So Future Ex-President Through Impeachment Donald Trump recently declared on Twitter that there should be punishments for flag burning. Perhaps losing your citizenship or spending a year in jail.
The question is not, “Why is he attacking the First Amendment?” The question is not, “Doesn’t he know the Supreme Court has already upheld this right?”
No, the question is, “What is he trying to distract from now?” Because that’s what he has done and always does. When something is coming up or has even arrived that is potentially embarrassing/criminal/destructive, he says something remarkably stupid and inane and the news cycle immediately zeroes in on that and overlooks the more important stuff.
At this point, I’m losing track. What’s the criminal thing that was just revealed that he’s trying to distract from this time?
PAD
• 
Consensus seems to be a WSJ piece about his son-in-law’s various business entanglements that would be conflicts of interest if he served any position in the administration, as he seems to be set on doing.
A typical liberal media hack job!
Honestly? I don’t think he’s trying to distract us from anything.
.
The WSJ thing on his son may be a contender, but I honestly think it’s more likely he needs a quick ego stroke. So he said something he may or may not actually believe but that he knows the truly stupid will cheer him for. He’s not in this to be a leader or to do good for the country, he’s in this for ego fixes. Look at his planned “Victory Tour” where he’s going to go out and tell people to let him know how great he is. For him, adulation on Twitter is likely more important than actually doing anything as President or hiding things like the WSJ piece.
.
Although, if it does both I’m sure he won’t mind.
Trump was just echoing the Flag Protection Bill of 2005, which proposed one year in prison and a $100,000 fine for burning the American flag.
Sponsored by Bob Bennett and Hillary Clinton.
You know what’s amazing? When the GOP acts like dìçkš, their supporters declare, “Well the Democrats did it too!” But when the Democrats act like dìçkš, the GOP’s amazing short-term memory always kicks in and they forget every dumb ášš thing they’ve done that was similar to it. Or deny it. Or say that the Democrats are supposed to act better. “Yes, sure, we spent eight years declaring Obama wasn’t our president and wasn’t even American, but now everyone should immediately accept Trump and stop protesting or questioning it because you’re supposed to be better than us.” Funny that.
PAD
You know what’s more amazing? That a writer as infamous as you are for word games and puns and shaggy-dog tales (“One-eyed, one-horned, flying purple eater” ring a bell?) and other flights of whimsy doesn’t get that Trump was likely amusing himself by trolling a little.
As far as the hysteria… Obama was and is my president. He was without my support, but he won legally. Of all the things I have ever challenged about him, I never questioned his citizenship or his election. Intelligence, competence, integrity, class, and a host of other things, yes — but not those two. Find another straw man to beat up.
BTW, did you miss the revelations that Hillary and the GOP not only rigged the Democratic primaries, but they actually paid instigators to go to Trump events, pretend to be Bernie supporters, and try to start trouble? Look up political consultant, Congressional spouse, frequent White House guest, and convicted felon Robert Creamer. He was a very busy boy, doing the Democrats’ bidding to help Trump get the nomination.
Sorry, I stopped reading after the first paragraph because I am sick to God of Trump apologists and their idiotic “He didn’t mean it seriously” defense. Get this through your block heads: WHEN THE PRESIDENT SAYS IT, IT’S SERIOUS. Everything a president says is scrutinized and analyzed and taken VERY seriously, and if Trump cannot get his mouth under control, he can destroy this country.
“When the President says it, it’s serious!”
.
You mean like that time Reagan, unawares the microphone was on, stated that a pre-emptive strike had just been launched at the Russians?
.
I do not believe in evolution any more. Every time I turn around I see signs that humans are DEvolving.
“You mean like that time Reagan, unawares the microphone was on, stated that a pre-emptive strike had just been launched at the Russians?”
.
I think we all know there’s a difference between someone joking about a preemptive strike while unaware that their comments were going public and someone taking the time to form a though, express that thought into words, and put it out for public consumption on their preferred media platform for communicating to supporters.
.
Seriously, the two don’t compare.
.
Anyone else notice how the talking point is that Trump is a man of his word, he means what he says, he says what he means, etc., but half the time when he says something mind bogglingly stupid it’s sometimes called “just a joke” or compared to others joking about something?
