Skip to content

Month: August 2019

White nationalists are very pleased with Donald Trump’s leadership

White nationalists are very pleased with Donald Trump’s leadership

by digby

As usual, Trump gives a big boost to the far-right:

A former Infowars staffer who organized the Proud Boys protest in Portland Saturday deemed the “mission” a success because President Donald Trump sided with the right-wing extremist group against the anti-fascists.

“Go look at President Trump’s Twitter,” Joe Biggs told The Oregonian (see the video above). “He talked about Portland, said he’s watching antifa. That’s all we wanted. We wanted national attention, and we got it. Mission success.”

Biggs said he was pleased with the relatively peaceful day between the Proud Boys — which describes its members as “Western chauvinists” — and counterprotesters, who included anti-fascist activists. Portland police reported that at least 13 people were arrested and six were injured.
[…]
Instead of addressing increasing right-wing violence, however, Trump repeated on the day of the Portland protest that he is considering labeling the leftist antifa a “terrorist” organization. “Antifa” is a blanket term that refers to a decentralized network of leftist, anti-fascist organizations that take on far-right protesters in the streets, sometimes violently. Nor have anti-fascist activists been linked to a single death, unlike gunmen compelled by extreme right-wing views.

No, they haven’t. Mostly they just dress up like ninjas and wander around the streets when the Nazis show up. Sometimes they protect people and sometimes they end up engaging in violent scuffles with the far right. But they haven’t killed anyone.

They haven’t locked up any babies in cages…

.

Reality is a witch hunt

Reality is a witch hunt

by digby

Poor Trump. Despite all of his ridiculous public bluster, he’s worried:

Privately, however, the president has sounded anxious and apprehensive. From his golf club in New Jersey, where he is vacationing this week, Trump has called a number of business leaders and financial executives to sound them out — and they have provided him a decidedly mixed analysis, according to two people familiar with the discussions who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the conversations were confidential.

Trump has a somewhat conspiratorial view, telling some confidants that he distrusts statistics he sees reported in the news media and that he suspects many economists and other forecasters are presenting biased data to thwart his reelection, according to one Republican close to the administration who was briefed on some of the conversations.

“He’s rattled,” this Republican said. “He thinks that all the people that do this economic forecasting are a bunch of establishment weenies — elites who don’t know anything about the real economy and they’re against Trump.”

Meanwhile, his top economic adviser:

White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow on Sunday confirmed that the Trump administration is exploring trying to buy the country of Greenland, noting that the self-governing country is a “strategic place” that is rich in minerals.

“It’s developing. We’re looking at it,” Kudlow said on “Fox News Sunday.” “Denmark owns Greenland. Denmark is an ally. Greenland is a strategic place … I’m just saying the president, who knows a thing or two about buying real estate, wants to take a look.”

President Trump’s desire to buy Greenland, which is part of the kingdom of Denmark, was first reported last week by the Wall Street Journal. Two people with direct knowledge of the directive told The Washington Post that Trump has mentioned the idea for weeks, and aides are waiting for more direction before they decide how seriously they should look into it.

Trump is scheduled to visit Denmark in two weeks. In the days since news of Trump’s interest in Greenland broke, the idea has been ridiculed by politicians in Denmark, and Greenland’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said Friday that the island is not for sale.

“Greenland is rich in valuable resources such as minerals, the purest water and ice, fish stocks, seafood, renewable energy and is a new frontier for adventure tourism,” the ministry said in a tweet. “We’re open for business, not for sale.”

While many in the United States have mocked the idea, one Democratic lawmaker on Sunday voiced openness to considering it. Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that “changes are happening” in Greenland due to climate change, “and the people up there understand it and they’re trying to adjust to it.”

Hey, once the ice melts and the animals are all dead, the riches underneath the desert that’s left will be ripe for the taking! Let’s get in on that global warming bonanza!

.

No Joe, they are not decent people. They aren’t.

No Joe, they are not decent people. They aren’t.

by digby

Via:

Democratic presidential front-runner Joe Biden told a Massachusetts fundraiser Saturday “there’s an awful lot of really good Republicans” with whom he successfully worked when he was vice president, as he defended his cooperative approach, The Hill reports.

Why it matters: Biden has been criticized by some Democrats for having worked with Republicans. But at an event in Harwich Port, he hit back at his 2020 rivals for promising executive orders to achieve policy priorities rather than working to generate consensus, the Washington Examiner notes. “You have to generate a consensus,” he said, according to a pool report.

