July 20, 2020

The quest for racial justice

The killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police has galvanized the Back Lives Matter movement and captured public opinion.  This is not because that was an unprecedented event; the cases of  Tamir Rice, Walter Scott, Elijah McClain, Freddie Gray and others made that clear.  Eric Garner, like Floyd. died from a police choke-hold, pleading “I can’t breathe.” 

There are several interrelated causes of the violence.  The first, clearly, is racial bias among police officers. The reality of that bias is demonstrated by the disproportionate number of African Americans who are the victims of the police.¹  Bias simply must be rooted out, and police unions must not overlook it in defending officers.  Federal oversight and monitoring of police departments should be expanded, another reason — if any were needed — to vote Trump out of office.

Another factor is the too-quick use of deadly force, often including frantic multiple rounds;  Breonna Taylor was a victim of that behavior.  This is in part the result of the militarization of police forces, including weapons and other equipment, tactics and attitudes.   American police kill far more civilians than those in other countries.² A swat team seems to be the default response to almost anything.  Using no-knock warrants, as in the Taylor case, adds another layer of irresponsibility.

Killings and other acts of violence by police often are not punished because of forgiving legal standards and policies regarding the use of deadly force.  This issue needs systematic review.³

Another reason for overreaction is gun policy.  Our idiotic laws and public attitudes have left the country awash in firearms, which must make policemen fearful.  That is no excuse for racist, over-violent actions, and it has nothing to do with cases such as George Floyd’s, but it does contribute to the wider problem. 

It is not only police who are armed and dangerous, especially to minorities.  The cases of Trayvon Martin and Ahmaud Arbery involved self-appointed vigilantes, free to roam about, armed, looking for “criminals,” i.e., African-American males. 

An article in the July 2 issue of The New York Review of Books discusses another shocking manifestation of racial bias and brutality, the torture of prisoners in Chicago police precincts.  “[B]etween 1972 and 1991 at least 125 black Chicagoans were tortured by police officers” in one precinct, probably repeated to some degree elsewhere in the city.⁴   

The protests have been peaceful for the most part, but there have been excesses, including vandalism and looting during the early rallies and the occupation of a few blocks in Seattle.  I was afraid that Trump would seize upon such matters, rally his base behind a law-and-order pitch, and turn the public against BLM.  However, his use of U.S. Park Police and National Guard troops to clear Lafayette Square for an inane photo-op was widely condemned, and his rhetorical attacks didn’t resonate, partly because public and media support for the protests was stronger than might have been expected, and also due to Trump’s obvious nods toward white supremacy.  His racism never has been a secret, so his tweeting of whites brandishing guns and yelling “white power” was just Trump blundering along his usual path.

There still is a risk of backlash as matters are out of control in places.  In Seattle on Sunday, demonstrators damaged the East Police Precinct building, adjacent to the formerly occupied area, damaged another precinct building, and engaged in some looting and general vandalism.  Public support has been both proper and strong, but this sort of behavior could destroy it.  The invasion of federal forces in Portland and the threat of similar deployments is Trump’s somewhat belated play of the law-enforcement card. However, it is so crude and excessive that it may be self-defeating. 

As a result of the protests there has been some movement by police departments to ban neck holds and to require an officer to intervene if another is using excessive force.  The US House has passed a bill which would, among other features,

Ban no-knock warrants in drug cases at the federal level. Condition law enforcement funding for state and local law enforcement agencies on prohibiting the use of no-knock warrants in drug cases. . . . Ban the use of chokeholds and carotid holds. Condition law enforcement funding for state and local law enforcement agencies on establishing a law to prohibit the use of chokeholds and carotid holds.⁵

It would create a national registry to track officers with a record of misconduct who move to other police forces.

The protests also have forced a long-overdue examination of Confederate symbols and attitudes.  The hypocritical defense of the Confederate flag — it’s a symbol of a proud regional heritage — should have collapsed, if not long before, with the image of Dylann Roof posing with a gun and the flag before he murdered nine people at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston in 2015.⁶  Again Trump has come down on the wrong side of the debate, opposing removal of Confederate statues and symbols and the renaming of military bases.

