Sign in to follow this  
deicer

Trump 2.0 Continues

Recommended Posts

This can only be good news for American farmers..... Donnie said so!

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-agriculture/china-approves-wheat-soy-imports-from-russia-idUSKCN1UL275

BEIJING (Reuters) - China has approved wheat imports from the Russian region of Kurgan, the Chinese customs office said on Friday, bringing Russia a step closer to its goal of dramatically increasing grain exports.

It also approved soybean imports from all parts of Russia, the General Administration of Customs said in a separate statement on its website, having all but halted U.S. soy imports as the trade dispute between Beijing and Washington deepened.

China was the top buyer of U.S. soybeans until Beijing slapped a 25% tariff on shipments last year in response to U.S. tariffs on a range of Chinese products.

 

Russia, already the world’s top wheat exporter, plans to invest billions of dollars in grain infrastructure and logistics with the aim of raising its exports of the commodity to at least 55.9 million tonnes by 2035.

The figure, outlined in a 2035 strategy published by Russia’s agriculture ministry earlier this month, could be as high as 63.6 million tonnes, its “optimistic scenario” forecasts showed.

This year, Russia is expected to export 41.9 million tonnes of grain, including 31.4 million tonnes of wheat, according to SovEcon, one of Russia’s leading agriculture consultancies.

Russian grain supplies could play a key role in President Vladimir Putin’s plan, announced a year ago, to increase the country’s exports of agricultural products to $45 billion by 2024. The agriculture ministry is in charge of that initiative.

China is already importing wheat from six other Russian regions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, deicer said:

Photo from the El Paso shooter's twitter page.  This is what is encouraged.

 

Trump.jpg

 

All sides of the political spectrum have nut cases.

 

“The Dayton Shooter Was A Satanist, Leftist-Socialist, And Bernie/Warren Fan, Supported Antifa”

This is probably something CNN won’t be sharing with its audience, but there’s some pretty striking news on the shooter who perpetrated the Dayton, OH shooting, which followed an equally tragic shooting in El Paso, TX by what appears to be a white supremacist.

Heavy.com got access to the shooter’s social media. Contrary to the media narrative currently boiling over, this shooter was not a Trump fan. In fact, he hated Trump, hated Republicans, was an avowed leftist, used antifa style language in his posts, and loved Elizabeth Warren.

Here’s some of what was found.

Bett’s Twitter profile read, “he/him / anime fan / metalhead / leftist / i’m going to hell and i’m not coming back.” One tweet on his page read, “Off to Midnight Mass. At least the songs are good. #athiestsonchristmas.” The page handle? I am the spookster. On one selfie, he included the hashtags, “#selfie4satan #HailSatan @SatanTweeting.” On the date of Republican Sen. John McCain’s death, he wrote, “F*ck John McCain.”

On Nov. 2, 2018, he wrote: “Vote blue for gods sake.”

Ironically, he was even a rabid supporter of gun control, using it to levy attacks against Republicans.

“This is America: Guns on every corner, guns in every house, no freedom but that to kill,” he wrote in December 2018. And, “’Tis! The pistol is a Beretta 93R, called the REK7 in BO4. Do love me some guns!” He also wrote, “Hammer, brick, gun.” On Feb. 14, 2018, he tweeted this at Sen. Rob Portman: “@robportman hey rob. How much did they pay you to look the other way? 17 kids are dead. If not now, when?” That was the date of the mass shooting at a school in Parkland, Florida…

He used language often used by Antifa, exclaiming that he wants to “kill every fascist.” He also liked and commented on posts expressing support for the group.

“#2016ElectionIn3Words This is bad,” he wrote on Nov. 8, 2016. “You can’t kill 50+ people and injure 600(!) In 10 minutes with cigarettes my dude,” he wrote in 2017. In response to a Buzzfeed story that read, “Virginia has declared a state of emergency in anticipation of the “Unite the Right” rally anniversary in Charlottesville this weekend,” he wrote: “Kill every fascist.”

Betts was a politically active socialist who supported Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.

On the Twitter page, Connor Betts indicated he’d vote for Elizabeth Warren for president but not Kamala Harris, responding to a person’s tweet suggesting they be co-presidents. “Nahh, but only cuz Harris is a cop – Warren I’d happily vote for,” he wrote.

betts34.jpg?quality=65&strip=all&w=541&h

He responded to a person’s tweet that read “if you nominate anyone other than sanders, you’re going to lose” by writing, “I think Warren has a decent shot, as well.” Some of his tweets referred to guns.

He was a fan of “The Squad,” Including Rep. Ocasio Cortez and Rep. Omar.

He shared an article that criticized Democratic leaders like Nancy Pelosi for not supporting Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, and Ayanna Pressley. “Read it,” he wrote. He shared posts about “concentration camps” at the border and wrote, “Cut the fences down. Slice ICE tires. Throw bolt cutters over the fences.”

He retweeted a post from another person about stealing from “right wingers” at a Trump rally.

