Update no.1119

 Update from the Sunland

No.1119

19.6.23 – 25.6.23

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

 

To all,

 

OceanGate, Inc., is (or may soon be referred to in the past tense) a U.S. company based in Everett, Washington, that advertises itself as providing crewed submersibles for tourism, industry research, and exploration. Recent events began a week ago Sunday and culminated this week. The OceanGate, deep-sea submersible Titan began a mission to the wreckage of RMS Titanic resting on the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean at a depth of 12,500 feet (pressure depth of roughly 370 atmospheres). The design of the Titan stepped away from conventional deep-sea submersible design practice in that it utilized a carbon fiber pressure hull with hemispherical titanium endcaps. Passengers were literally bolted into the vessel with no internal means of emergency egress. The available public information suggests the vessel catastrophically imploded circa 1:45 into the dive on Sunday morning, which would have put them near the ocean floor. Debris clearly from the Titan vessel has been found on the ocean floor approximately 1,600 feet from the bow of the Titanic. 

Those who are familiar with carbon composite technology know that carbon fiber matrix constructions are exceptionally strong in tension but not so much in compression.  I agree with James Cameron, the Titan application, i.e., pressure hull cylinder, was an inappropriate utilization as an external pressure vessel. The system was exposed to repeated very high-pressure applications, and no one knew what the durability of the structure would be, i.e., how many pressure cycles would the structure withstand. In comparison, aircraft are physically tested to flight load profiles equivalent to several lifetimes of stress. Such endurance testing was not performed on the Titan structure.

If there is a positive side to this tragedy, the five men inside the vessel died instantly. The collapse probably came without warning and happened in a fraction of a millisecond. I suspect there will be some, perhaps not the least being the governments of Canada and the United States, that will soon seek to end the operation of non-standard, insufficiently tested, experimental systems carrying commercial customers. The Transportation Safety Board (TSB) of Canada and the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) have both opened formal investigations into the Titan event.

 

We, the People, can still be pleasantly surprised when the system works.

On 6.April.2021, the Arkansas legislature overrode Governor Hutchinson’s veto of a controversial bill, enacting it into law. The law in question was House Bill 1570, titled: Arkansas Save Adolescents from Experimentation (SAFE) Act, codified at Arkansas Code Annotated §§ 20-9-1501 to 20-9-1504 and 23-79-164 (AKA Act 626). The law prohibits gender-affirming medical care for adolescents diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Several affected then-adolescents with their parents filed suit claiming the law violated their constitutional rights under the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses.

United States District Court Judge James ‘Jay’ Maxwell Moody Jr. issued his ruling in the case of Brandt v. Rutledge [USDC AR ED CDiv Case 4:21-cv-00450-JM (2023)]. Footnote 2 set the tone for the entire 80-page order, “The Arkansas Legislature titled the Act as ‘Arkansas Save Adolescents from Experimentation (Safe) Act.’ Because the title is misleading, the Court will refer to the Act as ‘Act 626’ in this order.” Judge Moody went onto eviscerate the law as failing to serve its stated purpose and harming those it was purported to protect, i.e., children affected by gender dysphoria. The State utilized an interesting circular argument . . . let’s ban a medical procedure because we don’t know enough about the long-term effects—an action that virtually guarantees we will not learn, and affected children will suffer.

The judge also informed me about three important organizations intended to help gender dysphoric children:

-- World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) 

-- Endocrine Society

-- Arkansas Children’s Hospital (ACH) Gender Clinic

Each organization has guidelines, standards, and protocols for treating gender dysphoria in children. The judge enjoined the state to cease and desist any enforcement of the Act 626 law, which means the law is irrelevant and medical practitioners are free to provide medical services in the best interest of their patients.

The Brandt order is a prime example of the former GOP, now fBICP, MAGA bunch, and their far-right evangelical supporters have become the political party of ignorance over knowledge. Act 626 is the consummate example of why I have arrived at that conclusion. Brandt is the epitome of ignorance over knowledge. Fortunately for all of us, Judge Moody stood up to ignorance. We are grateful that the system worked.

I imagine the hard right will insist that the state appeal the district judge’s order. I expect the 8^th Circuit Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court (if the appeal makes it that far) will reject the appeal and affirm Judge Moody’s order.