The death of John Lewis reminds us of another issue of racial justice: voting rights.  In 2013, in Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act claiming, through the Chief Justice, that its factual assumptions were out of date, although reviewed by Congress in 2006.  The decision resulted in a flood new restrictions on voting rights, affecting minorities disproportionally.  A bill updating the Act passed the House in December 2019, but has been ignored by the Senate. A Democratic Senate and President would guarantee its passage.  Whether the Supreme Court would uphold it is another matter; the Shelby decision also rested on a theory of states’ rights, spurious but attractive to reactionaries.

_____________________

1. I collected some statistics demonstrating bias in my post of July 11, 2019. Here’s another source:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/investigations/police-shootings-database/

2.https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/06/05/policekillings/

3. An article describing the situation is here:

 https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/08/how-courts-judge-police-use-force/594832/

4. Peter C. Baker, “A legacy of Torture in Chicago,” NYRB p. 43

5. Quotes are from a summary by sponsors:

https://judiciary.house.gov/uploadedfilesjustice_in_policing_act_of_2020_section_by_section.pdf?utm_ campaign=2926-519

6. There was a brief push to remove Confederate flags following that murder.  See my note of July 5, 2015, which also describes the hypocrisy in the pro-flag argument.

---

July 10

Trump, according to one of the inner circle

I haven’t posted anything since April 23 because my computer died, and I was slow in buying another, loading new programs, transferring data¹ and generally getting organized.  It would be an understatement to say that much has happened in the interim.  Before registering my thoughts on the killing of George Floyd and the mishandling of the virus pandemic, I’ll comment, while the impression is fresh, on a book I just read.

John Bolton’s oddly-titled The Room Where It Happened is a memoir of his seventeen-month tenure as National Security Advisor.  The buildup to publication, including Trump’s attempt to block it, suggested that the book would be a devastating portrait of our esteemed leader.  It hardly is sensational in tone, being a detailed and often tedious narrative of various challenges and crises faced during that time. Most of Bolton’s comments about and appraisals of Trump are not sweeping, but are connected to the discussions surrounding those events.  They certainly do reflect Bolton’s low opinion of Trump, but then Bolton expressed a low opinion of most of those in the executive branch — including Cabinet members and permanent staff — and of the Obama administration, and of foreign leaders, so a low opinion of the President is, up to a point, just a reflection of Bolton’s disappointment that others aren’t as wise as he.

True, he does give many examples of Trump’s limitations and of the near-impossibility of keeping him focused, but with a few exceptions these are details added to a picture well known to any reader of The New York Times or The Washington Post.  On one topic, Trump’s dealings with North Korea, including his fawning over Kim Jong-un, Bolton is kinder and less detailed than the news reports.

One exception pertains to discussions between Trump and Xi Jinping, President of China, on June 18, 2019. Trump, “stunningly, turned the conversation to the coming US presidential  election, alluding to China’s economic capability to affect the ongoing campaigns, pleading with Xi to ensure he’d win. He stressed the importance of farmers, and increased Chinese purchases of soybeans and wheat in the electoral outcome.”² This is an example, although a shockingly blatant one, of Trump’s known subordination of policy to re-election, the familiar instance being the manipulation of aid to Ukraine. However, on this topic Bolton does make a general appraisal: “I am hard pressed to identify any significant Trump decision during my tenure that wasn’t driven by election calculations.”³  

Bolton confirms reports that Trump was warned of the dangers of coronavirus infection but did little or nothing to prevent disaster.  His discussion is defensive, reacting to criticism of the structure of the NSC, but it rings true. He makes the point by quoting a New York Times report, then adding his evaluation of Trump’s response:

The National Security Council office responsible for tracking pandemics received intelligence reports in early January predicting the spread of the virus to the United States, and within weeks was raising options like keeping Americans home from work and shutting down cities the size of Chicago. Mr. Trump would avoid such steps until March.