This all leaves very little question about who Betts really was. He was absolutely a far leftist. He was not a white supremacist and hated religious people. He repeated antifa, as well as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez talking points on his social media. He was a global warming enthusiast and an avowed socialist. Every piece of evidence we have points to his radicalization coming via the left, not the right.

https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2019/08/04/dayton-shooter-leftist-elizabeth-warren-fan/

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is he not complying? Something to hide or?

Trump, Republican Party sue California over tax return law

The Trump campaign and the U.S. Republican Party sued California on Tuesday over a new law requiring presidential candidates to release their tax returns to run in the state's primary, legislation that was aimed at prying loose President Donald Trump's returns.

New law requires presidential candidates to release tax returns to run in state primary

The Associated Press · Posted: Aug 06, 2019 3:13 PM ET | Last Updated: 8 hours ago
The Trump campaign and the Republican Party are fighting back against a California law that would require presidential candidates to disclose their state tax returns. Two lawsuits were filed against the state on Tuesday. (Susan Walsh/The Associated Press)
Trump campaign and the U.S. Republican Party sued California on Tuesday over a new law requiring presidential candidates to release their tax returns to run in the state's primary, legislation that was aimed at prying loose President Donald Trump's returns.
 

California's law is "a naked political attack against the sitting president of the United States," the state and national Republican parties argued in one of two lawsuits filed in U.S. District Court in Sacramento, Calif.

The law signed last week by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom requires candidates for president and governor to release five years of tax returns to appear on the state's primary ballot, but the requirement does not extend to the general election. Trump has refused to release his tax returns, saying they are under audit.

The lawsuits argue the law violates the U.S. Constitution by creating an extra requirement to run for president and deprives citizens the right to vote for their chosen candidates. The Constitution puts just three requirements on presidential candidates: that they are natural born citizens, 35 or older and a U.S. resident for at least 14 years.

California is the first state to pass such a law, though many others under Democratic control have tried since Trump took office.

California is scheduled to hold its 2020 presidential primary on March 3. Without a serious Republican competitor, Trump would likely be able to forgo the state's primary and still win the nomination.

But the parties' lawsuit argues it will "directly impede" Trump's ability to secure the nomination. California provides 14 per cent of the delegates needed to win the party's nomination, the lawsuit says.

Trump's lawyer, Jay Sekulow, called the law "flagrantly illegal," and said voters already spoke in 2016 on whether Trump should release his tax returns.

"The effort to deny California voters the opportunity to cast a ballot for President Trump in 2020 will clearly fail," Sekulow said in a statement.

Dozens of lawsuits

It's the latest legal battle between the Trump administration and California, which has sued the federal government more than 50 times since Trump took office.

Tax returns reveal sources of income, charitable giving, business dealings and other information that Democrats in the state legislature say is essential for voters. Every president has released his or her tax returns since the early 1970s.

"There's an easy fix Mr. President — release your returns as you promised during the campaign and follow the precedent of every president since 1973," Newsom tweeted.

The Trump campaign, meanwhile, argued in its suit that Democrats are "on a crusade to obtain the president's federal tax returns in the hopes of finding something they can use to harm him politically."

The U.S. Supreme Court has previously halted state efforts to add ballot access rules for congressional candidates. Former governor Jerry Brown, also a Democrat, vetoed a similar law two years ago, arguing it would create a slippery slope of trying to force candidates to release additional information to run for president.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Marshall said:

Why is he not complying?

A State law trampling into Federal territory?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Fido said:

A State law trampling into Federal territory?

Not at all.  It is the State that sets the rules for their federal elections and they are well within their rights.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_United_States

Elections in the United States are held for government officials at the federal, state, and local levels. At the federal level, the nation's head of state, the president, is elected indirectly by the people of each state, through an Electoral College. Today, these electors almost always vote with the popular vote of their state. All members of the federal legislature, the Congress, are directly elected by the people of each state.

While the United States Constitution does set parameters for the election of federal officials, state law, not federal, regulates most aspects of elections in the U.S., including primaries, the eligibility of voters (beyond the basic constitutional definition), the running of each state's electoral college, as well as the running of state and local elections. All elections—federal, state, and local—are administered by the individual states.[2]

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, deicer said:

bible says.jpg

If you have not, then I suggest you read the "Old Testament"  as to what the bible says.  Of course it also depends on which version of a bible you read, there is not exactly one (IMO)  that could / should be called "The Bible".  Here is an article you might want to read:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/jun/29/a-history-of-the-bible-by-john-barton-review

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's going on in California right now isn't helping the poor it's manufacturing them. It isn't welcoming foreigners either it's ghettoizing them.

In my view, this qualifies as a vulgar and hypocritical form of racism for a sanctuary state full of sanctuary cities which are, in turn, full of sanctimonious liberals. So raise taxes and pay your bills.... while you are at it, tell me what the bible has to say about hypocrites. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Marshall said:

If you have not, then I suggest you read the "Old Testament"  as to what the bible says.  Of course it also depends on which version of a bible you read, there is not exactly one (IMO)  that could / should be called "The Bible".  Here is an article you might want to read:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/jun/29/a-history-of-the-bible-by-john-barton-review

Has nothing to do with the bible, it's about those who profess to be Christian.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, deicer said:

Has nothing to do with the bible, it's about those who profess to be Christian.....