“Anyone else notice how the talking point is that Trump is a man of his word, he means what he says, he says what he means, etc., but half the time when he says something mind bogglingly stupid it’s sometimes called “just a joke” or compared to others joking about something?”
.
Noticed and have mocked for months.
Hillary proposed something fairly similar in 2005, which-judging by your attitude-would’ve been considered a fine stroke of honest Americanism that you would be applauding, were only the “R” a Politically Correct, “D”.
And man, keep singing the song of “Ex-President” and “Impeached” and he stays in Office longer. Hëll, he hasn’t even been Sworn in yet and you’re dismissing him.
Makes me wonder if he does something that is resoundingly amazing for America, if you could even muster up the courage to give him an attaboy. Somehow, I’m in doubt about that.
That’s a remarkably stupid post, but I’m happy to attribute it to the notion that you’re ignorant.
I don’t recall hearing about the bill that Clinton co-sponsored back in 2005, but if I had, I would have condemned it just as loudly and forcefully because, unlike many Trumpites, I’m not inclined to give those of my own party a free pass when they say or do something stupid. Indeed, I have often condemned the left for being just as eager if not more so to censor than the right; just for different reasons. The right declares, “I want to censor this because I’m offended!” whereas the left typically says, “I want to censor this because I am concerned someone else might be offended!” Which is typically a lie but it makes the left self-righteous.
And I’m not dismissing him; I’m predicting him. From articles I’ve read, his conflicts of interest already have reached impeachment level and he isn’t even sworn in. Of course the problem with impeaching him is that it leaves us with Pence, who is as bad if not worse.
As for what you wonder: if he does something amazing for America, I will be thrilled. But I suspect his definition of amazing and mine are poles apart.
PAD
If only the Megalomaniac Man-Child wasn’t doing a fine job of making Nixon look like a paragon of justice, and he hasn’t even taken the office he doesn’t actually want yet.
Okay, who had four posts in the pool of when someone would come along and parrot the latest half truth (see- lie) spin from the rightwing blogosphere that this is just no different than Hillary’s silliness ten+ years ago? You’re prize is at the door. Good luck finding the door.
.
Look, I’m more than happy to criticize Hillary for the actions she once wrongly took. I did it at the time after all.
.
It wasn’t the same. Granted, once passed- had it been passed -there would have been
likely been abuses that would have taken that law to the Supreme Court and seen it overturned , but t hat’s just one reason why I opposed it back then.
.
But there was a clear difference in the bill Hillary sponsored. It was targeted to “flag desecration” acts related only where ” the primary purpose and intent to incite or produce imminent violence or a breach of the peace; or (2) stealing or knowingly converting the use of a U.S. flag either belonging to the United States or on lands reserved for the United States and intentionally destroying or damaging that flag.”
.
It was also proposed as a counter to the Republican pushed for amendment to the Constitution. She recognized the Supreme Court ruling (that Trump likely isn’t informed enough to even know about) and the bill was not targeted to acts of protest.
.
So simple protest was still intended to have been protected whether or not practical implementation if the law would have actually done so, and Hillary never advocated revoking the citizenship of Americans f or doing something so minor and trivial just because she disagreed with.
.
There are surface similarities, but they do not directly compare. Hillary’s act was
one of foolishness- believing the overly convoluted, over lawyerly concept of targeted prohibition would both work and not be abused when it came to simple protest -and shortsightedness. Trump’s statement shows a complete lack of understanding in what has come before, the Supreme Court ruling, how that impacts law and what can be made law, and our basic Constitutional freedoms. One wonders, and not for the first time, if he’s ever actually seen the Constitution, let alone read it.
.
Plus, again, no one advocating either that bill or the Constitutional amendment they were hoping to put off with it proposed revocation of citizenship. The idea of doing so- especially with a dumb schmuck high school or college kid -over something as truly inconsequential as setting fire to a piece of cloth you bought, paid for, and own is beyond politically vulgar
. One is the act of someone who naively believed they could have it both ways, who likely believed themselves more clever than they were or are. One is the suggestion by someone who shares the worldview of bullies and dictatorships.
.
