Update no.1142

Update from the Sunland

No.1142

27.11.23 – 3.12.23

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

 

To all,

 

The follow-up news items:

-- A four-judge panel of the First Judicial Department, Appellate Division, Supreme Court of the State of New York, reinstated the gag order issued by Judge Engoron against [the person who shall no longer be named] in the New York civil business fraud case— New York v. Trump, et al [NYSCEF Index No. 452564/2022] [1080]. The appellate judges’ ruling was Case No. 2023-05859; Motion No. 2023-05088, dated: 30.November.2023. Just after the ruling was issued, Judge Engoron publicly stated, “I intend to enforce the gag orders rigorously and vigorously.” The October gag orders cover the judge’s and the court’s staff—not his family. And, surprise, surprise, what does the “Orange Jesus” do? He attacks the judge’s wife with made-up stuff either he created or he found on the World Wide Web, but false nonetheless. Apparently, the judge has scheduled closing arguments and final motions for early January, and indicated he would issue his decision two weeks after that. Whether he will expand the gag orders during the hiatus or enforce the existing gag orders is yet to be seen. Tiny has already been fined twice for a total of US$15,000 (a spit in the ocean for him) so far. 

-- The presiding judge in the federal election interference case—United States v. Trump [USDC DC Case 1:23-cr-00257-TSC (2023)] [1125]—Judge Tanya S. Chutkan dismissed a multi-part motion of dismissal filed by [the person who shall no longer be named]. Judge Chutkan dissected and disproved every element of the former president’s claims in a 48-page ruling. Judge Chutkan noted, “Whatever immunities a sitting President may enjoy, the United States has only one Chief Executive at a time, and that position does not confer a lifelong ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ pass.”  She went on, Tiny “is the only former President in United States history to face criminal charges for acts committed while in office.” (emphasis mine ) “Against the weight of that history, Defendant argues in essence that because no other former Presidents have been criminally prosecuted, it would be unconstitutional to start now. But while a former President’s prosecution is unprecedented, so too are the allegations that a President committed the crimes with which Defendant is charged.” Most importantly, “Defendant’s four-year service as Commander in Chief did not bestow on him the divine right of kings to evade the criminal accountability that governs his fellow citizens. ‘No man in this country,’ not even the former President, ‘is so high that he is above the law.’” Judge Chutkan rejected all of Tiny’s argument; the trial will proceed and is scheduled to begin in January. 

The U.S. Constitution and election law provide for a month after an election for any candidate to contest the results administratively and in court. POTUS45 availed himself fully of those provisions. He lost 61 of 61 court cases and exhausted his legal options. From that point, [the person who shall no longer be named] knowingly entered into illegal, criminal conduct and began interfering with the defined constitutional process that culminated with the forceful insurrection on the 6^th of January, for which he is now criminally charged. He must be held accountable and suffer the consequences of his actions. The bill is due!

 

There has been considerable criticism of Israel’s response to the 7^th October incursion by Hamas from the Gaza Strip, mostly that the Israel Defense Force (IDF) has not conducted a proportional response. One question: what is proportional to murder, butchery, rape, kidnapping, hostage-taking, and indiscriminate area rocket attacks on innocent people?

 

A friend and contributor to this humble forum sent a message:

“Thought something like this may get your mind ticking over again!” with this link:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/tanks-rolling-down-main-street-experts-alarmed-at-trump-s-plans-for-military/ar-AA1kAYtr?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=95b53e9cca4c45d7c0b45c42a8d8da93&ei=53&rc=1, which was the URL for this article:

“‘Tanks rolling down Main Street’': Experts alarmed at Trump's plans for military”

Story by Brad Reed

Microsoft Start

Published: 27.11.2023

 . . . to which I replied:

It is difficult to judge the veracity of that article. However, such an action by [the person who shall no longer be named] is certainly plausible given his past and current public statements, his past conduct, and his blatantly obvious personality flaws. Regardless of his inclinations should he be re-elected, I have more faith in the military establishment. Every officer and especially every flag officer knows the law and the U.S. Constitution. There are always a few exceptions that slip through the filtration process of long service, e.g. Michael Flynn, but most are well grounded in proficiency with constitutional law with respect to the military’s place in American culture. [The person who shall no longer be named] may well attempt invocation of the Insurrection Act [PL 9-II-039; 2 Stat. 443 (3.3.1807)] to override the Posse Comitatus Act {§15 of PL 45-II-263; 20 Stat. 145 (1878)], [20 Stat. 152] [199]}, but I expect he will find considerable resistance from the professional military, even if he was elected and attempted such an action. Contrary to his demented imaginings, he cannot order officers to violate the law and the Constitution.

Based on his past performance with the Justice Department, he may well try to do the same with the Defense Department, i.e., dismiss those who do not comply to his will and shop for a flag officer who will succumb and comply. While such an event would be a major challenge to our republic and representative democracy, I expect our professional military to weather the storm and stand strong in defense of the Constitution.

I hope we never face that trial, but that man’s potential re-election will bring us closer to that challenge—too close for my liking.

“That is just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”

 

Are or should our civil rights be at the mercy of local or state elections? Is it acceptable for our freedoms and liberty to be at the whim of any willful local majority?

GOP candidate Chris Christie said, “We fought for 50 years to put the issue of abortion in the hands of the people.” In other words, let the states decide how they want to deal with abortion. The statement is exactly the problem when politicians improperly frame a referendum question placed before the people. We have seen the exact same phenomenon in multiple social questions—abortion, non-heterosexual relationships, even firearms control, and immigration control. I argue that U.S citizens are Americans first, and then they are residents of states. Thus, individual civil rights should not be parsed by any state.