If so, how come the lead sentence in the cartoon you posted says and I quote "So if the bible says".   ??????????????????????????????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Marshall said:

If so, how come the lead sentence in the cartoon you posted says and I quote "So if the bible says".   ??????????????????????????????

Ask the Trump followers, they're the ones supposedly following the bible  😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, deicer said:

Ask the Trump followers, they're the ones supposedly following the bible  😉

No, you are the one who posted it and then said it has nothing to do with the bible.  Perhaps caused by an ailment common to Trudeau and Trump but catching?😀

image.jpeg.e8a6c9014947d388affb40b9e5602766.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice try.

It is the Christian Evangelicals who are big right wing supporters, of which I am definitely not.

But if you're looking to try and trip me, try again.

Peruse these and then tell me how Trump and his acolytes follow it.....

https://www.openbible.info/topics/helping_the_poor

https://www.openbible.info/topics/foreigners

https://www.openbible.info/topics/healing_the_sick

And these especially for Trump...

https://www.openbible.info/topics/committing_adultery

I guess he shouldn't grab 'em by the pussy?

https://www.openbible.info/topics/lying

Pretty much everything that comes out of his phone/mouth.

https://www.openbible.info/topics/stealing

Can anyone say Trump University?

So in conclusion, it is a meme to highlight the two faced nature of the right wing supporters of Trump, and nothing  to do about what I said about it.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, deicer said:

Nice try.

It is the Christian Evangelicals who are big right wing supporters, of which I am definitely not.

But if you're looking to try and trip me, try again.

Peruse these and then tell me how Trump and his acolytes follow it.....

https://www.openbible.info/topics/helping_the_poor

https://www.openbible.info/topics/foreigners

https://www.openbible.info/topics/healing_the_sick

And these especially for Trump...

https://www.openbible.info/topics/committing_adultery

I guess he shouldn't grab 'em by the pussy?

https://www.openbible.info/topics/lying

Pretty much everything that comes out of his phone/mouth.

https://www.openbible.info/topics/stealing

Can anyone say Trump University?

So in conclusion, it is a meme to highlight the two faced nature of the right wing supporters of Trump, and nothing  to do about what I said about it.  

 

My point was not about what Trump etc. do or believe but rather your post re the Bible. You are tripping yourself. 😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Marshall said:

My point was not about what Trump etc. do or believe but rather your post re the Bible. You are tripping yourself. 😀

You are doing a typical conservative move which is to make it about me rather than the issue at hand.  Congrats.

Thank you for proving that much like most conservative arguments you have nothing to disprove or contribute to the discussion put forth, so you have to deflect.

Getting back to the discussion, isn't that against Christian mores, much like most things Trump and his followers profess?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Canadian, Trump has had more of an effect on our economy and culture than Trudeau.

Canada as a whole is doing fine, until it's affected by the tweets and tariffs from south of the border.

So as a Canadian, the more we can fight against that kind of ignorance, the better off our country will be.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't help but wonder if you are fighting against the wrong brand of ignorance. This is a slow motion train wreck and I'm actually grateful I have the ability to watch play out in real time.... I would hate to have missed it. The crazy left has produced more conservatives than Trump could ever have done if left to his own devices.  

Here is the latest demented offering from the world of madness. Trump need do nothing, it's like these guys are working for him. Imagine if this movie was about a group of deplorables hunting illegal border crossers in the desert with compound bows.  

https://www.foxnews.com/media/mark-steyn-the-hunt-film

As to your Christian meme, I see no sense in even debating the relative merits of scriptural context as it only plays to a base that is utterly ignorant of the very context it is trying to weaponize. It's like discussing weather delays with an irate passenger in the middle of a raging thunderstorm. 

Edited by Wolfhunter
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wolfhunter said:

I can't help but wonder if you are fighting against the wrong brand of ignorance. This is a slow motion train wreck and I'm actually grateful I have the ability to watch play out in real time.... I would hate to have missed it. The crazy left has produced more conservatives than Trump could ever have done if left to his own devices.  

Here is the latest demented offering from the world of madness. Trump need do nothing, it's like these guys are working for him. Imagine if this movie was about a group of deplorables hunting illegal border crossers in the desert with compound bows.  

https://www.foxnews.com/media/mark-steyn-the-hunt-film

As to your Christian meme, I see no sense in even debating the relative merits of scriptural context as it only plays to a base that is utterly ignorant of the very context it is trying to weaponize. It's like discussing weather delays with an irate passenger in the middle of a raging thunderstorm. 

 

895BB360-A894-451D-9C2C-51402313AA70.jpeg

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And so it continues.

As was pointed out to me in the aspect of aviation safety, this kind of behavior being accepted is just the continuation of 'the normalisation of deviation'.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/08/trumps-conspiracy-theory-about-clintons-and-epstein/595915

August 10, 1969: San Clemente, California—President Richard Nixon accused his predecessor Lyndon Baines Johnson of complicity in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Speaking with reporters on the first day of a 10-day stay at his Pacific Ocean vacation home …

Of course, that never happened. Obviously. How could it; how dare it? But had it happened, such an accusation—by a president, against a former president—would have convulsed the United States and the world. Today, President Donald Trump accused his predecessor Bill Clinton—or possibly his 2016 campaign opponent, the former first lady and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton—of complicity in the death of the accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

Many seem to have responded with a startled shrug. What do you expect? It’s just Trump letting off steam on Twitter.