I disagree with the act of flag burning as act of protest. I find it personally offensive and I think it makes the person doing it look foolish. But I also understand that the flag is nothing more than a piece of cloth, that it is nothing compared to some of the ideals it should represent (like freedom of speech and expression) with its existence, and that once bought, the flag in question belongs to the person who purchased it. It’s their property. They can do with it as they please. More importantly, I will defend the right of expression by an individual even if I disagree with it. I will call them out on it and voice my disagreement with it, but the right to express their point of view is something I stand behind.
.
Trump is certainly free to continue his habit of a lifetime by praising dictatorships and their mistreatment or their own people as “strength” all he wants. He is even free to express the opinions that we should be more like them with vulgar stupidity like revoking citizenship for burning bits of fabric. He is not free to actually make us more like them.
I think flag burning is almost always counter-productive as a protest. People have such a strong negative reaction to the act that they never hear the message that the protesters are trying to send.
As I said above, I think it makes the people doing it look stupid.
.
I will still defend their right to express themselves that way. It harms no one, and it only damages property they the,selves bought and paid for.
I agree, actually. I think the action so pìššëš øff observers that it distracts from the point you’re trying to make. But as annoying and ineffective a means of protesting as it is, we have to defend peoples’ right to employ it.
Eh, all of our flags are made in China (along with dámņ near everything else) anyway.
I’m not in favor of outlawing flag burning. I just think it’s a poor choice for protesting.
I love seeing people burn the flag. Just like I love seeing neo-Nazis and Klansmen march.
It’s wonderful when the a-holes make it so easy to identify them. I worry about the sneaky ones.
I love seeing people who didn’t realize what a staggeringly foolish thing they were saying try to deflect when they go back to look at the angry responses and suddenly realize how staggeringly foolish they actually looked.
As do I. Fortunately you’ve identified yourself in the past quite thoroughly.
“The Flag” is not – despite what some people who confuse symbol with actuality believe – sacred.
.
“A flag”, OTOH, may be – but that is because of the actions of men who bore them.
.
Right offhand i can think of the French flag that (metaphorically, anyway) flew over the farmhouse at Camarón, in 1863…
Maybe he’s trying to distract people away from his nominating Tom Price as HHS Secretary. Price wants to repeal Obamacare & privatize Medicare, which doesn’t make him popular in my household, anyway.
I’ve wanted Price to stop being my Rep for a decade or more. But this is worse. (Even worse, rumor is that his wife will be appointed to the vacancy. She’s worse than he is.)
Yeah. Makes me ashamed to be from Georgia.
.
At least we got rid of Broun… (His latest run was from my district, too.)
I think it’s because people aren’t really talking about *him* right now. His cabinet picks are getting all the attention. His deplorable supporters are getting the headlines for acting like deplorables. He wants all eyes on himself again, and always.
And his cabinet picks will be happy much of the time to not be noticed…won’t they?
Maybe he’s trying to distract everyone from the fact that while Trump says he wants to be the president for all Americans, so far his potential cabinet seems almost entirely composed of white men, caucasian males, and people with pinkish skin who aren’t female.
I doubt the gender or race is what he’s distracting from at all. It’s more what they are beyond that. If we’re going along with the idea of this being done to distract, look at the timing of this tweet to his latest pick.
.
On the campaign trail, Donald Trump had no apparent love for financial industry giants Goldman Sachs. He them in particular like a boogeyman, first tarring and killing Cruz over his connections to them and later suggesting that Hillary would somehow give them access to her administration and playing up how evil and bad that would be. He also threw around a lot of talk about evil hedge fund managers, lobbyists, and Wall Street special interest types, etc.
.
Trump has now turned to his campaign finance chairman to take the position of Treasury Secretary- a man who is all of the above. That would be Steven Mnuchin, a former partner for Goldman Sachs for 17 years. He’s a man who was a part of that Trump condemned “elite” and “establishment machine” during the fiscal collapse of 2008, was a part of the “foreclosure machine” that helped ruin lives, and who has pushed for greater loosening of the regulations that are designed to prevent such issues again.
.
He started saying he’d drain the swamp to great cheers from the masses who couldn’t bother to look past his rhetoric, but he’s just adding more lobbyists and insiders to fill up the swamp even more. I wonder how long it will take for the various Trump supporters to realize that when PT Barnum supposedly said there’s a sucker born every minute, he was talking about them?