 

Most of us, if not all of us, have undoubtedly seen and heard of the happenings in Rostov Oblast, the Russian province on the eastern border with Ukraine, and specifically in the capital of Rostov Oblast—Rostov-on-Don. Yevgeny Viktorovich Prigozhin, a Russian oligarch, one time friend and confident of Putin, and founder & leader of the infamous Wagner Group, announced and showed the world that the Wagner Group had apparently entered into open rebellion against the Putin government. Armed units of the Wagner Group including main battle tanks and armored personnel carriers had taken over and occupied Rostov-on-Don. They occupied the headquarters of the Southern Federal District of Russia and other government facilities in Rostov. Prigozhin had voiced his distinct and strong disagreement with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Kuzhugetovich Shoigu and Chief of the General Staff General of the Army Valery Vasilyevich Gerasimov over many years. His insurrection demanded a meeting and reform of the military. The Wagner leader had many gripes about the incompetence wasteful ineptitude of the two Russian leaders. He specifically did not criticize Putin. Prigozhin claimed his effort was not a coup d’état (perhaps not yet, but it surely looks like the beginning of such an insurrection). He called his conflict a “March for Justice.” Prigozhin ordered his armed troops to march on Moscow for the meeting he demanded. The Russian government ordered the main from Rostov to Moscow seriously torn up to slow down the Wagner advance on the capital. Then, as quickly as the insurrection burst into public awareness, the action dissipated even more quickly when Prigozhin was offered no prosecution and asylum in Belarus. I cannot imagine that Prigozhin feels safety in Belarus, but that deal was sufficient for him to call off the march north to Moscow and order an end to the rebellion.

I am feeling very prescient in this situation. I can see Prigozhin mysteriously falling to his death out of a six-story window or balcony somewhere in Belarus within 12 months. I suspect the FSB and GRU will take their vengeance in the name of Putin on those they can identify as having participated in the March for Justice. There will be no justice—only death. The Wagner Group will be disbanded, and the surviving troops will be dispersed among frontline units to serve as cannon fodder.

Just an FYI sort of observation, I suspect it was the Wagner Group that provided the anonymous “little green men” who invaded the Donbass in Eastern Ukraine in 2014. The group’s mercenary armed forces have been and still are being employed in multiple international locations, reportedly 23 conflict sites.

The Prigozhin insurrection tells us far more about Putin and his regime than it does about the mercenary oligarch. From everything I have seen and read over the last 18 months, Putin and the far-right nationalists supporting him are using Ukraine as a catalyst threat of their own making to hold onto power. After all, it is what fascist dictators do; they need a boogeyman. I think the Russian people will see the Prigozhin insurrection for exactly what it was—an attempt to shine a bright light on a very weak and incompetent dictatorship. What the Russian people do with the information is yet to be seen. Putin may not be long for this world.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1118:

Comment to the Blog:

“Tiny himself remains unworthy of my energy. The judge, as of now, is one Tiny appointed who has extremely little trial experience and a history of favoring him.

“We’re familiar with the MAGAts. Many people won’t vote unless they’re offered better candidates than Biden.

“The Electoral College makes manipulation easier. Scoundrels need only focus on enough of the backward states to thwart the more advanced majority. Hence, Trump and W.”

My response to the Blog:

True and agreed. However, as long as he remains a negative influence over millions of American citizens, I cannot ignore him. I tried that in 2016; I seriously underestimated the gullibility of so many citizens back then. I refuse to do the same now.

Your assessment of Judge Aileen Cannon is spot on correct, and her judicial supervision of this case must be closely watched.

“MAGAts” = nice imagery in that one.

“People won’t vote” . . . well then, the reelection of Tiny moves all the closer to reality. Voter suppression is exactly what the fBICP wants and needs. Their believers vote no matter what. So, perhaps we should prepare for another quasi-administration of [the person who shall no longer be named] and even a presidential administration with ihr Anführer in prison. And so it goes. We shall deal with what comes. The next go-around (if it happens) will be far worse than the first episode; he will feel zero restraints in his drive to be a dictator.

The fBICP (former GOP) know the rules, and they can and will use the rules to their advantage as we allow them to do. We can poo-poo the rules as not to our liking, and then we must accept the fBICP taking over the White House, both chambers of Congress, and loading the Judiciary with their believers. I am only one vote among millions. Voting is a choice (although I believe voting is an obligation of citizenship). I must accept and deal with what comes. I will do so as long as I am able.

 . . . Round two:

“It’s good to discuss voter suppression, but that’s not what I talked about. Voter apathy probably costs the Democrats even more votes than it does the Republicans, and apathy’s the biggest reason so many who could vote don’t bother. Many of those who would otherwise vote for Democrats have lost their faith that Democrats would actually carry out the policies they campaign for. That goes straight back to the Clinton Administration.

“I’ll note here that the Democrats have made little to no effort to change the rules the Republicans abuse. Others have also noticed that.”

