. Leave a comment like the one you left here, then report the page for threatened violence. I did and it was quite satisfying.

Expand full comment

You do know that you can just block Trump from your feed.

Expand full comment

Ostriches do not bury their head in the sand, but ppl who block a demagogue from their feed instead of confronting his bullshit do.

I have a whole collection of screen save refutations to tRump when we were on twitter, both mine and others and he was not allowed to delete them. So his cult had to see challenges to his lapses of logic, even tho they are too ignorant to grasp it.

Expand full comment

Kelpfroth. Hate speech, defamation and lies should be actionable.

Expand full comment

Agreed, who has the cajonas to do it?

Expand full comment
founding

The code doesn't need cajones (machines faithfully process instructions)...

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment
founding

... but speech which influences elections counts (that is why there is a F.E.C.); had Facebook/Twitter/etc. chosen to abide by the established norms for political speech, there likely wouldn't be any discussion today (much policy flip-flopping, account bans included, would have been obviated).

Expand full comment

You miss the point altogether.

Expand full comment

That only helps you, what about the other 80,000,000+ people!

Expand full comment

An orange jumpsuit would look stunning with his orange makeup.

Expand full comment

Regardless of what someone says or does in terms of speech/expression, you can't set the precedent of deciding which speech should and shouldn't be allowed unless you are willing to concede that same authority to your opposition.

Expand full comment

Jane Bouvier ; A billion hearts!

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Chuck Campbell.

"Speech" does not include hate speech, defamation.

60 court decisions refute the big lie.

Guess you missed the $1 million sanctions assessed against Trump. Out in the open?

BTW republication of defamation is actionable.

Expand full comment

Only if it’s used and proven!

Expand full comment

Defense of Republication falls under the heading "he/she said it first"

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

You know that there's a Georgia subpoena that so far has been avoided by the producer of 2000 Mules?

That Steele dossier is a red herring. If you're following the news, Durham - who was "weaponized" by Trump -- is now a material witness AGAINST him. No truth to Trump's version. Found another potential Trump crime. If he failed to disclose, 18 U.S. Code § 4 - Misprision of felony

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 684; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(G), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

Defamation, hate speech are not protected by the 1st Amendment.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Your boy, Durham did an investigation. Steele was not used to justify the investigation. The investigation was initiated before Steele got involved. And Steele was hired by McCain initially. Durham took this to trial. Public record.

I have a lot experience with the FBI - even have relatives. For the most part they are right wingers. Many of them were Trumpers. The wife of an agent was one of the first people convicted for Jan 6.

Virtually all of the witnesses against Trump are people he appointed.

Your scenario after 500 convictions and guilty pleas for Jan 6 is pure Qanon bull. Insurance may cover deprogramming.

Expand full comment

Chuck Campbell ; Jan 6th was a crime!!!

Expand full comment

The federal government can’t muzzle Drumpf. Who cares whether the for-profit social platforms do? Tempest in a teapot.

Expand full comment

We have had checks for two years. The GOP and it’s allies have given the fox the keyes to the hen house!

Expand full comment
founding

Hey, remember when a tan jacket was enough to have people claim you hate America? I feel like we need to block Trump from all media outlets to reinforce the notion that actually trying to overthrow the US government is a level of anti-American activity worthy of scorn and punishment.

Expand full comment

Ian, I would vote for keeping Trump off all media as a way of letting people know there is a line that should never be crossed when it comes to trying to undermine our nation.

Expand full comment

Maybe, but every media conglomerate operates on a 1st priority - make $$$, period. There is absolutely no interest in anything remotely close as an operating mandate. Adhering to principles first in hoped that $$$ would follow went out w/Murrow a long time ago.

Good night & good luck......

Expand full comment

Peter Croppo ; If there was anyone as hated or destructive as Tokyo Rose was in the 40's, they would be banned, for sure , with good reason.

Expand full comment

Too true. Which is why I think independent journalists are among the best reporters covering Washington politics. No corporate overseers. Seth Abramson, Aaron Rupar, Parker Molloy, Sandi Bachom....