James,
Just wondering how it feels to be so Racist? How much are you able to get done each day while constantly running everything through your “Is it Racist to me?” Filter?
And how many [Insert the proper number of OTW Cabinet Candidates], does it take to effectively satiate that “Since I’ve said it this way, I’m not a Racist” feeling for you?
I want the best candidates for these jobs, regardless of Race, color, gender and you should too. Putting people in jobs JUST BECAUSE they fit some ethereal definition of “Diversity” is just plain idiotic.
If you ran a business, you wouldn’t put unqualified people in key positions to run your company just so someone couldn’t call you some trendy version of an “ist”. You’d be closed up in weeks.
My recommendation is, if you don’t dig the way TRUMP is running It, the door is wide open for you in four years. Go for it and if you win, we can micro-manage your picks.
You know, it’s not often you run into someone with such an apt surname.
PAD
So basically the same as pretty much every cabinet in history?
Peter, do you ever watch the Young Turks or the Real News? They are great alternatives to the corporate media. They are really great at interrogating what those with power say. Second, I have written a letter to the X-editors that I would like to share with you. (You are mentioned.) Is there any way for my to e-mail it to you? I ask because it doesn’t seem to fit into any of discussions here. Thanks.
Nope. Never seen them. As for Rahne and Doug, if the characters had ever overlapped in X-Factor I definitely would have done that story.
PAD
What is he distracting from? It’s not just Trump. His whole campaign was intended not so much to get him, or even a Republican, into the White House, nor even to hold on to let alone make gains in their Senate and House majorities, nor even to get to appoint the next several Supreme Court justices. Those are all gravy, and will be moot in less than three years when they finally get to accomplish their real goal. It’s the most serious danger our Constitutional republic has ever faced (yes, worse even than the Civil War), and it’s imminent. I frankly don’t see them being thwarted in this. It would take a massive effort and cooperation among all the disparate parties that oppose them for whatever reasons, putting aside their own differences, and they have less than two years to do it.
I speak of a fatal flaw in the Constitution that is finally about to be exploited: Article V’s lesser known clause.
Article V is the Article which allows for the Constitution to be amended. Many people are familiar with the primary method: Congress votes on proposed Amendments, and with a ⅔ supermajority in each chamber (separate supermajorities in both the House and Senate, same as for overriding a Presidential veto), the Amendment then gets sent to the states for ratification, which takes ¾ of the state legislatures to vote to ratify it.
But there’s another way to submit Amendments to the states for ratification — a way that completely bypasses the entire Federal government. A ⅔ supermajority of the state legislatures can vote to call a Convention of the States. They can then propose any Amendments they want, with Congress, the President, even SCOTUS, having no say whatsoever. Again, those Amendments would have to be ratified by ¾ of the states to take effect.
Now here’s the danger: while we’ve been concentrating on the Presidency and hoping to take back the Senate so that we can get a majority on the Supreme Court, as well as maybe reducing the House GOP majority, the Republicans since Obama took office have been focusing on state legislatures. Since the 1970s, the Democrats held a varying but usually small majority of state legislatures, with one brief slight GOP majority in the 1980s.
But suddenly, in 2010, the GOP gained full majority control of both chambers of eleven states that they did not have before. Samantha Bee did an excellent two-part series on the consequences of that election (which went that way because Democrats haven’t been voting in midterms — Republicans have been convinced that it’s a religious duty to God Himself to vote straight Republican in every election), but even she missed the really big threat,
In 2014, the GOP gained a few more state legislatures (both chambers of each), and now, as of 2016, they have 33 (counting Nebraska which is unicameral and technically non-partisan but which is in practice Republican by about a 35–13 margin). What is ⅔ of 50 states? 33⅓. Of course, any fractions have to be rounded up, which is the only reason we have any time and any chance at all of averting this disaster. They need to gain just one more state — heck, just one more chamber in a currently divided state — in 2018. Then they can call the Convention, even if every non-Republican elected or appointed official at all levels of government, from President and SCOTUS down to some small town low-level official, opposes it!