 . . . my response to round two:

Apathy and complacency are just additional versions of voter suppression. Whether directed, purposeful, governmental Jim Crow suppression or just the paucity of inspiration, the result is the same. By any mechanism or process, not voting abdicates decisions to those who do vote. I have chosen not to join any political party for a host of reasons, which means, among other things, that I do not get to select the candidates. I must decide who is the best of the candidates presented in the general election. My message has remained the same for decades. My only claim to success is our children and of-age grandchildren fulfill their obligation to vote. In our circumstances, my greatest concern today with voter suppression in all of its myriad forms may well yield a far worse and more destructive result than 2016. To make momentous societal changes requires a significant progressive majority on the scale of the majorities Franklin Roosevelt enjoyed . . . that means voting for change.

Your criticism of the Democrats is certainly justified. They have missed opportunities. However, I must remind you the Democrats passed and implemented the PPACA [23.3.2010], which is the closest we have yet come to universal health care. The Republicans have relentlessly attacked the PPACA, chiseled away elements of the law, but the law and process still stand to this day.

 . . . Round three:

“Apathy and complacency result from negative campaigning and from loss of faith both in the parties and in one's vote actually counting. Both of the major parties and the Constitution itself each play a part in that.

“The PPACA is a gift to the insurance industry. Nobody's making a serious effort to replace it with something better.”

 . . . my response to round three:

Perhaps so; your assessment is as good as any. I will note, however, the result and consequences are the same . . . election of the least capable person. We get what we vote for. And so it goes.

Yes, it was . . . an essential element of the compromise it took to pass the law. Nonetheless, the PPACA was the closest we have yet come to universal health care. You are also quite correct in that the GOP attacked and chiseled away at PPACA, but did absolutely nothing to improve the PPACA or offer a better health care law. I will note here that the Democrats passed the Social Security Act [PL 74-I-271; 49 Stat. 620] [546], Medicare & Medicaid {Social Security Amendments Act of 1965 [PL 89-097; 79 Stat. 286]}, in addition to the PPACA [PL 111-148; 124 Stat. 119]. Let us give credit where credit is due despite the fact that none of the noted laws is perfect. Something is better than nothing. I remain guardedly optimistic that we will find a path to improve and one day achieve universal health care. We will remain distant from that objective if the majority does not vote. ‘Nuf said.

 

My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)

Update no.1118

 Update from the Sunland

No.1118

12.6.23 – 18.6.23

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

 

To all,

 

The follow-up news items:

-- In the wake of the obstruction of justice indictment against [the person who shall no longer be named] [1117], he does what he does best; he lies, creates false scenarios, obfuscates, and accuses the government of conspiracy against him. And then, he repeats those lies a bazillion times to as many people who will listen in hopes of achieving the Goebbels’ objective threshold—convince as many people as possible that his lies must be correct. What he refuses to acknowledge is the prime, if not sole, difference between his conduct in the classified documents case and all other presidents and senior officials who improperly held classified materials remains his refusal to hand over the documents and follow the proper process for adjudication. He does NOT decide; he is not a king, a dictator (although a wannabe variant), or potentate. It is his obstruction and continued obstruction that separates his conduct from all others. He was an employee of We, the People; he was obligated to follow the proper procedures. And, more importantly, those documents belong to the government and We, the People—NOT to him in any way, form, method, or means, period, full stop.

As a former Marine pilot and intelligence officer, I handled a substantial number and wide variety of TS-SCI documents and materials. I had to repeatedly get my security clearance and access evaluated and approved. Thousands of officers in all the services had to do exactly the same thing. We know precisely what it means to handle these sensitive materials. I publicly condemned Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private server fiasco [760]; at the time and I still believe Clinton deserved to be prosecuted for interference with federal document retention laws. I can only surmise that the Department of Justice did not have sufficient evidence “beyond a reasonable doubt” to prosecute her. Clinton’s transgression pales in comparison to Tiny’s persistent obstruction.

Of particular note, of the hundreds of improperly retained documents, including classified documents seized by the FBI under a judicially approved search warrant, the Special Counsel chose only 31 of the most egregious documents to charge him.

Further, hey, Tiny read the Constitution; the Department of Justice, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, are NOT part of the Judiciary.  You will be tried in a court of law under the Judiciary. You will have your constitutionally protected right to defend yourself by the rules of evidence. There is only one reason you will soon be in the dock—you willfully violated numerous federal laws. You are NOT a victim; you are the rightfully accused perpetrator.

This case is NOT a witch hunt, the deep state, the Justice Department, the FBI, or anyone or anything else. It is the law, period, full stop, drop the mic.