“Thus, responding to the coronavirus, the NSC biosecurity team functioned exactly as it was supposed to.  It was the chair behind the Resolute desk that was empty.”⁴

Bolton’s discussion of the Ukraine issue — whether Trump demanded election help in exchange for releasing aid to Ukraine — is confusing.  However, he refers to Trump’s request to President Zelensky of Ukraine for “a favor,” makes clear that Trump was holding up transfer of the funds, and comments as follows: “When, in 1992, Bush 41 supporters suggested he ask foreign governments to help out in his failing campaign against Bill Clinton, Bush and Jim Baker completely rejected the idea. Trump did the precise opposite.”⁵

Bolton criticizes the way in which the House went about impeaching Trump.  There is some merit in his appraisal, along with some of his ususal negative attitude toward Democrats.  One point he makes is that narrowing the charge to the Ukraine issue “provided no opportunity to explore Trump’s ham-handed involvement in other matters — criminal and civil, international and domestic — that should not properly be subject to manipulation by a President for personal reasons (political, economic, or any other).”  He suggests that if attention had been directed toward the “broader pattern of [Trump’s] behavior . . . there might have been a greater chance to persuade others that ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ had been perpetrated.”⁶  Perhaps, but the Senate would have acquitted anyway; contrary to Bolton’s impression, not only Democrats play politics.  However, a broader and longer inquiry might have been the better plan in terms of demonstrating to the public just how important it is to send Trump into retirement next January.

____________________

36.Fortunately, a tech-savvy son retrieved files from the dead box.

37. The Room Where It Happened, p. 301

38. Ibid, at 485

39. Ibid, at 317

40. Ibid, at 468

41. Ibid, at 485. In the ellipsis, the author refers to examples of what, elsewhere, he describes as “Trump’s penchant to, in effect, give favors to dictators he liked. . . .” Ibid, at 458.

---

April 23

Tribal communication

A lie gets halfway around the world

                 before truth puts on its boots.

In the present circumstances, “going viral” is a bitterly ironic description of the spread of false, negative and dangerous ideas, claims and themes on the internet. 

The right wing is less a political movement in any ordinary sense than a sect or a tribe, and its impulse is rejection of order and commonality. Its reaction to the coronavirus crisis consists of conspiracy theories, denial of basic facts, and obstruction wrapped in faux patriotism.  Once such idiocy would have had a limited influence, but now, thanks to the internet, it races to a vast audience conditioned to accept, repeat and, in some cases, act on it.  Better communication breeds greater ignorance.

Lest any among that audience question the claims, the Babbler-in-Chief offers reassurance and reenforcement, as with his inane encouragement of rallies demanding reopening: “LIBERATE MICHIGAN!”  “LIBERATE MINNESOTA!” and most irresponsible of all, “LIBERATE VIRGINIA, and save your great 2nd Amendment. It is under siege!”

Some of the protesters showed poor judgment in joining the rallies, both as to association and the need for continued distancing, but carried signs reflecting genuine concerns, such as “Earning a living is essential. Reopen” and “I want my job back. Reopen.”  Other signs demonstrated the effects of viral lies: “Fake crisis,” “COVID-19 is a scam,” “COVID-19 is a lie,” and “It is just a cold virus.”  Those and the chant “Fire Fauci” captured the anti-science, down-with-facts mentality.  The tendency of the right toward separatism was revealed by the presence of Confederate flags and guns.  Some signs provided comic relief and revealed the phoniness of the protests: “Freedom Trumps the commie virus” and “I need a haircut.” 

Trump’s daily performance aids the protests but, by any rational standard, is pathetic.   The Washington Post has tallied his lies, which is a useful metric, but branding Trump as a liar would miss the point.  A rational, powerful man could be a liar.  In that case, his lying would be noteworthy in itself, and we would ask: why does he lie?  With Trump, the lies are merely one of the manifestations of his utter inability to cope with the demands of an office he should not hold.  He is ignorant, egocentric and insecure, and reacts to every challenge in the predictable manner of such a person: lying, boasting, threatening, shifting blame.    