Now, they probably won’t do it with just 34. They’ll wait for the ¾ supermajority for guaranteed ratification of whatever horrors they propose. But ¾ of 50 is 37½ which rounds up to 38. They only need five more states than they have now to do that! And remember, they gained over twice that many in 2010 alone!
If Democrats stay home again, if the Greens or Socialists or other left-wing parties run candidates in opposition to the Democrats, or if more than one Democrat runs, or if a Republican runs unopposed, for seats on any of several state legislatures, plus the existing minority voter suppression (thanks to SCOTUS gutting the VRA), allows them to gain just five more state legislatures, that’s it for freedom in the USA, forever!
It wouldn’t matter, from then on, who the President is or who controls the Senate or House or even who sits on the Supreme Court. All of them swear to uphold the Constitution, and the Constitution is perilously close to being utterly rewritten according to the wildest dreams (everyone else’s nightmares) of the corporatist fascist smart-ALECs in unholy union with the Dominionist Dispensationalist Christianis Christocrats. Permanently and irrevocably.
No matter how much the demographics change in the future, the pendulum will be welded in place at the far right end of its swing. The nation could turn fluorescent cobalt blue and it wouldn’t help. You can bet that the very Article V that allows them to do this will be one of the first things to be altered or even repealed, to prevent their “great Godly” achievement from ever being undone.
The futures of every child alive today or that will ever be born in this nation for as long as it continues to exist, will be destroyed. The great achievements of the Founders and Framers and the heroes of our nation that pledged and all too often gave their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor, will all be for naught.
We have only two years to prevent this. Heaven help us if California or Oregon or some other “blue” state manages to make good on its threats to secede. The GOP in Congress would probably let them, because then we’d only have 49 states, and a ⅔ supermajority of that is only 32⅔ which means they wouldn’t have to wait until after 2018 to call the Convention if they so choose. If several such states secede (leaving us with 44 or fewer), they can guarantee ratification.
Argh! I forgot to include non-breaking spaces between each paragraph! Please, somebody with power in this site, fix the style.css file! Or switch to a better theme.
Do you have any indication or proof that this plan is in the works?
PAD
I used to, when I had more free time than I do these days, hang out in several right-wing forums (using Disqus or WordPress for commenting) from time to time. Holding an Article V Convention of the States was a very popular topic on these. Even in otherwise unrelated threads, often someone would bring it up, and it taking over much of the discussion.
There are elements among the Dominionist Christianists who, despite public proclamations to the contrary about how oh-so-Christian this nation and the Founders and Framers and Constitution are, recognize that the Constitution is not explicitly Christian in nature, and that it should be amended to bring it in line with their views of what “Christianity” (their extremist version of Dispensationalism [what many people think of as “born-again” or “just plain” evangelical “Protestant” “Christianity,” but it isn’t], itself a nineteenth century cult of Christianity that not a single one of the Framers, let alone Founders, adhered to, since it hadn’t even been invented yet [same way we know for a fact that none of them were Mormons or Jehovah’s Witnesses or Heaven’s Gate] — its founder, John Nelson Darby, wasn’t even born until December, 1800, well after even the Bill of Rights in 1791, let alone the Constitution in 1787, let alone the Declaration in 1776 [he’d’ve had to’ve been really precocious for his writings to have influenced the Framers when he was a minimum of negative nine years old!]). Even former Governor of Arkansas and twice failed candidate for President of the United States, Mike Huckabee, has stated this in public and on video.
There are influential Dominionists who are at least honest about this and make no bones about the fact that they want the Constitution outright repealed and replaced with “Bible Law.”
One of them is Dennis Oliver Woods, founder and headmaster of the very Dominionist Christianist King’s Way Classical Academy (whose motto / slogan is, “Discipling the Nations, One Student at a Time”) and former paid consultant to the Oregon State GOP, used to run a website called “America Betrayed 1787” (← that link goes to an Internet Wayback Machine archive of the site from May 10, 2012). Gee, what might have happened in 1787 that might be considered a betrayal of America?