 

On Tuesday, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Rochelle Paula Walensky (née Bersoff), MD, MPH, testified before the House Select Committee on the Coronavirus Pandemic. During questioning, the infamous firebrand Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia stated, “I don’t want my staff educated. You should educate the American people about what you’ve done of 1.5 million reports because they feel like you’ve done nothing and continue to say ‘safe and effective.’” [emphasis mine]

Exactly! This is precisely why I publicly state that the fBICP and MAGA bunch prefer ignorance over knowledge, fantasy over facts, and lies over truth. They do not want to know the facts, the truth. Their preferred conspiracy theories tell them everything they want to know. They need fear, ‘them,’ boogeymen, and adversaries in order to retain their grip on a vigorous minority. However, fear or resentment of the others is not sufficient for their loyal minority; they must attack and destroy everything that opposes them or even strives to provide balanced action. The fBICP must energetically discourage the others and them from voting. The fBICP fulfills its objective with ignorance; they do not want anyone thinking of alternatives. They deserve to be relegated to the dustbin of history. We must vote.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1117:

Comment to the Blog:

“The Chump finally sees his actions catching up with him regardless of the bluster and bullshit he and his followers continue to spout. As in Watergate, the most serious charges will be around the cover-up. The national security implications may cost him part of the base that his other charges haven’t.

“Oklahoma’s approval of tax money for a Catholic school is “an establishment of religion” specifically forbidden by the First Amendment of the Constitution.

“Unfortunately, the Constitution doesn’t directly address anything about political parties, including gerrymandering. The electoral process established there has other flaws as well.”

My response to the Blog:

Yeah! The issue, as illustrated in the indictment, is not about the possession of classified documents; it is predominantly about obstruction of justice. A woman, clearly a Tiny supporter, was interviewed on CNN and publicly stated she did not care about the obstruction indictment; she and others were going to vote for Tiny whether he was on the ballot or not; they would write him in. His demonstrably cavalier handling of highly classified material may well cost him some support—those dedicated to national security. Anyone who has gone through the clearance process and handled TS and TS-SCI information knows precisely what the requirements are and the threat unauthorized exposure represents. Yet, it will only take one (1) juror with the mindset of that woman noted above to hang the jury.

It will be interesting to see how this Supreme Court decides the Oklahoma religion case. I suspect we shall bear witness to a grandiose display of hypocrisy. They may well attempt to parse the words of the first clause of the 1^stAmendment—the indefinite versus a definite article.

Indeed! Taking strict constructionism to the extreme, the U.S. Constitution does not address many critical topics like equality, freedom, privacy, ethics, respect, integrity, honesty, et al. There are men like Tiny (he is certainly not the only one), who are sociopaths with no morality or moral compass to stop them from taking advantage of the trust represented in the Constitution. Conversely, there are more than a few voters who do not care a hoot about morality; they like the orange man, and that is all they need, like good women who are drawn to bad men.

 

Another contribution:

“Interesting exchange with the old country. Wish for more exchanges with your USA correspondents.

“Thanks for the minimal nod in favor of the Electoral College.

IMHO, this institution is the only thing keeping our country from being the United States of the Pacific/Atlantic Coasts.”

My reply:

All respectful contributors are welcome to add their opinions to this public forum. I do not discriminate by any one or combinations of the social factors, including national origin. I cannot induce U.S.A. contributions, but they are always welcome . . . as long as they are respectful. No Tiny ad hominem attacks, period, full stop!

The Electoral College is an interesting debate topic, especially in the predicament we find ourselves today. I have long defended the constitutional provisions of Article II, Section 1, and the 12^th Amendment, but not without reservation or criticism. The Electoral College, while well intentioned, has yet to fulfill its purpose as a buffer against capricious voting. You may well be correct. We may well face the ultimate test in the 2024 presidential election. We shall see.

The intransigence of political calcification is pushing us to fracture, or worse, the dissolution of our democracy that has survived for a quarter of a millennium.

 

My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)

Update no.1117

Update from the Sunland

No.1117

5.6.23 – 11.6.23

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

 

To all,

 

The follow-up news items:

-- On Thursday afternoon, [the person who shall no longer be named] was indicted by a federal grand jury in South Florida under Special Counsel Jack Smith on reportedly seven federal felonious counts related to the former president’s mishandling of highly classified national defense documents. This is just the classified documents case [1074, 1077]. The insurrection case as well as the Georgia election interference case, are still pending. Reportedly, he will be arraigned in Miami this coming Tuesday (13.June.2023). Since he was a child (and he still acts like a child), he has sought prominence and attention. Well, he finally attracted the attention he deserves.