 

Prior to 2015, I would have said it was highly unlikely that we might ever experience an abandonment of representative democracy like they experienced in 1933 Germany. I am no longer that naïve. The former GOP, fBICP, MAGAts are so desperate to hold onto their dwindling power and influence that they have apparently reconciled themselves with the abandonment of the U.S. Constitution and the implementation of an autocracy (dictatorship) where they control all levels and forms of governance (1933 Germany redux). If we allow it to happen or enable that shift in governance, we will fail in our defense of the centuries of history and the U.S. Constitution.

 

Finally, on the third try, the House of Representative expelled the liar, wannabe conman George Santos (if that is actually his real name) of New York after the House Ethics Committee issued a scathing report on their investigation of the New York representative. Of course, his supporters yammered on about due process and waiting until the felonious criminal trial is decided. The usual suspects of the Freedom Caucus voted against H.Res.878 - Providing for the expulsion of Representative George Santos from the United States House of Representatives [House: 311-114-2-8(0)]. One hundred twelve Republicans including Santos himself and two Democrats voted against the resolution. The threshold for passage was 290 (2/3), so they had a substantial margin this time. Santos left the chamber and Capitol Hill before the vote was concluded. I say good riddance . . . long, long overdue.

The fallacy of the Santos due process argument in this instance is the House of Representatives is not a court of law. Santos was not on trial. In this instance, he was not entitled to the rigors of judicial proceedings in a court of law. He was a representative of the people of the 3^rd District of New York and the House of Representatives. Further, Santos did receive the process due him as a member of that organization. The Ethics Committee clearly and emphatically documented his conduct unbecoming of a member of the House of Representatives. Santos will have his day in court, but not as a member of Congress. And, based on the evidence, I suspect he will be convicted in a court of law in due course and enjoy several years as a guest of the federal government.

 

Henry Alfred Kissinger passed away on Wednesday. He was born in Fürth, Bavaria, Germany, adjacent to Nürnberg, in 1923. He was 10 years old when Hitler became chancellor—old enough to understand what was happening around him. Henry fled Germany with this family ahead of Kristallnacht in 1938, at 14 years of age and became a naturalized citizen of the United States of America in 1943, at 20 years of age. Henry served with the U.S. Army in Europe late in World War II. He rose to national and international prominence when he was chosen by President Richard Nixon to be his national security advisor. Kissinger was very much a product of the man he served as National Security Advisor and Secretary of State—President Nixon. The president gave him the gravitas to voice his views of geopolitics and relations. He had significant accomplishments like the rapproche mal with the People’s Republic of China and the peace negotiations with the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV) to end U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. He shared the 1973 Nobel Peace Prize with his counterpart, Le Duc Tho. For all his accomplishments, he was a very impactful man.

Former U.S. secretary of labor Robert Reich was not impressed by Kissinger’s accomplishments. He wrote an opinion piece:

“Henry Kissinger, 1923-2023. War criminal”

by Robert Reich

Published: Nov 30 [2023]

https://robertreich.substack.com/p/henry-kissinger-1923-2023#:~:text=In%20my%20humble%20opinion%2C%20Kissinger,of%20hundreds%20of%20innocent%20Chileans.

Reich focused on one very controversial event that the right sees as an accomplishment and the left (and I will add here many moderates like me) see as a distinct failure—the instigation of and support for the 11.September.1973 coup d’état in Chile. What the U.S. (and Kissinger) did in that episode was wrong in that they overthrew the will of the people. The genesis of that action goes back decades, and we can argue that examples like Venezuela and Nicaragua tend to validate Kissinger’s counsel in hindsight, but what the U.S. did in Chile joins the Bay of Pigs debacle of mindless anti-Communist actions to which Kissinger was an essential supporter and advocate. Taking that advocacy to the war criminal level is patently wrong. 

Kissinger’s service to the nation along with his boss Nixon paint a very serious and real societal question: Is communism the issue, or the implementation of communism by flawed men the problem? Kissinger and others foretold many evils should Salvador Guillermo Allende Gossens be allowed to continue. The bottom line was that choice was not Kissinger’s or Nixon’s choice to make. What they did was wrong, but war crime . . . no! So many of those similar interventions including Vietnam were wrong. And Henry Kissinger was a little too quick on the trigger for my liking. Chile was an excellent example. In his passing, I would like to have his accomplishments remembered as much as his failures.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1141:

“I wish you a happy holiday season as well. For those who follow nature’s cycles, this is the time between harvest/endings and the Solstice that brings new conception. Unlike the commercial mainstream, it’s a good time to rest ahead of the next cycle.

“The New York Times DealBook column for this morning addresses the economic and political importance of the winter shopping season. I share with my friends who take Christianity seriously a revulsion at that commercial phenomenon. The corporate world uses a very distorted version of a pagan holiday with a Christian label on it to sell us a lot of ‘gifts,’ many of which we’d rather not receive. It’s social psychology in action.”

My response to the Blog:

Excellent words of wise counsel. Thank you.

I certainly understand the significance of the holiday shopping season. We are a consumer culture. Where my understanding butts up against my tolerance is the commercialization of important holidays, especially Christmas, but every holiday is affected (or perhaps I should say ‘infected’.) Social psychology in action . . . indeed!

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)