Expand full comment

Ya', and don't forget Thom Hartmann & Heather Cox Richardson... they both provide terrific insights with a relevant dose of history for context... both are brilliant...

Expand full comment

Ruth, as much as I agree with your comment, greed supersedes

all.

Expand full comment

I wonder if it should be allowed to. Isn't antitrust law for preventing that kind of tyranny?

Expand full comment

Seems like there used to be laws, rules, means & morals when it came to politics, corporations, law enforcement & the military, but it all seems to thrown out.

Expand full comment
Jan 27, 2023·edited Jan 28, 2023

Dawna Lee Driskill ; Scarier and scarier. Too bad that even the perps can't see what could come of this. Not everyone grabbing for all the power and gold will end up on top. And there are those who don't want History taught!

Expand full comment

Creating a different bunch of Dems, eventually.

Expand full comment

I can't support blocking him from all media outlets. I think it would do us well to remind ourselves that it's the most hateful abhorrent speech that requires the most protection. That being said, freedom of speech is not inviolate; Trump planned and excited and insurrection, as such prudence on this issue is appropriate. Anyway, it was the damn media who gave him so much air time that we ended up in this position.

Expand full comment
founding

I may very well need to think more about this, but honestly, I'm struggling to see how a complete block is unwarranted. If all someone dies is yell FIRE!!!, the move theater is legally allowed to remove and ban that person. If all someone yells is, That MAN!!! The one right THERE! He's trying to kill you!! STOP HIM! STOP HIM!!!!....Do we not officially commit or imprison that person, effectively keeping them away from any method of amplifying such a message?

Expand full comment

Ian I agree with you that the social media companies should block TFG, a user known for spewing false, hateful and dangerous speech. The right to freedom of speech is the right to be protected from the government restricting one's own expression. A business can, and often does, restrict free expression. Corporations are held liable for unsafe activity they knowingly allow to happen on their grounds. Corporate spaces have been allowed to restrict expression on their properties that they deem problematic. Social media platforms, in my view, are not public squares but corporate spaces. They're owned, operated and maintained by corporations. If a corporation cannot allow unsafe behavior in a physical space, why should they be able to do it in a digital one? If they can determine unwelcome speech in a physical domain, why are they unable in a digital one?

If inclined, please search for the case of Stephen Downs vs Crossgates Mall as a reference. Mr. Downs and his son wore t-shirts, purchased in the mall, that were protesting imminent war with Iraq during 43's term and mall security asked them to leave. Downs claimed he and his son were merely walking around the premises, wearing shirts sold by one of the mall's stores, in silent protest. Courts found that the mall had the right to oust them, as a mall is private property. FB, Insta, Twitter and the like, just like a mall, are open to public use but private property. If they can arbitrarily block journalists critical of their operations, why are they suddenly unable to block someone that used their platforms to organize a riotous mob to overthrow the government, killing law enforcement in the process?

Sometimes I wonder what is happening in our country: peaceful protests are savagely stomped out while hateful rhetoric and actions are defended by endless pretzel logic.

Expand full comment

Michael Bruno ; So you admit that certain speech can put us "In this position". Then why should destructive speech be given "the most protection"? It seems to work against us.

Expand full comment

Thank you Ian. It’s only obvious to the sane.

Expand full comment

I agree. Trump doesn't deserve to be handed a platform to spew lies, including The Big Lie that he was robbed of the presidency. He is quite aware that if he keeps repeating a lie, some people come to believe it. Whatever else he is, tfg is a master of propaganda.

Expand full comment
Jan 28, 2023·edited Jan 28, 2023

Imagine Tokyo Rose being allowed to do her thing during or after World War two; being given the freedom to be a prominent voice on America's airwaves in the 40's. Iva Toguri D'Aquino was the 7th person convicted with treason In American history.

Expand full comment

I followed it this morning. The comments are overwhelmingly negative toward the *. I left a disparaging comment then reported the page for threatened violence.

Expand full comment

Enforce anti-trust laws on the books. Close all tax loopholes. Reverse Citizens United because corporations are not human individuals.