Is Joe Biden is trolling for GOP Senator votes? I can see why. They would undoubtedly love to have him “negotiating” with them again:

Even for Barack Obama’s liberal critics, there was much to like about the way he set up last week’s fiscal deal, not least the use of his presidential perch to drive home his message on taxes. As my colleague John Judis argued, it’s easy to see how Obama could reprise this approach for the next installment of our ongoing fiscal soap opera. The GOP’s plan to force Medicare and Social Security cuts under threat of a debt default could prove wildly unpopular with the right White House framing, and Obama has proved himself pretty capable in this department.

The problem is what happens when, having crafted a favorable backdrop to the negotiation, it comes time for him to close the deal. And this is where the just-completed “cliff” episode is still disconcerting. Because it turns out Obama made a critical if underappreciated mistake in the final hours of the back and forth: sending Joe Biden to haggle with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell once McConnell’s talks with his Democratic counterpart, Harry Reid, had broken down.

From my after-the-fact discussions with Democratic aides in the House and Senate leadership, it’s clear that Reid had a plan for resolving the cliff and considered the breakdown of his talks with McConnell very much a part of it. By involving Biden, Obama undercut Reid and signaled that he wanted a deal so badly he was unwilling to leave anything to chance, even when the odds overwhelmingly favored him. It suggested that even if Obama plays his cards exceedingly well in the run-up to the debt-limit showdown, he could still come away with a worse deal than he deserves because of his willingness to make concessions in the closing moments.

Here’s what happened near the end of the cliff talks, as I understand it. On Friday, December 28, Obama handed off the negotiations to Reid and McConnell, with the caveat that he wanted a vote on a fallback plan to raise taxes on income above $250,000 for couples (and $200,000 for individuals) if they couldn’t strike a deal by Monday the 31st. The two Senate leaders made some progress but hit a wall Saturday afternoon. Reid had offered to move the threshold up to $450,000 for couples and $360,000 for individuals in exchange for a one-year extension of federal unemployment benefits and delaying the automatic spending cuts known as the sequester for a year. McConnell was unwilling to go so low on the income-tax threshold or so long on the sequester delay. He was also asking for a change to Social Security’s cost of living adjustment—a fairly significant benefit cut. After huddling with his staff late Sunday morning, Reid told McConnell he had no more concessions to give.

Not long after, McConnell went to the Senate floor saying he had placed a call to Biden but hadn’t heard back. Sunday night, Reid’s staff went to bed aware that Biden had returned McConnell’s call but assuming nothing would come of it. “There was no indication [Biden] would engage,” says a Senate Democratic leadership aide close to the talks. Alas, it didn’t work out that way. Reid’s staff woke up Monday morning to discover that Biden had opened up his own negotiation with McConnell. The Republican leader had accepted a $450,000 income-tax threshold ($400,000 for individuals) and Biden was offering him a three-month delay of the sequester. (The eventual deal was a two-month delay.)

Reid was furious. In a call, he told the president that he or Biden would have to come to the Senate and pitch the deal to Democrats themselves–Reid wanted no part of it himself. But while other accounts have portrayed Reid’s frustration as stemming from the substance of the deal, Reid was just as frustrated over the fact that he’d been in the middle of executing his own plan, which was now moot.
According to the Senate aide, Reid believed that one of two things would happen if the negotiations were allowed to play out his way: Either McConnell, who obviously wanted a deal, would have come slinking back to him and basically accepted Reid’s last offer. “It would have been great if he called Biden and no one called him back,” says the leadership aide. “He would be so desperate for a deal that he took whatever he could get.” Or, less likely, McConnell would have thrown in the towel, allowing Reid to hold a vote on the Democratic fallback bill, which would have moved the income threshold back to $250,000 while extending unemployment insurance and a series of tax credits for the poor and middle class.

The latter might well have passed the Senate—Reid believed there were close to 60 votes for it—but would have been unlikely to pass the House, sending us over the cliff. In that case, Reid assumed the House GOP would have taken the blame, and that Republicans would rapidly soften up. Reid’s plan was to then work out another deal with McConnell that would have provided a small fig leaf—perhaps a slight rise in the income threshold above $250,000, but not close to $400,000 or $450,000—which would have likely passed on Saturday, January 5 (basically the soonest possible date). The aim was to pass this new bill with a large bipartisan majority (just as the eventual compromise did), thereby isolating the House GOP and forcing them to pass it too.