Reactions to actions by Trump are always filtered through the prism of the ever more widely accepted view—within his administration, within Congress, within the United States, and around the world—that the 45th president is a reckless buffoon; a conspiratorial, racist moron, whose weird comments should be disregarded by sensible people.

By now, Trump’s party in Congress, the members of his Cabinet, and even his White House entourage all tacitly agree that Trump’s occupancy of the office held by Washington, Lincoln, FDR, and Eisenhower must be a bizarre cosmic joke, not to be taken seriously. CNN’s Jake Tapper on August 2 quoted a “senior national security official” as saying: “Everyone at this point ignores what the president says and just does their job. The American people should take some measure of confidence in that.”

Everybody at this point ignores what the president says.

So even though Trump just retweeted the comedian Terrence K. Williams accusing the Clinton family of murder, the people who work for Trump may ignore that, too. They know that the president punching the retweet button like an addled retiree playing the slots through a fog of painkillers means nothing. The days of “taking Trump seriously, not literally” have long since passed. By this point, Trump is taken neither seriously nor literally. His words are as worthless as Trump Organization IOUs.

But cosmic joke or no cosmic joke, Donald Trump is the president of the United States. You may not like it. I don’t like it. Mike Pompeo doesn’t like it. Mitch McConnell doesn’t like it. Kevin McCarthy doesn’t like it. But it’s still a fact, and each succeeding outrage makes it no less a fact. Grinning and flashing a thumbs-up over an orphaned baby? Yes, still president. Tweeting that a third-tier dictator has threatened him with more missile tests unless he halts military exercises with a U.S. ally——and that he has surrendered to that blackmail? Shamefully, still president. Accusing a former U.S. president of murder? It’s incredible, it’s appalling, it’s humiliating … but, yes, he is the president all the same.

 

Trump’s circle probably expects the world to sputter for a while and then be distracted by some new despicable statement or act. That is how it has gone for nearly three years, and that is how it is likely still to go. Trump is steering the U.S. and the world into a trade war, and perhaps a financial crisis and recession along with it. He is wrecking the structure of U.S. alliances in Asia, and his rhetoric is inciting shooting rampages against minorities. Compared with that, mere slurs and insults perhaps weigh lighter in the crushing Dumpster-load of Trump’s output of unfitness for the office he holds.

But it shouldn’t be forgotten, either, in the onrush of events. The certainty that Trump will descend ever deeper into subbasements of “new lows” after this new low should not numb us to its newness and lowness.

Neither the practical impediments to impeachment and the Twenty-Fifth Amendment process, nor the foibles and failings of the candidates running to replace him, efface the fact that this presidency shames and disgraces the office every minute of every hour of every day. And even when it ends, however it ends, the shame will stain it still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/08/09/leading-civil-rights-lawyer-shows-20-ways-trump-copying-hitlers-early-rhetoric-and

Leading Civil Rights Lawyer Shows 20 Ways Trump Is Copying Hitler’s Early Rhetoric and Policies

The author, Burt Neuborne, is one of America’s top civil liberties lawyers, and questions whether federal government can contain Trump and GOP power grabs.

 
 
We’re used to thinking of Hitler’s Third Reich as the incomparably evil tyranny that it undoubtedly was. But Hitler didn’t take power by force. He used a set of rhetorical tropes codified in Trump’s bedside reading that persuaded enough Germans to welcome Hitler as a populist leader. (Photo: photolibrarian/Flickr/cc)

We’re used to thinking of Hitler’s Third Reich as the incomparably evil tyranny that it undoubtedly was. But Hitler didn’t take power by force. He used a set of rhetorical tropes codified in Trump’s bedside reading that persuaded enough Germans to welcome Hitler as a populist leader. (Photo: photolibrarian/Flickr/cc)

A new book by one of the nation’s foremost civil liberties lawyers powerfully describes how America’s constitutional checks and balances are being pushed to the brink by a president who is consciously following Adolf Hitler’s extremist propaganda and policy template from the early 1930s—when the Nazis took power in Germany.

In When at Times the Mob Is Swayed: A Citizen’s Guide to Defending Our Republic, Burt Neuborne mostly focuses on how America’s constitutional foundation in 2019—an unrepresentative Congress, the Electoral College and a right-wing Supreme Court majority—is not positioned to withstand Trump’s extreme polarization and GOP power grabs. However, its second chapter, “Why the Sudden Concern About Fixing the Brakes?,” extensively details Trump’s mimicry of Hitler’s pre-war rhetoric and strategies.

Neuborne doesn’t make this comparison lightly. His 55-year career began by challenging the constitutionality of the Vietnam War in the 1960s. He became the ACLU’s national legal director in the 1980s under Ronald Reagan. He was founding legal director of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School in the 1990s. He has been part of more than 200 Supreme Court cases and Holocaust reparation litigation.