Expand full comment

End Citizens United. There is no such thing as a CORPERSONORATION. Get $ out of politic$.

Expand full comment

While your word, CORPERSONORATION, is excellent it does make a bit of a mouthful. Like you, I like playing with words so I came up with PERPORATION. The first 3 letters mean person(s)with the preponderance of the word indicating the complete unbalance and unfairness of the corporate world against the US citizen. Just playing around.

Expand full comment

Deb, you are right on all of these things, particularly Citizens United, but Republicans, as long as they are in charge of anything will never go along with eliminating any because they have benefited so much from them. Their donors are so happy they can give as much as they want knowing the legislators they have bought will do whatever the donor wants them to, usually without question. It's disgusting, but reality.

Expand full comment

Ruth Sheets, some day there will be a cost for this disgusting realty.

Expand full comment

And the democrats especially Biden are somehow excluded from this equation? They are all bought and paid for. Some more so then others.

Expand full comment
founding

... but with respect to Professor Reich's posting ('Should Trump get back his giant megaphones?') the immediate issue is not corporate speech but political speech - meaning the question of whether the law (F.E.C.) should have some say...

Expand full comment

Rishi Chopra ; See what the illegitimates running Congress have just done ; impoverishing the IRS so it cannot afford to hire enough qualified accountants and investigators to enforce the tax laws against those ultra wealthy who cheat ; Many who pay nothing. The FEC has been similarly starved of the support needed to have the power to have some say...legislatively and financially.

Expand full comment
founding

It comes as no surprise - as what else would folks who think "free markets" will solve everything do...? ("When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail...")

Expand full comment

Rishi ; I am not surprised that they would hammer away at anything which would stop them. We are not talking about 'free markets' but Democracy and accountability. They are enabling the next attacks on our country ; allowing the same demagogue to gin up the next attempt to overrun the will of the humans in self rule, and impose tyranny on the world.

Expand full comment

No. He should be in jail like the other people in jail for January 6th.

Expand full comment

Personally, I would much rather hear that he has dropped dead, and/or suffering horribly from bleeding rectal cancer. But, that's just me....

Expand full comment

Rotting in jail is exactly how he deserves to spend the rest of his life.

Expand full comment

Lol I concur.

Expand full comment

The sooner Trump is in jail, the better. What’s taking so long???

Expand full comment

Stephen, yes, Trump should be in jail and I think in the past it might have happened, but Trump has a huge following from his reality TV spot. The Trumpers and Trumpettes have no idea that all of that TV stuff was staged and that Trump is neither bright nor competent as a businessman. His behavior is childish and he is literally losing any ability to reason he may have once had. If you are not sure, just listen to his ramblings. They make no sense, repeat garbage he has been spouting for years and a little bit that has recently been fed to him by his handlers who know perfectly well he is unfit to do anything, let alone be president again. Heck, he was incompetent as president the first time. It was the media that kept him going the first time, praising him every time he "acted presidential." That stuff needs to stop. Facebook, grow up and keep Donnie Trump off your platforms. It's time you all start being a responsible organization.

Expand full comment

“Be willing to listen.

You cannot learn what you THINK you already know”.

I copped that little comment from the comment section of my UNDERSTANDABLY newsletter and thought it somewhat appropriate, especially pertaining to the trumpers/trumpets.

Expand full comment

SPW ; It appears that their will has been hijacked by lies and hypnosis of some sort.

Expand full comment

Ruth Sheets ; recent elections have shown that the MAJORITY of voters do not want tRump.

Expand full comment
Jan 27, 2023·edited Jan 27, 2023

Stephen Kaufman ; If not jail, at least poverty and powerlessness.

Expand full comment

The real problem here is that Trump is free. There is a serious problem with our justice system in that justice is insufficiently swift. Trump and all his allies should have been instantly incarcerated on January 6, 2021. It has been two years and that traitor is still free to spew his venom. He should be locked away with no access to any communication device. The same with Bannon and every other conspirator, and every Republican who voted not to certify Biden's election victory should have been ejected from office and every AG who signed that heinous letter should have been disbarred. There's a time to draw the line on due process, and when there's an insurrection attempt it's time to draw that line. Otherwise, the insurrectionists are free to continue their attempts.