This may seem a bit far-fetched—how could Reid be so confident, after all? Obama, for one, worried that missing the cliff deadline could mean waiting for weeks if not months to resolve the situation. According to a senior White House official, the embarrassing failure of John Boehner’s “Plan B” meant the House might “never be able to act … and this would bleed into debt ceiling.” The official added: “Our hand is weakened on the debt ceiling if the economy is spiraling out of control and everyone’s taxes were up.”

But there were good reasons to believe the endgame would play out the way Reid envisioned. Reid’s model was the payroll tax cut fight of late 2011, when he and McConnell struck a deal to renew the tax cut for two months because they couldn’t agree on how to pay for a year-long extension. The deal passed the Senate overwhelmingly, at which point conservatives in the House revolted. For a day or two, the outcome looked uncertain—polls showed the public favored the tax cut, but the House had dug in. At that point, Obama suggested to Reid that they reopen the negotiations, but Reid, according to the Senate aide, told him, “Don’t you dare.” Democrats held the line, and the House GOP abruptly folded. When all was said and done, Democrats got an even better deal than they’d hoped for. The Republicans were so eager to put the episode behind them they dropped their insistence that the tax-cut extension be offset with spending cuts.

Long story short: Reid’s strategy would have at worst produced a slightly better deal than Biden negotiated had McConnell accepted his final offer before the cliff (a slightly lower threshold for the new top income tax rate and a one-year suspension of the sequester rather than a two-month suspension). At best it could have produced significantly more revenue (closer to a $300,000 threshold) had we briefly gone over. But Reid never got the chance to execute it. “Their guys were running around asking to be forced to vote for this so they could move on,” says the Senate aide of the GOP. “Everything Republicans were doing signaled weakness and desperation for a deal. Unfortunately, everything out of the White House did, too.”

It is, of course, important not to romanticize congressional Democrats here. Senate moderates didn’t exactly earn any glory during the last Bush tax cut fight in 2010. At the time, many were panicked about the idea of letting them lapse for anyone, even the wealthy, which massively complicated the administration’s efforts to phase out the tax cuts at higher income levels. The White House official argues that Reid’s cliff scenario would have hinged on Reid’s ability to hold Senate Democrats together this time around, too, which Team Obama considered an open question at best. Indeed, when Reid called Obama urging him not to take the Biden-McConnell deal, Obama was quick to ask what would happen if the House somehow passed a bill raising the threshold to $500,000—could Reid keep Senate Democrats from peeling off to support it? Reid insisted he could, but the White House was skeptical. (The White House official says that, during the December 28th meeting between the president and the top four congressional leaders, Reid even put a 500,000 income-tax threshold on the table. But aides to both Reid and Nancy Pelosi deny this.)

Still, the Senate Democrats had actually shown surprising discipline this time around, having passed a bill in July that would have lowered the threshold to $250,000. There had been little wavering by individual senators since then—and none since the election. “No one more than us had come around to the idea that our political leverage was greater now,” says the Senate aide. “In 2010 we thought we were vulnerable in a million ways. In 2012, we did the ass-kicking.”

Whatever the case, allowing your adversary to decide who he’s going to negotiate with is a terrible precedent to set. The evidence suggests that McConnell got a better deal from Biden than he could have gotten from Reid. But even if you disagree, McConnell himself clearly believed this to be true. The lesson he surely took from the White House’s sidelining of Reid is that Republicans will be rewarded with concessions if they hold out in the run-up to a deadline. With that in mind, McConnell will almost certainly repeat the exercise during the next round. And since, by the White House’s own accounting, failing to raise the debt limit would have far more serious economic consequences than going over the fiscal cliff, it’s hard to believe that the president will be in any position to call him on it.

Obama did some good things. Sending Biden up to the hill to negotiate with the Grim Reaper wasn’t one of them.

Joe Biden needs to stop acting as if he’s already the nominee and is running as fast as he can in the right in the general election. That’s a strategy of the 20th century, not today. He may not have learned anything from the past few years of GOP perfidy bt Democratic voters have. And whether he knows it or not, Democrats know there are good alternatives to his anachronistic vision this time.