“Why does an ignorant, narcissistic buffoon like Trump trigger such anxiety? Why do so many Americans feel it existentially (not just politically) important to resist our forty-fifth president?” he writes. “Partly it’s just aesthetics. Trump is such a coarse and appalling man that it’s hard to stomach his presence in Abraham Lincoln’s house. But that’s not enough to explain the intensity of my dread. LBJ was coarse. Gerald Ford and George W. Bush were dumb as rocks. Richard Nixon was an anti-Semite. Bill Clinton’s mistreatment of women dishonored his office. Ronald Reagan was a dangerous ideologue. I opposed each of them when they appeared to exceed their constitutional powers. But I never felt a sense of existential dread. I never sensed that the very existence of a tolerant democracy was in play.”

A younger Trump, according to his first wife’s divorce filings, kept and studied a book translating and annotating Adolf Hitler’s pre-World War II speeches in a locked bedside cabinet, Neuborne noted. The English edition of My New Order, published in 1941, also had analyses of the speeches’ impact on his era’s press and politics. “Ugly and appalling as they are, those speeches are masterpieces of demagogic manipulation,” Neuborne says.

“Watching Trump work his crowds, though, I see a dangerously manipulative narcissist unleashing the demagogic spells that he learned from studying Hitler’s speeches—spells that he cannot control and that are capable of eroding the fabric of American democracy,” Neuborne says. “You see, we’ve seen what these rhetorical techniques can do. Much of Trump’s rhetoric—as a candidate and in office—mirrors the strategies, even the language, used by Adolf Hitler in the early 1930s to erode German democracy.”

Many Americans may seize or condemn Neuborne’s analysis, which has more than 20 major points of comparison. The author repeatedly says his goal is not “equating” the men—as “it trivializes Hitler’s obscene crimes to compare them to Trump’s often pathetic foibles.”

Indeed, the book has a larger frame: whether federal checks and balances—Congress, the Supreme Court, the Electoral College—can contain the havoc that Trump thrives on and the Republican Party at large has embraced. But the Trump-Hitler compilation is a stunning warning, because, as many Holocaust survivors have said, few Germans or Europeans expected what unfolded in the years after Hitler amassed power.

Here’s how Neuborne introduces this section. Many recent presidents have been awful, “But then there was Donald Trump, the only president in recent American history to openly despise the twin ideals—individual dignity and fundamental equality—upon which the contemporary United States is built. When you confront the reality of a president like Trump, the state of both sets of brakes—internal [constitutional] and external [public resistance]—become hugely important because Donald Trump’s political train runs on the most potent and dangerous fuel of all: a steady diet of fear, greed, loathing, lies, and envy. It’s a toxic mixture that has destroyed democracies before, and can do so again.

“Give Trump credit,” he continues. “He did his homework well and became the twenty-first-century master of divisive rhetoric. We’re used to thinking of Hitler’s Third Reich as the incomparably evil tyranny that it undoubtedly was. But Hitler didn’t take power by force. He used a set of rhetorical tropes codified in Trump’s bedside reading that persuaded enough Germans to welcome Hitler as a populist leader. The Nazis did not overthrow the Weimar Republic. It fell into their hands as the fruit of Hitler’s satanic ability to mesmerize enough Germans to trade their birthright for a pottage of scapegoating, short-term economic gain, xenophobia, and racism. It could happen here.”

20 Common Themes, Rhetorical Tactics and Dangerous Policies

Here are 20 serious points of comparison between the early Hitler and Trump.

1. Neither was elected by a majority. Trump lost the popular vote by 2.9 million votes, receiving votes by 25.3 percent of all eligible American voters. “That’s just a little less than the percentage of the German electorate that turned to the Nazi Party in 1932–33,” Neuborne writes. “Unlike the low turnouts in the United States, turnout in Weimar Germany averaged just over 80 percent of eligible voters.” He continues, “Once installed as a minority chancellor in January 1933, Hitler set about demonizing his political opponents, and no one—not the vaunted, intellectually brilliant German judiciary; not the respected, well-trained German police; not the revered, aristocratic German military; not the widely admired, efficient German government bureaucracy; not the wealthy, immensely powerful leaders of German industry; and not the powerful center-right political leaders of the Reichstag—mounted a serious effort to stop him.”

2. Both found direct communication channels to their base. By 1936’s Olympics, Nazi narratives dominated German cultural and political life. “How on earth did Hitler pull it off? What satanic magic did Trump find in Hitler’s speeches?” Neuborne asks. He addresses Hitler’s extreme rhetoric soon enough, but notes that Hitler found a direct communication pathway—the Nazi Party gave out radios with only one channel, tuned to Hitler’s voice, bypassing Germany’s news media. Trump has an online equivalent.

“Donald Trump’s tweets, often delivered between midnight and dawn, are the twenty-first century’s technological embodiment of Hitler’s free plastic radios,” Neuborne says. “Trump’s Twitter account, like Hitler’s radios, enables a charismatic leader to establish and maintain a personal, unfiltered line of communication with an adoring political base of about 30–40 percent of the population, many (but not all) of whom are only too willing, even anxious, to swallow Trump’s witches’ brew of falsehoods, half-truths, personal invective, threats, xenophobia, national security scares, religious bigotry, white racism, exploitation of economic insecurity, and a never ending-search for scapegoats.”