Another is evangelist Ted R. Weiland, founder of the so-called “Mission to Israel” (which is not about the nation of Israel in the Middle East, but about the Brit-Am hypothesis that posits that Europeans, including Britons, are descendants of the Lost Ten Tribes [DNA demolishes this, of course] and are thus the “True Israel”). He wrote a full-fledged book on the subject, Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective (link goes to his website about the book [which includes the full text of the book as well as a proposed prototypical replacement “Biblical Constitution” for the USA as well as a petition of repentant apology to the Lᴏʀᴅ for His forgiveness daring to have this seditious Constitution in place of His altogether righteous triune commandments, statutes, and judgments], but it’s also available via Amazon and other sources). Like Woods, Weiland makes the case that the Framers of the Constitution, but also the Founders, included many Masonic and otherwise “pagan,” atheistic, or otherwise “Satanic” men, who held sway over the few good righteous Christians like John Jay and Patrick Henry.
Now, granted, these particular guys are extremists, but not all that much more so than the Dominionist leadership.
There’s a lot more I could show you.
I posted a lengthy reply with lots of links, and it went into moderation. Please check your WordPress comment moderation queue.
One thing I forgot to put in that one the fact that a simulated Convention of States has already been held, September 21–23, 2016, in Colonial Williamsburg, with 137 state legislators. This was done for practice and to try to assuage fears that such a convention could run amock.
I’d like to post a link to the website about this, but I don’t want this comment to go into moderation also and I’m not sure what the limit is.
Okay. That is grounds for Worry and Action.
I’ve shared this with a few people already, and now I found this: https://www.yahoo.com/news/republican-success-opens-door-amending-us-constitution-165446908.html
If I had to guess, he put the idea of flag burning out there to encourage opponents to burn flags at his spike the ball Victory Tour.
Then he will say something to the crowds that will go like “We came here to celebrate democracy and our opponents respond by showing their hatred of America by burning the flag! Sad! Sad.”
Too obvious by half, I think, though who knows?
Obvious solution suggested by someone on FARK: don’t burn the U.S. flag.
Burn the Conferderate flag instead. And/or the Gadsden Flag (“Don’t Tread On Me!” — a historically valid flag which has unfortunately been co-opted by the Teabaggers¹). And, of course, the TrumpPence flag.
Recount and talk of Electors rebelling. That’s my guess. Though I don’t think it’s so much distraction (I think that’s an unintended consequence) as trying to convince as many Republican Electors as possible to not go rogue and cast an Electoral College vote for Hillary.
Hey, I just had this thought the other day. Remember Lloyd Bridges’ character in the movie Airplane? He makes little comments throughout the movie like, “I guess I picked the wrong day to quit smoking!” as he lights up. With every day of the pre-Trump Presidency and I’m sure into his first term and some outrageous piece of news comes out about him (like angering China), I channel Lloyd Bridges’ character and appropriate his line, “Well, I guess I picked the wrong year to stop snorting coke!”
Yeah, he’s President Beeblebrox, for sur
I have not visited your site in a while. I see you are not a Trump fan. Neither am I. You are still one of my favorite authors, but I could not vote for Clinton. I just have to hope for the best. I have not had a president for the last 8 years. I am not black, I am not Muslim. I do not support the radical elimination of our countries values. As far as Clinton goes, I do not support a lying witch who sold access to the State Dept., next the White House itself would be up for the highest contributor to the phony clinton foundation. The Clinton’s have been involved in nothing but scandals since the first White Water scandal in which Hillary was fired for lying and unethical behavior. Her behavior has never changed. She finds it so funny that she got a man off on all charges after he beat a 12 yr old girl unconscious before raping her she was wiping tears from her eyes because she was laughing so hard. (This is while saying “and I knew he was guilty”!!!) She stole over $190,000 dollars in furniture and paintings from the White House when leaving in 2001, on top of causing more than $14,000 in damage and vandalism to the computers in said building. She verbally attacked Billy Bob’s sexual assault victims. She physically destroyed cell phones had laptops with a hammer to keep evidence from the people seeking evidence about her personal server. I could easily keep going, there have been more than 22 scandals she created over the last 40 years. She still supports the Obamination’s Health care law, And I quote “You can keep your providers and current plan, and it will be affordable”!!! The rate for premiums are going up by double digits(25% – 53% dependeing on where you live) everywhere, again!!! The Obama Admin. has pumped millions into the exchanges every year since its inception. Even Billy Bob said it is the craziest thing he has ever seen.