Expand full comment

Are you still on twitter and facebook? I left when Musk took over, knowing the right-wing shitshow that was about to commence, although not knowing how quickly. The people do have a say, we say with our engagement. Big follower accounts don't leave because of big followers numbers with the attention they provide. If those that oppose the alt-right's attempt to overthrow our democracy left, twitter would quickly join the importance of Parlar and Truth Social.

Expand full comment

The only problem is too many people have built their business or personal careers on a Twitter account. None of the other quite fit that niche. Most politicians who want to connect beyond their base have a Twitter account. Many government agencies also. And cultural organizations as well. You name a non-political group, they likely have a Twitter account.

That said, I did what you did.....kinda. I was off FaceBook before Trump was elected and haven't been back. When Musk took over I cancelled my account ...the one with my name. Then after surveying the damage, I opened another account under a pseudonym that's fairly innocuous. I use it to monitor and follow up on stories that have referenced other's Twitter feeds. But alas, no blue check. Unfortunately, Twitter has become as much or more a part of my communication outreach as the USPS as much as I might not wish it.

Expand full comment

It is a difficult decision and significant sacrifice to walk away and rebuild. Not many are willing to take those steps and I wonder at a society that is unwilling to sacrifice for their ideals, principles, and love of our democracy. I think it means that we've already fallen and all that is left is living with the growing consequences.

Expand full comment

I know it's difficult but don't give up. Too many already have. Hang in there

Expand full comment

I totally understand. I dropped Facebook when the Cambridge Analytica scandal erupted.

But I've been on Twitter over 10 years, and, like many other disabled people have found a community of like-minded people there. I have friends I hate to leave, and we've grown even closer since Musk bought Twitter. That said, I am setting up an account at Post.News.

Expand full comment

Yes, I understand. In your case its even more cumbersome to abandon Twitter....its become more of a necessary utility than just a communication app. Perhaps our politicians should take that into consideration. Contact your rep and senators and let them know. There are plenty more people like yourself that could back you up.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Take a break. You sound too much like Tucker.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Anyone who is an antivaxxer is too scientifically illiterate and incurious to take seriously, sorry.

Expand full comment

You lost me when you interpreted someone else's actions based on what you would do, how you would react and then name called them and prescribed what action they/you should take. Can you understand why there's no way back from that?

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Not with such a chip of superiority on your shoulder. Go away.

Expand full comment

Eggs and Trump. Your posts yesterday and today were really about the same thing, the concentration of corporate power into the hands of a few, and it does not really matter who the heads of the corporation are, the point is the concentration of power. This includes, of course, the "military industrial complex". All need breaking up. We are under corporate thumbs even if we enjoy freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, and yes even the freedom to bear arms in the context of a well-organized militia (though we usually leave out this last part!). Breaking up the corporate giants will not happen unless we can get the money out of politics. The thing Trump represents is big money. Trump disappears when money ceases to be the motive force of politics. To that end I think the most dangerous politician(s) in America is not Trump, it is those who control the money. Think Rick Scott, Glen Youngkin, Joe Manchin and their corporate cronies whose wealth resides in stock dividends. They really drive the system and are very hard to deal with in a reasoned way because the believe, in a social Darwinist mindset, that money proves that they are better than we are, right down to reproductive genetics.

Expand full comment

Most dangerous is Ron DeSantis. He has the political power and gathering majority support with the far right. He is truly dangerous with his real suppression of human rights, i.e., voter suppression, banning books in libraries, "Don't Say Gay" bills, suppression of teaching racial issues in schools, etc. DeSantis truly believes his hateful rhetoric and is ready to write laws and prosecute. My only hope is that Trump will go independent when he loses Republican primary and splits the Presidential vote.

Expand full comment

You have generated a nice list of points for running against DeSantis, or as Trump himself put it, DeSanctimonious. If we all remember them and put them to good use we should be okay -- provided Biden stays healthy.