3. Both blame others and divide on racial lines. As Neuborne notes, “Hitler used his single-frequency radios to wax hysterical to his adoring base about his pathological racial and religious fantasies glorifying Aryans and demonizing Jews, blaming Jews (among other racial and religious scapegoats) for German society’s ills.” That is comparable to “Trump’s tweets and public statements, whether dealing with black-led demonstrations against police violence, white-led racist mob violence, threats posed by undocumented aliens, immigration policy generally, protests by black and white professional athletes, college admission policies, hate speech, even response to hurricane damage in Puerto Rico,” he says. Again and again, Trump uses “racially tinged messages calculated to divide whites from people of color.”

4. Both relentlessly demonize opponents. “Hitler’s radio harangues demonized his domestic political opponents, calling them parasites, criminals, cockroaches, and various categories of leftist scum,” Neuborne notes. “Trump’s tweets and speeches similarly demonize his political opponents. Trump talks about the country being ‘infested’ with dangerous aliens of color. He fantasizes about jailing Hillary Clinton, calls Mexicans rapists, refers to ‘**bleep** countries,’ degrades anyone who disagrees with him, and dreams of uprooting thousands of allegedly disloyal bureaucrats in the State Department, the Environmental Protection Agency, the FBI, and the CIA, who he calls ‘the deep state’ and who, he claims, are sabotaging American greatness.”

5. They unceasingly attack objective truth. “Both Trump and Hitler maintained a relentless assault on the very idea of objective truth,” he continues. “Each began the assault by seeking to delegitimize the mainstream press. Hitler quickly coined the epithet Lügenpresse (literally ‘lying press’) to denigrate the mainstream press. Trump uses a paraphrase of Hitler’s lying press epithet—‘fake news’—cribbed, no doubt, from one of Hitler’s speeches. For Trump, the mainstream press is a ‘lying press’ that publishes ‘fake news.’” Hitler attacked his opponents as spreading false information to undermine his positions, Neuborne says, just as Trump has attacked “elites” for disseminating false news, “especially his possible links to the Kremlin.”

6. They relentlessly attack mainstream media. Trump’s assaults on the media echo Hitler’s, Neuborne says, noting that he “repeatedly attacks the ‘failing New York Times,’ leads crowds in chanting ‘CNN sucks,’ [and] is personally hostile to most reporters.” He cites the White House’s refusal to fly the flag at half-mast after the murder of five journalists in Annapolis in June 2018, Trump’s efforts to punish CNN by blocking a merger of its corporate parent, and trying to revoke federal Postal Service contracts held by Amazon, which was founded by Jeff Bezos, who also owns the Washington Post.

7. Their attacks on truth include science. Neuborne notes, “Both Trump and Hitler intensified their assault on objective truth by deriding scientific experts, especially academics who question Hitler’s views on race or Trump’s views on climate change, immigration, or economics. For both Trump and Hitler, the goal is (and was) to eviscerate the very idea of objective truth, turning everything into grist for a populist jury subject to manipulation by a master puppeteer. In both Trump’s and Hitler’s worlds, public opinion ultimately defines what is true and what is false.”

8. Their lies blur reality—and supporters spread them. “Trump’s pathological penchant for repeatedly lying about his behavior can only succeed in a world where his supporters feel free to embrace Trump’s ‘alternative facts’ and treat his hyperbolic exaggerations as the gospel truth,” Neuborne says. “Once Hitler had delegitimized the mainstream media by a series of systematic attacks on its integrity, he constructed a fawning alternative mass media designed to reinforce his direct radio messages and enhance his personal power. Trump is following the same path, simultaneously launching bitter attacks on the mainstream press while embracing the so-called alt-right media, co-opting both Sinclair Broadcasting and the Rupert Murdoch–owned Fox Broadcasting Company as, essentially, a Trump Broadcasting Network.”

9. Both orchestrated mass rallies to show status. “Once Hitler had cemented his personal communications link with his base via free radios and a fawning media and had badly eroded the idea of objective truth, he reinforced his emotional bond with his base by holding a series of carefully orchestrated mass meetings dedicated to cementing his status as a charismatic leader, or Führer,” Neuborne writes. “The powerful personal bonds nurtured by Trump’s tweets and Fox’s fawning are also systematically reinforced by periodic, carefully orchestrated mass rallies (even going so far as to co-opt a Boy Scout Jamboree in 2017), reinforcing Trump’s insatiable narcissism and his status as a charismatic leader.”

10. They embrace extreme nationalism. “Hitler’s strident appeals to the base invoked an extreme version of German nationalism, extolling a brilliant German past and promising to restore Germany to its rightful place as a preeminent nation,” Neuborne says. “Trump echoes Hitler’s jingoistic appeal to ultranationalist fervor, extolling American exceptionalism right down to the slogan ‘Make America Great Again,’ a paraphrase of Hitler’s promise to restore German greatness.”