At the time of that botched negotiation, I wrote this:

I have to suspect at this point that this is not entirely a function of “bad negotiating.” It looks an awful lot like a subtle way to achieve desired policy outcomes which may be opposed by the president’s own party. The need to make a deal at all costs has become the negotiating strategy. And it conveniently means that all the demagogueing about the consequences of not making a deal will get more and more shrill as the negotiations go on and the Republicans will always take it to the very edge — at which point it becomes “necessary” to make a less than optimal deal than what might have been possible without all the hand wringing and rending of garments. And I hate to say it, but after several of these so-called hostage situations, it’s looking to me as if the Republican leaders are partners in a little square dance, not adversaries.

In other words, it serves both parties’ technocratic goal of austerity in the guise of “reform” to milk every contrived fiscal crisis to its last drop and then be “forced” to make a “compromise” that didn’t have to be made. Perhaps that’s cynical, but we’ve seen this dance enough times now to at least be skeptical.

After what we’ve seen of these neo-fascist Trump sycophants during the last two and a half years, I don’t think the Democratic electorate will stand for this nonsense again.

.

The Halcyon Days of the Trump Era May Be Ending by tristero

The Halcyon Days of the Trump Era May Be Ending 

by tristero

And you probably think it’s already gotten really bad. But this is a harbinger of the future:

Saturday morning, before events in Portland had gotten underway, President Donald Trump said “major consideration” was being given to designating Antifa an “organization of domestic terror.” He added, “Portland is being watched very closely. Hopefully the Mayor will be able to properly do his job.”

Did you catch that? Trump tweeted this before the fascists gathered in Portland. Holy Minority Report, Batman!

And this is just one of many, many signs that serious suppression of dissent is just one or two small steps away.

Message to all: hang in there and don’t give up.

Qualifications for President 2020: Mentally stable and not beholden to hostile foreign powers

Qualifications for President 2020: Mentally stable and not beholden to hostile foreign powers

by digby

I don’t know how many Republicans feel this way right now but even a non-trivial number would be helpful. This is by Never-Trumper Tom Nichols:

I don’t care if Sen. Elizabeth Warren is a mendacious Massachusetts liberal. She could tell me that she’s going to make me wear waffles as underpants and I’ll vote for her. I don’t care if Sen. Kamala Harris is an opportunistic California prosecutor who wants to relitigate busing. She could tell me that I have to drive to work in a go-cart covered with Barbie decals and I’ll vote for her. I don’t care if Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is a muddle-headed socialist from a rural class-warfare state (where I once lived as one of his constituents). He could tell me he’s going to tax used kitty litter and I’ll vote for him.

I don’t care if Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is clearly influenced by a hostile foreign government or that Marianne Williamson is a weird, anti-science guru. They could …

Wait. I do care about that. It’s the reason they won’t get my vote next year, and why the president won’t either.

Trump is getting worse

All of the policy “what about” hypotheticals from my conservative friends are diversions. They’re trying to move the argument to policy to blind us to the reality that President Donald Trump is both unstable and compromised.

As I have argued for well over two years, there is plenty of evidence that the president is compromised by our most dedicated enemy. Even before the Mueller report laid bare the degree to which the Trump campaign welcomed Russian help, it was obvious that Trump feared Russian President Vladimir Putin — not only because Putin knew how much Trump had lied to the American people during the campaign about his dealings with Russia, but also likely because Moscow holds Trump’s closest financial secrets after years of shady dealings with Russian oligarchs.

And obviously, I would care if Warren or Harris wanted me to do something insane, because it would be evidence of their mental or emotional impairment. As much as conservatives hate to admit it, governing by executive order or supporting the financial evisceration of rich people is not a sign of an emotional disorder.

I can live with policies I hate

Compulsive lying, fantastic and easily refuted claims, base insults and bizarre public meltdowns, however, are indeed signs of serious emotional problems. Trump has never been a reasonable man, but for two years, he has gotten worse. He literally cannot tell the truth from a lie, he often seems completely unable to comprehend even basic information, and he flies off the handle in ways that would make most of us take our children to a pediatrician for evaluation.

This is why policy doesn’t matter. I have only two requirements from the Democratic nominee. First, he or she must not be obviously mentally unstable. Second, the nominee must not be in any way sympathetic — or worse, potentially beholden — to a hostile foreign power. This rules out Gabbard, Williamson and maybe New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, although in de Blasio’s case it’s hard to tell whether he is unstable or just a terrible person.