The country is divided.  In a time of crisis, a leader would unite it, but not the Present Occupant.  He is disinclined to unite because he sees division as his ticket to re-election.  The tribal messages serve that end.

April 11, 2020

Atheists in church

Possibly, just possibly, the country will learn a lesson from the coronavirus crisis: don’t put people in charge of government who don’t believe in it.  The damage is especially great if the federal government is in their hands.

They reject what they are told by government agencies.  They are reluctant to use government resources, preferring to dump responsibility on the states.  They argue that private enterprise can work more efficiently than any public body.  When they are forced to act, they bungle, being unfamiliar with, and resentful of, administrative practices, and needing resources that they have neglected or destroyed.

Governmental agencies, employees and experts are part of the dreaded Deep State.  Trump knows that he

mustn’t trust them because Rush Limbaugh, to whom he awarded the Medal of Freedom, told him so.  Rush dismissed the coronavirus as merely the flu and, when those with some knowledge of the subject declared otherwise, offered this rebuttal: “You know, we've talked about the ‘Deep State’ all these years since Trump was elected . . . well, the Deep State extends very deeply. And the American people did not elect a bunch of health experts that we don't know. We didn't elect a president to defer to a bunch of health experts that we don't know.”²⁹  

For the President, inspectors general are the epitome of the dreaded Deep State (a concept so captivating that he referred to his foreign office as the Deep State Department).  Any action by an inspector general is suspect and probably disloyal.  After all, one of them, the Intelligence Community Inspector General, informed Congress of the whistle blower complaint about the Ukraine phone conversation.  Trump fired him.

Another such sinister operative produced a report on the current crisis: “The Office of Inspector General at the Department of Health and Human Services conducted phone interviews with administrators from 323 hospitals across 46 states” which revealed that hospitals are “unable to keep up with COVID-19 testing demands" and are experiencing "severe shortages."  Trump’s response: “It's just wrong, Did I hear the words ‘inspector general’? Really? It's wrong."³⁰

As part of the stimulus plan, Congress created the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee (PRAC), within the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE).  On April 1, 2020, the CIGIE released a statement that, "The PRAC will promote transparency and support independent oversight of the funds” provided by the stimulus bills and "prevent and detect fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement."³¹  Acting Pentagon Inspector General Glenn Fine was selected by a council of inspectors general to lead the Committee.  Trump fired him as Defense IG. and, because he is no longer an inspector general, he is ineligible to hold the committee post.  “Inspector General” and “independent oversight” are frightening terms.

Fortunately, there is an antidote to the Deep State readily available: Jared Kushner, all-around expert whom no one will accuse of depth. 

Republicans in Congress, surprisingly, voted for relief bills.  However, the administration’s ineptitude and its reliance on private banks has delayed distribution of funds.  As to obtaining badly needed protective gear, it first left that to the states, then interfered with orders for equipment placed by them.

Even if the Trump administration had realized early on how serious the virus pandemic is, its previous anti-government bias would have left it ill-prepared to respond.  A group specifically designed to warn of possible pandemics was disbanded, and numerous relevant positions were unfilled.³²  This thinning out was no accident.   Stephen Bannon had declared that “the mission of the Donald Trump Administration would be ‘deconstruction of the administrative state’.”  Those appointed to Cabinet posts, he said, “were all selected for a reason. And that is the deconstruction.”³³ 

Despite efforts to dismantle government, warnings about a possible pandemic were made and, at least in theory, reached Trump.  According to ABC News, “As far back as late November, U.S. intelligence officials were warning that a contagion was sweeping through China’s Wuhan region, changing the patterns of life and business and posing a threat to the population.”  The warning was contained in “a November intelligence report by the military's National Center for Medical Intelligence.”  That led to “briefings through December for policy-makers and decision-makers across the federal government as well as the National Security Council.”  Finally, “a detailed explanation of the problem . . . appeared in the President’s Daily Brief of intelligence matters in early January.”³⁴ 

  