The first 27 pages of the 49-page grand jury indictment, United States v. Trump [USDC SDFL Case no. 9:23-cr-80101-AMC], offered a detailed summary of the evidence against the defendants. The following felonious violations of federal law are alleged:

COUNTS 1-31 - Willful Retention of National Defense Information (18 U.S.C. § 793(e))

COUNT 32 - Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice (18 U.S.C. § 1512(k))

COUNT 33 - Withholding a Document or Record (18 U.S.C. §§ 1512(b)(2)(A), 2)

COUNT 34 - Corruptly Concealing a Document or Record (18 U.S.C. §§ 1512(c)(l), 2)

COUNT 35 - Concealing a Document in a Federal Investigation (18 U.S.C. §§ 1519, 2)

COUNT 36 - Scheme to Conceal (18 U.S.C. §§ l00l(a)(l), 2)

COUNT 37 - False Statements and Representations (18 U.S.C. §§ 1001(a)(2), 2)

COUNT 38 - False Statements and Representations (18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2))

Tiny is solely charged in Counts 1 through 31 and 37. Nauta is listed as a co-defendant in Counts 32 through 36 and alone on Count 38. Counts 1 through 35 carry a Maximum Term of Imprisonment of 10 to 20 years for each count. Counts 36 through 38 call for a maximum term of five years. Whether the punishment is served consecutively or concurrently is decided by the judge at sentencing and could amount to several hundred years in prison. Trump Attorneys 1, 2, and 3 were not subjects of this indictment, but the evidence presented against [the person who shall no longer be named] does not bode well for their future employment. Based on the evidence presented in this indictment, I would expect separate criminal charges against Trump Attorneys 1, 2, and 3 to be forthcoming and disbarment for all three at a minimum. Of note, the boxes display no markings of organization, i.e., number, type, catalog, or contents. There is apparently no registry of the contents of those boxes. The facts are the facts. The law is the law. This has absolutely nothing to do with politics despite the screams of the fBICP and MAGA loyalists. The reason the DoJ is against Republicans is they break the law, period, full stop.

In a rather disturbing announcement, Judge Aileen Mercedes Cannon [1078] has been initially assigned to preside over the trial. You may remember her from the fiasco of her decision in authorized a special master review requested by Tiny in the precursor case, Trump v. United States [USDC SDFL WPBD Case no. 22-81294-cv-AMC] [1078]. Her ruling was overruled by the Circuit Court of Appeals and affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The fBICP minions immediately gathered around ihr Anführer and defended him. They accused the Department of Justice of being weaponized against them, implying that the charges are capricious and non-substantive. Tiny’s charges are serious felonious crimes that other citizens have been sentenced to prison for many years for far less significant violations. When the fBICP sycophants say anything about weaponization of the Department of Justice, they really mean the law does not apply to them; it only applies to everyone else. What is particularly sad at a very personal level in this sordid affair is his indicted co-defendant. Waltine Torre Nauta is a former U.S. Navy culinary specialist petty officer from Guam assigned to the White House. Tiny retained Nauta’s service after he departed the White House. Nauta was a loyal, obedient valet, personal assistant, and so-called body man, who acted by the explicit direction of [the person who shall no longer be named]. Tiny dragged Nauta into the cesspool in which he dwells. Nauta is likely going to be convicted of serious crimes and sent to prison for many years for his loyalty to a man who did not deserve such loyalty.

Founders and Framers did not explicitly or implicitly address the question of an individual running for or holding federal office after being convicted in a court of law. Based on my reading of the U.S. Constitution and associated supporting documents, I believe them assumed the Electoral College would be the appropriate buffer / filter to avoid a convicted felon becoming president of the United States. They never imagined a conman, huckster, snake-oil salesman would ever get past the Electoral College. They were wrong. It happened. Now, we must deal with the consequences.

 

More Republicans and fBICP adherents entered the 2024 presidential race with Christie and Pence joining this week. The more candidates who enter and challenge [the person who shall no longer be named], the more likely they will dilute the opposition against the conman, huckster, snake-oil salesman and nearly guarantee his renomination.

Just a reminder, there is no provision in the U.S. Constitution that prohibits a twice impeached, confirmed sex offender, and likely soon-to-be convicted felon from running or even serving as president of the United States. To my knowledge, the Founders and Framers did not even debate such a potential, set aside provide for restrictions on the potential. My guess, they probably considered such a possibility as virtually impossible. The voters would never support such a ridiculous event, and the Electoral College would provide a collective buffer to a less than honorable candidate. I must note here that premise has never been exercised or executed. It failed in 2016; it can fail again. Nonetheless, in our present circumstances, the larger the number of Republican candidates for president significantly enhance the potential that [the person who shall no longer be named] will be nominated again, which is one step too close to another serious challenge to our democracy.