As for the rest of them, I am willing to live with whoever wins the Democratic primary process. I will likely hate the nominee’s policies, but at least I will not be concerned that he or she is incapable of understanding “the nuclear” or “the cyber.” I will feel like I have a shot at trying to convince my elected representatives that they should listen to the policy preferences of normal human beings instead of two old men wearing shirts that say they’d “rather be a Russian than a Democrat,” or a woman in a shirt indicating that she is willing to have the president grab her genitalia.
I can’t believe I miss Eric Holder

The Democratic candidate will promise to nominate people into Cabinet posts who will make me tear my hair out. But at least I will be confident that they are in charge of their own inner circle, instead of surrounded by unprincipled cronies who keep their own boss in the dark while taking a hatchet to the Constitution. Is there anyone that Warren or former Vice President Joe Biden could bring to, say, the Justice Department, whom I would fear more than an odious and sinister courtier like William Barr?

I never thought I could miss Eric Holder, yet here we are.

It is a sign of how low we have fallen as a nation that “rational” and “not compromised by an enemy” are now my only two requirements for the office of the president of the United States. Perhaps years of peace and prosperity have made us forget the terrifying responsibilities that attend the presidency, including the stewardship of enough nuclear weapons to blow the Northern Hemisphere to smithereens.

As long as the Democrats can provide someone who can pass these simple tests, their nominee has my vote.

Pass the waffles.

I doubt there are very many who see the stakes in this election so clearly. But every vote counts.

Oh wait …

.

Of course they would say the court jester has executive privilege

Of course they would say the court jester has executive privilege

by digby

Executive privilege for dummies:

White House officials have been engaged in preliminary discussions about invoking executive privilege to limit former campaign aide Corey Lewandowski from complying with a congressional subpoena, despite Lewandowski never serving in any role in the administration, according to three sources. House Democrats authorized a subpoena for Lewandowski last month, and served it Thursday.

The White House has invoked executive privilege in the past to block former aides such as Don McGahn from complying with similar congressional subpoenas. While testifying in June, Hope Hicks declined to answer nearly every question about her time in the West Wing, citing instructions from President Donald Trump that she was “absolutely immune” from answering. Annie Donaldson, McGahn’s deputy, also did not answer more than 200 questions in her written responses to the House Judiciary Committee, citing similar immunity.
But this would be the first time Trump has tried to invoke privilege for someone who has never worked in the administration when it comes to the Russia investigation. McGahn, Hicks and Donaldson all held titles in the West Wing; Lewandowski has only informally advised Trump since his work on the 2016 campaign ended. The White House once asserted that former Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach’s conversations with the President about adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census were “confidential.” Kobach nonetheless testified in front of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

House panel subpoenas Lewandowksi and former White House official as impeachment push ramps up
Trump officials and allies aren’t confident the move on Lewandowski will work, skeptical that the President will be able to assert the same executive privilege principles over an informal adviser as he would a staff member. The White House has been in contact with members of the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department about whether it would be successful, and say it remains an option. A White House official cautioned that the discussions are preliminary and no formal Office of Legal Counsel opinion has been sought or rendered by the White House counsel’s office yet, though there is one related to Kobach’s testimony.

“Executive privilege exists to protect internal government information that, if made public, would cause some damage to the country,” said Mark Rozell, the author of “Executive Privilege: Presidential Power, Secrecy and Accountability.” “It applies to the President and high-level executive branch officers, not private citizens who never served in the administration

lol!

As if that matters.

.

A “calming thought when you’re feeling homicidal” by @BloggersRUs

A “calming thought when you’re feeling homicidal”
by Tom Sullivan

After a particularly tough week for all “involved,” this video of a foul-mouthed, self-taught naturalist from the old neighborhood rescuing a sick coyote pup lightened my mood. You too might need a break from reading profiles of administration sociopaths who believe they embody the nation and whose rhetoric suggests they’d just as soon “embody” some of you. With extreme prejudice.

Tony Santoro’s YouTube page calls it “A Low-Brow, Crass Approach to Plant Ecology as muttered by a Misanthropic Chicago Italian.” Botany is a subject about which I know nothing beside kudzu and poison ivy. But Santoro’s enthusiasm is catching.

Rescuing the coyote pup has turned Santoro into a minor internet celebrity. He’s toned down his language for this TV profile.

Next time, more sociopaths.

Saturday Night at the Movies

Free to ride: RIP Peter Fonda

By Dennis Hartley

Regarding Peter Fonda: Well, I didn’t see that coming. Not so much his death (he was 79 and he had been battling cancer for a while) but my unexpectedly emotional reaction to it.