11. Both made closing borders a centerpiece. “Hitler all but closed Germany’s borders, freezing non-Aryan migration into the country and rendering it impossible for Germans to escape without official permission. Like Hitler, Trump has also made closed borders a centerpiece of his administration,” Neuborne continues. “Hitler barred Jews. Trump bars Muslims and seekers of sanctuary from Central America. When the lower courts blocked Trump’s Muslim travel ban, he unilaterally issued executive orders replacing it with a thinly disguised substitute that ultimately narrowly won Supreme Court approval under a theory of extreme deference to the president.”

12. They embraced mass detention and deportations. “Hitler promised to make Germany free from Jews and Slavs. Trump promises to slow, stop, and even reverse the flow of non-white immigrants, substituting Muslims, Africans, Mexicans, and Central Americans of color for Jews and Slavs as scapegoats for the nation’s ills. Trump’s efforts to cast dragnets to arrest undocumented aliens where they work, live, and worship, followed by mass deportation… echo Hitler’s promise to defend Germany’s racial identity,” he writes, also noting that Trump has “stooped to tearing children from their parents [as Nazis in World War II would do] to punish desperate efforts by migrants to find a better life.”

13. Both used borders to protect selected industries. “Like Hitler, Trump seeks to use national borders to protect his favored national interests, threatening to ignite protectionist trade wars with Europe, China, and Japan similar to the trade wars that, in earlier incarnations, helped to ignite World War I and World War II,” Neuborne writes. “Like Hitler, Trump aggressively uses our nation’s political and economic power to favor selected American corporate interests at the expense of foreign competitors and the environment, even at the price of international conflict, massive inefficiency, and irreversible pollution [climate change].”

14. They cemented their rule by enriching elites. “Hitler’s version of fascism shifted immense power—both political and financial—to the leaders of German industry. In fact, Hitler governed Germany largely through corporate executives,” he continues. “Trump has also presided over a massive empowerment—and enrichment—of corporate America. Under Trump, large corporations exercise immense political power while receiving huge economic windfalls and freedom from regulations designed to protect consumers and the labor force.

“Hitler despised the German labor movement, eventually destroying it and imprisoning its leaders. Trump also detests strong unions, seeking to undermine any effort to interfere with the prerogatives of management.”

15. Both rejected international norms. “Hitler’s foreign policy rejected international cooperation in favor of military and economic coercion, culminating in the annexation of the Sudetenland, the phony Hitler-Stalin nonaggression pact, the invasion of Czechoslovakia, and the horrors of global war,” Neuborne notes. “Like Hitler, Trump is deeply hostile to multinational cooperation, withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Paris Agreement on climate change, and the nuclear agreement with Iran, threatening to withdraw from the North American Free Trade Agreement, abandoning our Kurdish allies in Syria, and even going so far as to question the value of NATO, our post-World War II military alliance with European democracies against Soviet expansionism.”

16. They attack domestic democratic processes. “Hitler attacked the legitimacy of democracy itself, purging the voting rolls, challenging the integrity of the electoral process, and questioning the ability of democratic government to solve Germany’s problems,” Neuborne notes. “Trump has also attacked the democratic process, declining to agree to be bound by the outcome of the 2016 elections when he thought he might lose, supporting the massive purge of the voting rolls allegedly designed to avoid (nonexistent) fraud, championing measures that make it harder to vote, tolerating—if not fomenting—massive Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, encouraging mob violence at rallies, darkly hinting at violence if Democrats hold power, and constantly casting doubt on the legitimacy of elections unless he wins.”

17. Both attack the judiciary and rule of law. “Hitler politicized and eventually destroyed the vaunted German justice system. Trump also seeks to turn the American justice system into his personal playground,” Neuborne writes. “Like Hitler, Trump threatens the judicially enforced rule of law, bitterly attacking American judges who rule against him, slyly praising Andrew Jackson for defying the Supreme Court, and abusing the pardon power by pardoning an Arizona sheriff found guilty of criminal contempt of court for disobeying federal court orders to cease violating the Constitution.”

18. Both glorify the military and demand loyalty oaths. “Like Hitler, Trump glorifies the military, staffing his administration with layers of retired generals (who eventually were fired or resigned), relaxing control over the use of lethal force by the military and the police, and demanding a massive increase in military spending,” Neuborne writes. Just as Hitler “imposed an oath of personal loyalty on all German judges” and demanded courts defer to him, “Trump’s already gotten enough deference from five Republican [Supreme Court] justices to uphold a largely Muslim travel ban that is the epitome of racial and religious bigotry.”

Trump has also demanded loyalty oaths. “He fired James Comey, a Republican appointed in 2013 as FBI director by President Obama, for refusing to swear an oath of personal loyalty to the president; excoriated and then sacked Jeff Sessions, his handpicked attorney general, for failing to suppress the criminal investigation into… Trump’s possible collusion with Russia in influencing the 2016 elections; repeatedly threatened to dismiss Robert Mueller, the special counsel carrying out the investigation; and called again and again for the jailing of Hillary Clinton, his 2016 opponent, leading crowds in chants of ‘lock her up.’” A new chant, “send her back,” has since emerged at Trump rallies directed at non-white Democratic congresswomen.