 

Oklahoma approved expenditure of state treasury funds to the tune of US$26M for funding of a religious (Catholic) charter school. Oklahoma's Statewide Virtual Charter School Board approved the plan to create the St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School in a 3-2 vote. I imagine the board’s decision will be (or should be) challenged in court. A few years ago, I would have said I cannot imagine the decision surviving judicial scrutiny. Today, I am not so sure. So much for separation of church and State.

 

On Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in the case of Allen v. Milligan [598 U.S. xxx (2023); No. 21–1086]—affirming the district court rejection of an Alabama redistricting plan (HB1). The justices voted 5-4 with Roberts and Kavanaugh voting with the liberals. The chief justice wrote the majority opinion, which was unremarkable. The debate among the nine justices was over the validity and application of §2 [79 Stat. 437; 52 U.S.C. §10301] of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) [PL 89-110; 79 Stat. 437]. Of course, Justice Thomas wrote a dissenting opinion. The noteworthy segment of his opinion was his purposeful ignoring of history, as if it does not matter. He also implicitly says, yeah what happened in the past was wrong, but hey, all is forgiven. We start anew. I will say that Justice Thomas is correct intellectually in that all levels and forms of governance, society, and social intercourse should be blind to a citizen’s skin pigmentation [I will add here that we should]. Unfortunately, institutional segregation, discrimination, and oppression cannot be overcome by a ruling of five justices in black judicial robes. It takes years, decades, and centuries of learning from history and methodically counteracting the root causal factors and effects. We have only just begun the long struggle to overcome the evil grips of institutional racism. Justice Thomas is flat wrong. We cannot and must not forget history. The U.S. Constitution makes it quite clear; we cannot discriminate against anyone on the basis of race [I extend that prohibition to anyone or combination]. Regrettably, far too many people inside and outside of government see themselves as superior and thus empower to oppress others not like them by any one or combination of the social factors. The rest of us must do better and help the oppressed among us despite the narrowmindedness of the Supremes’ dissenters.

Gerrymandering has always fascinated me in a morbid sort of way since I first learned of the practice in school; What is the reason(s) for a convoluted voting district—sh*ts and giggles? There is a reason legislatures gerrymander voting districts. I highly doubt they are drawn for generous altruistic reasons. The fallacy in all this is the presumption of future voting knowledge. Thomas acknowledges the broad invariability of voting performance, i.e., the political polarization of our society. Reading between the lines, we are headed toward the division of districts based on past voting records.

The issue is access to political power. No one can predict future voting, nor can we prescribe the solution to political power. The dissenters in Milligan are perceptive enough to recognize that trying to equalize the future is chasing their tail and ghosts. Whatever criteria the Supreme Court may dream up or devise, the more nefarious factions within our body politik will find a way around it since it all about power.

Here is an idea. The constitutionally mandated, decennial, U.S. Census should establish the racial make-up of each congressional district in each state. We have got to put an end once and for all time this damnable Jim Crow (in all its versions).

With equal populations . . . not registered voters, nor voting citizens, and not even adult citizens—population. The best we can do and/or hope for is to give minorities and the oppressed within our society the opportunity. Yet, at the end of the day, the old adage prevails—we can lead a horse to water, but we can’t make him drink. People will vote as they choose.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1116:

Comment to the Blog:

“As you pointed out, the most salient fact about the debt ceiling is that the relevant law should be repealed ASAP.

“Joni Ernst and her Republican colleagues don’t merely ‘appear like’ parochial tribal hacks; that’s exactly what they are. The economy’s doing all right except that greedflation is still running higher than wages.

“Two central topics are plenty. Rest and enjoy your day,”

My response to the Blog:

Well, thanks, and yet, I do not understand, after this most recent experience, why is it the Democrats do not even make an attempt to repeal §1 [40 Stat. 288]? After the cudgel has been used to extort changes and the weapon dropped, it appears the Democrats picked up the bludgeon and handed it back to the Republicans to be used the next time—January 2025. This has got to stop.

I was being generous, but you are, of course, quite correct. As long as the fBICP, MAGA bunch have their hands on the instruments of power, we will see more fascist, ‘greedflation’ largesse.

Well, thank you for the pass. Like all of us, I must deal with what comes.

 . . . Round two:

“Self-care is always appropriate.

“The Comstock Act is one more example of the Democrats’ ‘lovable loser’ approach to policy, along with the filibuster and the debt limit.”

 . . . my response to round two:

Quite so! I have learned far more medical stuff in the last nine months than I really cared to learn, but such is life. The situations are becoming more complicated and frequent, but again such is life. We press on as best we can.