At 63 I’m no spring chicken myself; by the time you reach your sixth decade, you begin to grow armor against losing your shit every time another pop culture icon of your youth buys the farm. It’s all part of life. Nobody lives forever, and your idols are no exception.

So why the waterworks? I mean, I was 13 when Easy Rider came out in 1969; by the time I finally had a chance to see it (probably on late-night TV or maybe a VHS rental…can’t recall) I was in my mid 20s and Jerry Rubin was working on Wall Street; so obviously the scene where Captain America gets blown away by inbred rednecks (while still shocking) did not portend the same potentially mind-blowing epiphany for me that it might have for a 25 year-old dope smoking longhair watching it in a theater back in 1969.

Maybe it’s the timing of Fonda’s passing. Not that he planned it, but it came smack dab amid the 50th anniversary of Woodstock (August 15-17, 1969). Since it began on Thursday, I’ve been sporadically listening in to a 72-hour synchronized broadcast/web-streaming of the uncut audio recordings of every Woodstock performance (via Philly station WXPN). It’s a very different experience from watching Michael Wadleigh’s famous documentary film, which (for very practical reasons) only features bits and pieces of the event. WXPN’s presentation is more immersive, and somehow-it is more moving.

So perhaps I was feeling extra nostalgic about the era; which adds extra poignancy to Fonda’s passing, as he was very much a part of the Woodstock Generation iconography.
But he was not just an icon, he was a human being. Here’s his sister Jane’s statement:

“He was my sweet-hearted baby brother. The talker of the family. I have had beautiful alone time with him these last days. He went out laughing.”

I did not know him personally, but if you can go out laughing…that is a pretty cool life.

As to that part of his life he shared with all of us-here are some film recommendations:

Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry– John Hough’s 1974 road movie features Fonda as the leading man and co-stars Susan George (*sigh* my first teenage crush) and Adam Roarke. Fonda and Roarke are car racing partners who take an ill-advised detour into crime, robbing a grocery store in hopes of getting enough loot to buy a pro race car. They soon find themselves on the run from the law. A shameless rip-off of Vanishing Point; but delivers the thrills for action fans (muscle car enthusiasts will dig that cherry ’69 Dodge Charger).

Easy Rider – This was the film that not only awakened Hollywood to a previously untapped youth market but put Fonda on the map as a counterculture icon. He co-wrote the screenplay along with Terry Southern and Dennis Hopper (who also directed). Fonda and Hopper star as two biker buddies (flush from a recent lucrative drug deal) who decide to get on their bad motor scooters (choppers, actually) and ride from L.A. to New Orleans for Mardi Gras. Along the way, they encounter a cross-section of American society; from a commune of idealistic hippies, a free-spirited alcoholic Southern lawyer (memorably played by Jack Nicholson) to a pair of prostitutes they end up tripping within a cemetery.

The dialogue (along with the mutton chops, fringe vests and love beads) may not have dated so well, but the outstanding rock music soundtrack has held up just fine. And thanks to Laszlo Kovacs’ exemplary DP work, those now iconic images of expansive American landscapes and endless gray ribbons that traverse them remain the quintessential touchstone for all American “road” movies that have followed in its wake.

The Hired Hand – Fonda’s 1971 directorial debut is a lean, poetic neorealist Western in the vein of Robert Altman’s McCabe and Mrs. Miller and Jan Troell’s Zandy’s Bride. Gorgeously photographed by the great Vilmos Zsigmond, it stars Fonda as a taciturn drifter who returns to his wife (Verna Bloom) after a prolonged absence. Embittered by his desertion, she refuses to take him back, advising him to not even tell their young daughter that he is her father. In an act of contrition, he offers to work on her rundown farm purely as a “hired hand”, no strings attached. Reluctantly, she agrees; the couple slowly warm up to each other once again…until an incident from his recent past catches up with him and threatens the safety of his longtime friend and traveling companion (Warren Oates). Well-written (by Alan Sharp), directed, and acted; it’s a genuine sleeper.