19. They proclaim unchecked power. “Like Hitler, Trump has intensified a disturbing trend that predated his administration of governing unilaterally, largely through executive orders or proclamations,” Neuborne says, citing the Muslim travel ban, trade tariffs, unraveling of health and environmental safety nets, ban on transgender military service, and efforts to end President Obama’s protection for Dreamers. “Like Hitler, Trump claims the power to overrule Congress and govern all by himself. In 1933, Hitler used the pretext of the Reichstag fire to declare a national emergency and seize the power to govern unilaterally. The German judiciary did nothing to stop him. German democracy never recovered.”

“When Congress refused to give Trump funds for his border wall even after he threw a tantrum and shut down the government, Trump, like Hitler, declared a phony national emergency and claimed the power to ignore Congress,” Neuborne continues. “Don’t count on the Supreme Court to stop him. Five justices gave the game away on the President’s unilateral travel ban. They just might do the same thing on the border wall.” It did in late July, ruling that Trump could divert congressionally appropriated funds from the Pentagon budget—undermining constitutional separation of powers.

20. Both relegate women to subordinate roles. “Finally,” writes Neuborne, “Hitler propounded a misogynistic, stereotypical view of women, valuing them exclusively as wives and mothers while excluding them from full participation in German political and economic life. Trump may be the most openly misogynist figure ever to hold high public office in the United States, crassly treating women as sexual objects, using nondisclosure agreements and violating campaign finance laws to shield his sexual misbehavior from public knowledge, attacking women who come forward to accuse men of abusive behavior, undermining reproductive freedom, and opposing efforts by women to achieve economic equality.”

Whither Constitutional Checks and Balances?

Most of Neuborne’s book is not centered on Trump’s fealty to Hitler’s methods and early policies. He notes, as many commentators have, that Trump is following the well-known contours of authoritarian populists and dictators: “there’s always a charismatic leader, a disaffected mass, an adroit use of communications media, economic insecurity, racial or religious fault lines, xenophobia, a turn to violence, and a search for scapegoats.”

The bigger problem, and the subject of most of the book, is that the federal architecture intended to be a check and balance against tyrants, is not poised to act. Congressional representation is fundamentally anti-democratic. In the Senate, politicians representing 18 percent of the national population—epicenters of Trump’s base—can cast 51 percent of the chamber’s votes. A Republican majority from rural states, representing barely 40 percent of the population, controls the chamber. It repeatedly thwarts legislation reflecting multicultural America’s values—and creates a brick wall for impeachment.

The House of Representatives is not much better. Until 2018, this decade’s GOP-majority House, a product of 2011’s extreme Republican gerrymanders, was also unrepresentative of the nation’s demographics. That bias still exists in the Electoral College, as the size of a state’s congressional delegation equals its allocation of votes. That formula is fair as far as House members go, but allocating votes based on two senators per state hurts urban America. Consider that California’s population is 65 times larger than Wyoming’s.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court’s majority remains in the hands of justices appointed by Republican presidents—and favors that party’s agenda. Most Americans are unaware that the court’s partisan majority has only changed twice since the Civil War—in 1937, when a Democratic-appointed majority took over, and in 1972, when a Republican-appointed majority took over. Senate Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s blocking of President Obama’s final nominee thwarted a twice-a-century change. Today’s hijacked Supreme Court majority has only just begun deferring to Trump’s agenda.

Neuborne wants to be optimistic that a wave of state-based resistance, call it progressive federalism, could blunt Trump’s power grabs and help the country return to a system embracing, rather than demonizing, individual dignity and fundamental equality. But he predicts that many Americans who supported Trump in 2016 (largely, he suggests, because their plights have been overlooked for many years by federal power centers and by America’s capitalist hubs) won’t desert Trump—not while he’s in power.

“When tyrants like Hitler are ultimately overthrown, their mass support vanishes retroactively—everyone turns out to have been in the resistance—but the mass support was undeniably there,” he writes. “There will, of course, be American quislings who will enthusiastically support an American tyrant. There always are—everywhere.”

Ultimately, Neuborne doesn’t expect there will be a “constitutional mechanic in the sky ready to swoop down and save American democracy from Donald Trump at the head of a populist mob.” Whatever Trump thinks he is or isn’t doing, his rhetorical and strategic role model—the early Hitler—is what makes Trump and today’s GOP so dangerous.

“Even if all that Trump is doing is marching to that populist drum, he is unleashing forces that imperil the fragile fabric of a multicultural democracy,” Neuborne writes. “But I think there’s more. The parallels—especially the links between Lügenpresse and ‘fake news,’ and promises to restore German greatness and ‘Make America Great Again’—are just too close to be coincidental. I’m pretty sure that Trump’s bedside study of Hitler’s speeches—especially the use of personal invective, white racism, and xenophobia—has shaped the way Trump seeks to gain political power in our time. I don’t for a moment believe that Trump admires what Hitler eventually did with his power [genocide], but he damn well admires—and is successfully copying—the way that Hitler got it.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this