Ah, you know me so well. You selected the perfect example. The Federal Anti-Obscenity Act of March 3, 1873(AKA Comstock Act) [PL 42-III-258; Chap. CCLVIII, p.598, Sess.III; 17 Stat. 598]. The act was passed during the 42^ndCongress with a Republican majority in both chambers and was signed into the law by President Ulysses S. Grant (Republican). The composition of the 42^nd Congress was:

House: Republican, 135; Democratic, 102; Liberal Republican, 3; Independent Republican, 1.

Senate: Republican, 55; Democratic, 14; Liberal Republican, 1; Independent Republican, 0.

The worst of it is, we are still dealing with the consequences of the Comstock Act to this day, e.g., Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration [USDC ND TX Amarillo Div. case no. 2:22-CV-223-Z (2023)]—150 years after the Comstock Act became law. The debt limit and contemporary use of the filibuster in the U.S. Senate are 20^th Century artifacts, arguably efforts by Republicans to hold onto waning power. The Republicans held a substantial majority in both chambers in 1873, so I am not sure what the Democrats could or might have done to stop that damn repressive / oppressive moral projection law. Nonetheless, suppression of our precious freedom of choice and fundamental right to privacy is a direct product of Republican moral projection for more than a century and a half. They persist to this very day, which is one of myriad reasons they must be relegated to the scrap heap and dustbin of history—the sooner, the better. We, the People, must vote!

 . . . Round three:

“The Democrats might not have been able to stop the Comstock Act in 1873, but they've had plenty of opportunities in the 150 years since then to repeal it. No action so far.”

 . . . my response to round three:

Point taken. Quite so! The Democrats had substantial majorities in both chambers in past Congresses in the last 150 years. They could have repealed that damn law. They did not. One of these days they must get the freakin’ law off the books. I do not know, and if I was to guess, I suspect saner minds assumed the law had been nicked away over the years by various court rulings. As we have recently witnessed, even an outmoded law can be reinvigorated by a zealous prosecutor or judge. The validity or constitutionality of the Comstock Act has never been challenged on the whole or repealed, and we see what can happen.

 

Another contribution:

“Looking forward to that! Political happiness is at a low ebb here too. It just underlines my personal view on that cult.

“Your political low tide is much more serious than our minor disturbance. What a bloody mess. Trust you are feeling on the mend now bud. We’re having coffee in our garden in what could be the first day of a dry hot summer. We have 27degs C now which as you know is quite warm for this side of the pond.”

My reply:

In such discussions, I constantly recall the wise words of Sir Winston about democracy being the worst form of governance . . . except when compared to all the rest. Yes, our politicians are human beings. They are all flawed as we all are. Some are ethically, morally, or criminally flawed. What we are suffering at the hands of [the person who shall no longer be named] is embarrassing, disgusting, nauseating, and otherwise revolting. But, we shall endure and overcome.

Yes, our version of political intrigue is far more serious, threatening, and concerning. We are the closest we have ever been in our history to abandoning democracy for autocracy or dictatorship. A bloody mess, indeed! Again but, we must remain relentless in our defense of democracy and freedom. Tiny represents a disastrous form of authoritarianism. A conman, huckster, snake-oil salesman bamboozled 74M Americans, and many of those still believe conman. He must and will be stopped.

Thank you for your kind words. Yes, I would say I am 100% for a 75-year-old man. The struggle with old age continues.

We will only reach 33degC today; the sky is clear, and wind is light and variable.

 . . . follow-up comment:

URL sent:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65869992

“Have the USA ever had a president locked up and still serving ? it appears that should he be found guilty of these crimes he will still run for residentiary at the White House--what pure nonsense.

“Looking forward to your words Cap.”

 . . . my follow-up reply:

Good article . . . accurate.

No, we have not had a president or former president convicted and incarcerated. We should have . . . Richard Nixon. President Grant was arrested for speeding in his carriage. But, no president has ever been incarcerated. The current indictment (reviewed in this week’s Update) is very detailed and damning. And yet, he will be tried in South Florida, so conviction is not a slam-dunk. After all, a jury acquitted O.J. Simpson; the same could happen with Tiny despite the hard evidence. The Constitution and the law do not prohibit a citizen from being elected and serving as president from prison; I do not know how that would work, but it is technically and legally possible. The authors of the Constitution never considered such a potential—sad but true.

 . . . another follow-up comment (open):

“Thanks Cap, all clear and accurate. It’s difficult for me to shed my tears on that person why, because I’m not an American and personally I would consider an infringement of our friendly rights to be that critical but then I don’t need to do,  as you my friend are totally capable of combatting his handling of what was a most serious position in the world of politics that he has  made something of an utter mess of. We shall see what John the law makes of it all.”