Even if Trump doesn’t read the Daily Brief, or have it read to him, even if he dismissed those reports as coming from Deep State experts, a warning was circulated by another, presumably trusted source.  Peter Navarro, the President’s trade adviser, authored a memo on January 27 stating: “The lack of immune protection or an existing cure or vaccine would leave Americans defenseless in the case of a full-blown coronavirus outbreak on U.S. soil. This lack of protection elevates the risk of the coronavirus evolving into a full-blown pandemic, imperiling the lives of millions of Americans.”³⁵ 

Should Trump act?   No: "It’s going to disappear. One day, it's like a miracle, it will disappear." Even if it doesn’t, the administration won’t take the lead: “States can do their own testing. . . . We’re the federal government. We’re not supposed to stand on street corners doing testing.” As the organization he nominally heads has no role, he can  tell us “I take no responsibility at all.” 

____________________________

29. https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/rush-limbaugh-health-experts-are-part-deep-state-and- shouldnt-be-trusted

30.  https://americanindependent.com/donald-trump-health-and-human-services-inspector-general-report- covid-19-testing/

31. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemic_Response_Accountability_Committee#cite_note-CIGIE_040120-4

32. https://time.com/5792015/trump-coronavirus-vacancies/

https://americanindependent.com/donald-trump-coronavirus-warnings-ignored-pandemic-response-team-white-house-covid-19/

33. https://time.com/4998276/demolition-crew/?xid=homepage&pcd=hp-magmod

34. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/intelligence-report-warned-coronavirus-crisis-early-november-sources/ story?id=70031273

35. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/us/politics/navarro-warning-trump-coronavirus.html

April 4, 2020

Trump unbound

Off script, President Trump has numerous salient characteristics.  He focuses on himself and what makes him look good.  He attacks anyone who criticizes him, or is perceived to have done so.  He blurts out whatever comes to mind, sometimes unintentionally telling an inconvenient truth.  Finally, he isn’t bright, so doesn’t always realize the effect of what he says.

Mitch McConnell, ever eager to protect Trump, offered this excuse for his Leader’s inaction on the coronavirus outbreak: That issue "came up while we were, you know, tied down in the impeachment trial. And I think it diverted the attention of the government, because everything, every day, was all about impeachment,"²⁵  Trump, displaying the first, third and fourth traits, destroyed McConnell’s excuse:

“Did it divert my attention? I think I’m getting A pluses for the way I handled myself during a phony impeachment. . . . I don’t think I would have done any better had I not been impeached, okay? And I think that’s a great tribute to something, maybe it’s a tribute to me, but I don’t think I would have acted any differently, or I don’t think I would have acted any faster. ²⁶

I think that we can agree with that.

The third and fourth traits produced an accidental admission of GOP election strategy.  Democrats proposed giving $4 billion to states to boost mail-in ballots, requiring states to send absentee ballots to every registered voter, requiring online and same-day voter registration, and expanding early voting by 15 days. Trump’s response: “The things they had in there were crazy. They had things, levels of voting that if you ever agreed to, you would never have a Republican elected in this country again.”²⁷  Yes, making voting difficult is a core Republican strategy; thanks for making that clear.

The first and second were on display in one of his rants about Governors who don’t praise him.  “I don’t have to call” them, he said; “I get Mike Pence to call. I get the head of FEMA to call. I get the admiral to call.”  Why doesn’t he talk to Governors?  “Because when they disrespect me, they’re disrespecting our government.”²⁸  It’s tempting to add L’état c’est moi.  A more original and more apt comment on his boast is a cartoon by Ann Telnaes in The Washington Post showing Trump as Mussolini with the caption “Il Donald.” A populist buffoon is a better subject for comparison than the Sun King.

____________________

25.  https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/04/01/mcconnell-draws-outrage-ridiculous-excuse- trump- impeachment-trial-prevented-action

26. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-response-coronavirus-not-better-without-impeachment- mcconnell

27. https://americanindependent.com/donald-trump-mail-voting-republicans-coronavirus-fox-news-gop/

28.https://americanindependent.com/gop-governors-coronavirus-stay-at-home-orders-states-republicans-covid-19/

---