Expand full comment

The most important question is whether Trump or anyone has a Constitutionally protected right to have lies, false and misleading statements, for which they have no factual evidence of the truth of his statements, to be publicly distributed. Legal precedents support that false information in commercial speech can be regulated under the standard of being "truthful and non-misleading" to prevent the corrupt manipulation of consumer preference between companies and service providers. And of course libel and fraud have never been Constitutionally protected speech.

It is time for us to confirm that lies, false and misleading statements cannot be distributed by the social media platforms that today have greater public reach than traditional broadcast media. The originator of statements has the responsibility to present the factual evidence that their statements are true, and the platforms have the responsibility to review and agree that the evidence supports the truthfulness of the statement if it becomes broadly distributed via their algorithms. The law should hold each liable if these requirements aren't met. And this requirement should apply to all speech, including political, health care, educational policy, etc. False and misleading political speech is more damaging than false commercial speech in our society and we should confirm that false political this speech is not Constitutionally protected outside of the halls of Congress.

There is a new book being launched at the National Press Club on Washington on February 1. The title is "Discovering Truth" about this very issue, by a lifelong expert in the advertising industry's experience in the voluntary self-regulatory actions to implement the standards of truthful and non-misleading commercial speech.

This should be the focus of revising Secrion 230 of the Telecommunications Act this year. It would make the issue of Trump's presence on social media platforms irrelevant if this standard would be enforced.

Sincerely,

Robert Viney

Mason, OH

Expand full comment

So far as misinformation and disinformation in mainstream digital media today? Personally, I miss the Fairness Doctrine. (1949 - 1987) The notion of "Voluntary self-regulation???" :D What a great idea! ...but (and there's always a "but"), When is the last time any corporation regulated itself, taxed itself or voluntarily raised the wages of ANY average American citizen itself in the USA without being required to do so by law? Look at all the laws on the books today that go unfunded and unenforced by our OWN government. Look at all the tax cuts since 1985 which supports an INCREASE to the wealth of utterly monopolized Corporations and the oligarchs who own them at the expense of average taxpaying American citizens.

Take the current vicious version of "winner take all" capitalism, (please!), and add to that the amount of Corporate Welfare demanded by oligarchs around the world who support authoritarianism these days instead of democracy. We may as well expect climate change to mitigate itself as to expect corporations to regulate themselves. When corporate CEO's make 254 TIMES what an average American Citizen earns with an existing, (but unenforced), RULE OF LAW in place, we can ALL be certain that corporations have NO intention of "sharing" anything with American Citizens except their unmitigated GREED. Show me the nation on this planet where corporations are more interested in supporting the common good for all than they are about increasing their own profits.

Expand full comment

Just Me, if you're old enough to remember "green wash" environmental claims in the late 1980's, the false information about environmental benefits of products was eliminated through voluntary industry self-regulation. That process has been in practice for more than 50 years, and is effective at keeping false information out of traditional print and broadcast media to a very large extent.

Expand full comment

Don't forget, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which was passed in 1996, says an “interactive computer service” can't be treated as the publisher or speaker of third-party content. The first amendment does not apply to private or public organizations or to individuals only to governments.

Expand full comment

Terry, Congress is holding hearings to consider changes to Section 230. The social media platforms with their algorithms are directing specific messages and content to specific users. There's a broad belief that these actions make them "distributors" of content to the public, and that they have a responsibility not to distribute harmful, inciteful, or false information, as do other media distributors. The first amendment comes in to play when government requires such regulation of the content being distributed, because it requires the platforms to block or delete information which is harmful, inciteful or false. With traditional media, the companies are required to review factual evidence provided by the originator of the content or message that it is not harmful, inciteful or false. They are not "truth police" but they have an obligation to remove content when the originator has no factual evidence to support that the content is truthful, of the evidence presented doesn't support the content. I believe you are likely to see some version of those requirements used to revise Section 230 soon.

Expand full comment

Thanks Bob for bringing me/us up to date. It's a subject I'm aware of but haven't been closely following. Good to know someone is doing a better job than I.