The Limey
– One of my favorite Steven Soderberg films (from 1999) also features one of Fonda’s best latter-career performances. He’s not the main character, but it’s a perfect character role for him, and he runs with it. Scripted by Lem Dobbs, Soderberg’s taut neo-noir centers on a British career criminal (Terrance Stamp, in full East End gangster mode) who gets out of prison and makes a beeline for America to investigate the death of his estranged daughter. He learns she had a relationship with an L.A.-based record producer (Fonda), who may be able to shed light on her untimely demise. Once he locates him, the plot begins to thicken. Fast-moving and rich in characterization, with a great supporting cast that includes Lesley Ann Warren, Luis Guzman, Nicky Katt, and Barry Newman (look for a winking homage to Newman’s iconic character in Vanishing Point).

92 in the Shade – This quirky, picaresque 1975 black comedy is acclaimed writer Thomas McGuane’s sole directorial effort. (I consider it a companion piece to Frank Perry’s equally oddball Rancho Deluxe, which was also written by McGuane, features several of the same actors, and was released the same year). Fonda stars as a trustafarian slacker who comes home to Key West in to start a fish chartering business. This doesn’t set well with a gruff competitor (Warren Oates) who decides to play dirty with his rival.

As in most McGuane stories, narrative takes a backseat to the characters. In fact, the film essentially abandons its setup halfway through-until a curiously rushed finale. Still, there’s a bevy of wonderful character actors to savor, including Harry Dean Stanton, Burgess Meredith, William Hickey, Sylvia Miles and Louise Latham. Also in the cast: Margot Kidder (McGuane’s wife at the time) and Elizabeth Ashley (his girlfriend at the time)-which begs speculation as to what was going through his mind as he directed a scene where Kidder and Ashley exchange insults and then get into a physical altercation!

Race With the Devil –Peter Fonda and Warren Oates star as buds who hit the road in an RV with wives (Lara Parker, Loretta Swit) and dirt bikes in tow. The first night’s bivouac doesn’t go so well; the two men witness what appears to be a human sacrifice by a devil worship cult, and it’s downhill from there (literally a “vacation from hell”). A genuinely creepy chiller that keeps you guessing until the end, with taut direction from Jack Starrett.

The Trip – This 1967 drug culture exploitation fest from famed B-movie director Roger Corman may be awash in beads, Nehru jackets, patchouli and sitars…but it’s a much better film than you’d expect. Fonda plays a TV commercial director who seeks solace from his turned-on and tuned-in drug buddy (Bruce Dern) after his wife leaves him. Dern decides the best cure for Fonda’s depression is a nice getaway to the center of his mind, courtesy of a carefully administered and closely supervised LSD trip. Susan Strasberg and Dennis Hopper co-star. Trippy, with a psychedelic soundtrack by The Electric Flag.

Ulee’s Gold – Writer-director Victor Nunez’s 1997 family drama ushered in a career revival for Fonda, who received critical accolades (as well as an Oscar nomination and a Golden Globe win) for his measured and nuanced performance. Fonda plays a widower and Vietnam vet who prefers to keep himself to himself, living a quiet life as a beekeeper-until the day his estranged son (Tom Wood) calls him from prison, asking for a favor. Unexpected twists ensue, with Fonda slowly peeling away hidden depths of his character’s complexity. Beautifully acted and directed, with career-best work by Fonda.

The Wild Angels – Another youth exploitation extravaganza from Roger Corman, this 1966 drama kick-started a spate of low-budget biker movies in its wake. Fonda is a member of San Pedro M.C., The Angels. The club decides to party in Palm Springs…and all hell breaks loose. It’s fairly cliché genre fare, but a critical building block for Fonda’s 60s iconography; especially when he delivers his immortal line: “We wanna be free to ride our machines…without being hassled by The Man!” The cast includes Nancy Sinatra, Michael J. Pollard and erm-Laura Dern’s parents (Bruce Dern and Diane Ladd!).

More reviews at Den of Cinema
On Facebook
On Twitter

Dennis Hartley

The ugliness is spilling out

The ugliness is spilling out

by digby

This is just the saddest story …

Weeks before the bullets of El Paso, the words of Greenville echoed through this small city on the North Carolina coastal plain — and across the nation.

Samar Badwan, a Greenville resident, watched that day as 8,000 neighbors and fellow citizens jammed a local basketball arena to serenade the president with a chant of “Send her back,” a response to Trump’s insistence that a Muslim, Somali American congresswoman should “go back” to the land of her birth.

“As we say in the South, he’s stirring the pot,” Badwan remembers thinking. “And that’s a very dangerous game. People are listening.”

That visit — and that chant — continues to reverberate loudly here nearly a month later, particularly for those such as Badwan, who see themselves as targets of a campaign to whip up xenophobia and hate.