 

My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                  :-) 

Update no.1116

 Update from the Sunland

No.1116

29.5.23 – 4.6.23

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

 

To all,

 

This is a minimal minimalist edition. Enjoy what there is of it.

 

The follow-up news items:

-- The debt limit debacle [424, 494, 499, 501, 503, 577, 585, 611, 634, 725, 819, 1028, 1038, 1098] has occupied the Press and talking heads since the 118^th Congress was sworn into office. Speaker McCarthy defied the so-called Freedom Caucus and passed H.R.3746 to suspend the national debt limit until January 2025. The Extreme Right is not happy, and the Progressive Left is not pleased either, which suggests the bill was probably a reasonable compromise . . . other than the worthless debt limit is retained. I agree with President Biden. The national debt limit is about paying the nation’s debts, i.e., paying for what Congress has already allocated and funded (spent). The annual budget resolution is the proper mechanism for debating appropriation legislation. The Republicans typically do not abide normal or traditional processes; they want what they want and screw everything and everyone else. Regardless of the inappropriateness of Republican conduct and the ridiculousness of the national debt limit, Congress passed the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 [PL 118-xxx; H.R.3746; Senate: 63-36-0-1(0); House: 314-117-0-4(0); 137 Stat. xxx] on an overwhelmingly bipartisan basis in both chambers. Of intriguing interest in this episode. The bill was passed by an overwhelming majority of both political parties. 
House: Republicans – 149-71-0-2; Democrats – 165-46-0-2; and Independents – 0-0-0-0.
Senate: Republicans – 17-31-0-1; Democrats – 44-4-0-2; and Independents – 2-1-0-0

On Saturday, President Biden signed the bill into law with two days whew-space to spare.

There should be no doubt whatsoever, no matter what your political persuasion, that §1 [40 Stat. 288] of the Second Liberty Bond Act of 1917 [PL 65-I-043; 40 Stat. 288; 31 USC §3101; 24.9.1917] must be repealed. That provision of that law has not served its intended purpose for decades. One political party has decided to use the law as a cudgel to extract spending cuts from the favorite programs of the other guys. The law is used to extort spending cuts from the other guys, while they spend without restriction or restraint . . . well because their spending is noble and righteous. The other guys’ spending is frivolous. The law was not intended for extortion. §1 [40 Stat. 288] and must be repealed as soon as possible. We must be done with this political extortion once and for all time.

 

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 339,000 in May. They also revised the March and April employment upward in both months. The unemployment rate ticked up by 0.3. to 3.7% as more Americans returned to the job market. The U.S. inflation rate is currently 4.93%, half of what it was last year. The U.S. economy is doing much better than expected. So, when U.S. Senator Joni Kay Ernst, née Culver, of Iowa publicly states that President Joe Biden is destroying America, she needs to explain what exactly the basis of her complaint is. Virtually every metric of economic health is positive and trending more positive. When fBICP adherents say such baseless misstatements, they lose whatever credibility they might have once had. I understand the fBICP wanting to convince us that everything President Biden is doing is bad, but doing so makes them appear like parochial tribal hacks rather than intelligent representatives of We, the People. They will reap what they sow.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1115:

Comment to the Blog:

“I hope you recover your balance quickly—or already have.

“Tim Scott is black. The Republican base won’t vote for him.

“We’ll see what happens to DeSantis.

“It doesn’t bother Chump if veterans and those of us dependent on Social Security don’t get paid or if the economy crashes.

“I share your loathing of those claiming the conservative label nowadays.”

My response to the Blog:

Thank you for your words. I am back to 100% . . . at least for a nearly 75-year-old man. I am still in the process of catching up from the lost days.

Perhaps. I do not care about his skin pigmentation. His politics are too far to the right for me. He has to say what he did to make it through the fBICP primaries, but those words will haunt him for the general election . . . if he gets that far. He will not be a popular candidate for the white supremacists within the fBICP.

Yes, we will see how this works out. I will not be involved with their rigamarole. They will select who they wish. I will say, Tiny is not campaigning with the vigor he did in 2016. I am left with the impression that he is not serious about re-election. I suspect his campaign is far more about trying to balk the judicial process in his myriad criminal and civil cases.

Spot on, correct! He cares about no one, not even his children. He only cares about himself. But that is not new; he has been that way since Ivanka distanced herself from the fiasco that is her father.

There are more than a few of us, but we must all vote. That list of grievances will continue to grow. Any one of those items is unacceptable to me.

 

My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)