Expand full comment

I agree. However what your on about is regulations in regards to FB and Instagram and any other social media platform. The problem here is the public, and most members of Congress, are ignorant about what FB, Instagram, Twitter, TicToc, YouTube and all other social media platforms are, they are advertising platforms using social media to sell stuff. Being that they are private companies they have no obligation to control speech even if you or I feel they should be better actors in the public space of social media.

Expand full comment

Jeff, traditional media companies are private companies, and they have an obligation to control speech as required in law and FTC and FCC regulations on harmful, inciteful and false information. Those categories of speech aren't protected by the First Amendment and have been successfully regulated by traditional media companies for decades. Section 230 is likely to be revised to reflect the degree to which social media platforms use algorithms to distribute specific content to specific users, to be classified as "content distributors", and be required under new law and regulations to remove content that is harmful, inciteful or false, just as traditional media companies are required to do.

Expand full comment

FB, Instagram, YouTube and Twitter are not traditional media companies and it's clear they do what they want based on their rules. It seems you have forgotten that the FCC eliminated the Fairness Doctrine policy in 1987. Media companies, and Fox News is a shining example of this, do what they want. How else do you explain Tucker Carlson.

Expand full comment

Jeff, you are 100% correct regarding current law. That is why a group of concerned former advertiser and advertising agency executives are working on revisions to the Telecommunications Act and Section 230 regarding online liability for the distribution of damaging content, to develop requirements for all media -- traditional broadcast, cable broadcast, radio, internet, podcasts, and social media -- to hold these platforms accountable if they broadly distribute content that is false and therefore damaging to political, medical and important social issues. False and damaging speech is not protected under the First Amendment, and these new requirements would confirm accountability not for individual posts but for any third party content that their traffic-building and content sharing algorithms distribute broadly across their platform.

New technologies, and new impacts, require new protections.

Expand full comment

NO! Trump will never change. And if Garland does not speed up, we are in for chaos.

This looks like a purely financial decision by these social media darlings.

Expand full comment

Nailed it.

Expand full comment

Like his dad, Trump has a sell-by-date. Its likely going to be very noticeable soon if the media will do their jobs.

Expand full comment

Absolutely not! It's bad enough that he's back on Twitter; we don't need his vile spouting on Facebook and Instagram.

Expand full comment

With things being the way they are Trump has been rather quiet as of late. Now that he has been reinstated on several public media outlets his ignorance will be once again heard by all.

Expand full comment

He apparently has an exclusivity contract with his Truth Social platform, where he has posted prodigiously. It expires in June, when he is planning to return to other platforms.

Expand full comment

I wonder if he'll invite Santos. After all they speak the same language.

Expand full comment

James Comer is mistrusted by many women, every where he goes the guy is always covered in KY.

Expand full comment

Better told on TruthSocial.

Expand full comment

Comer is someone I'd rather never have known about.

Expand full comment

If we pretend maybe he'll go away.

Expand full comment

Personally, I think Dump should not be allowed on FB. He has "Truth" Social. Let him play with that.

Expand full comment

Pardon me, but keep in mind, Meta is losing money.

GREED is the ONLY reason it is allowing #Turdking #MangoWanker back onto their platform

Expand full comment
founding

https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/META/analysis?p=META

On a quarterly basis their reported earnings reflect no shortage of profits...

Expand full comment

Robert is wrong in saying, "America is still struggling with the damage Trump did to our democracy." The truth is, 'America is still struggling with the damage Trump is still doing to our democracy.'

Expand full comment

No. the pathological liar and leader of an insurrection against our government should have a lifetime ban from Twitter and Facebook, but the avaricious Zuckerberg has already succumbed to Trump who probably paid him for re-admission from one of his phony fund raising accounts where the gullible send the crook money. Trump belongs in prison and on a GA work gang.

Expand full comment

Trump is in the news every day! He doesn't need another platform! What is taking the justice department so long in locking him up? Anyone else would have been in prison long ago!!!

Expand full comment

Anyone else would have gotten the death penalty. We’ve killed spies over less.

Expand full comment

He should not be able to spout his lies on any national medium. Very bad move for allowing him back!

Expand full comment

Are you suggesting the First Amendment needs tweaking?

Expand full comment