After this month’s El Paso shooting, in which 22 people were killed by a gunman who parroted the president’s warnings about an “invasion” of immigrants, the words carry a particularly ominous resonance: as a prelude to murder.

“In my heart, I knew what his message was going to be,” Badwan said, as she sipped sweet tea at her local Starbucks. “I didn’t know the extent to which it would impact our small town.”

Before that day, Badwan never had to question whether her hijab was incompatible with her Southern drawl. She never had to fear that her North Carolina neighbors might hold her Palestinian heritage against her. She never had to think that in Greenville — a city she has been proud to call home for 30 years, raising three children along the way — her faith would mark her as an unwanted outsider.

Then the president came to town.

Greenville, a university city of just under 100,000, touts itself as diverse and inclusive, but it was introduced to much of the country through a chant condemned by the Anti-Defamation League as “the sound of intolerance.”

A recent study by University of North Texas researchers found a 226 percent surge in reported hate crimes in counties that hosted 2016 Trump campaign rallies when compared with those that did not. Police in Greenville say they have seen no increase in reported hate speech or crimes since the president’s July 17 visit.

But to immigrants, refugees and others who don’t fit neatly into some people’s ideas of what an American should look like, the appearance has spawned fears that the president’s words could be used as a pretext for violence.

The crowd’s chant has also prompted painful reflection: Was the hostility on display at the rally new for Greenville? Or was it here all along, just waiting to be activated?

Heidi Serrano, who was born in Guatemala but who has lived in Greenville her entire adult life, has reluctantly concluded the latter. She now wonders if some of her neighbors and co-workers truly want her here.

“Trump has allowed people to say what’s in their hearts,” said Serrano, 39. “That’s been the hardest part for me. You think you know somebody.”

As Serrano spoke, a diverse group of children shrieked with delight as they bounded up and down an inflatable slide. Mothers wearing hijabs casually bantered, while dads toggled between English and Spanish as they led their children on a tour of a firetruck. African American and white families shared barbecue, fresh off the grill.

It was National Night Out, a chance for police officers to mingle with residents, and the idyllic scene at Greenville’s Jaycee Park reflected the message advertised in welcome signs posted on the outskirts of the city: “We are building an inclusive community.”

Many residents say, on the whole, that is what it is.

Badwan, who came here as a teenager and has never left, said no one in Greenville has ever told her to go back to where she came from.

Some people do tell her Greenville is too small, too isolated from big-city attractions — a minor island of urbanity in a sea of farms and fields.

But Badwan, who teaches autistic students and serves as an Arabic interpreter for the local school district, couldn’t imagine a better place to live.

“I do a lot of traveling,” she said, “but there’s nothing like coming back here.”

Greenville boasts a high-quality state university, top-notch hospital and thriving arts district. Everything she might need is within a short drive, and the community’s leaders, she said, support the city’s diversity.

After a gunman in March sprayed two New Zealand mosques with bullets, killing 51 people, Badwan texted local officials to invite them to a vigil outside of Greenville’s mosque. All of them showed up.

“Samar, if your mosque needs me to come and sit by the door during prayers so you feel safe, I will come,” a local pastor told her.

She thanked him for his offer, but the mosque’s leaders decided they would need more: They hired a security guard to protect worshipers, who can number in the hundreds during Islamic holidays and who hail from Algeria, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Morocco, Syria and beyond — a reflection of the fact that this city, which is still predominantly made up of native-born white and black citizens, is becoming ever more international.

“Sometimes, people in Greenville can be isolated from what the rest of the world really is,” said longtime resident Ann Hamze. “But there’s so much more diversity here now. The world has descended on Greenville.”

Hamze taught social studies in the public schools for 25 years, and she tried to instill in her students a sense for the wider world. She had worked overseas for the U.S. Agency for International Development earlier in her career, and her husband is Lebanese.

She thought the city had moved beyond some of the racial prejudice she had seen decades ago in Greenville and that for some is reflected in the monument to Confederate soldiers that stands in the heart of the city’s downtown.

Then she watched the Trump rally, and she heard the chant.

“I was surprised,” she said. “I was scanning the crowd, hoping that none of my former students from seventh-grade social studies were there.”

Trump’s rally prompted heated exchanges on the letters page of Greenville’s newspaper, the Daily Reflector.

“I have a confession to make. I was at the president’s rally Wednesday night, and when the chant ‘send them back’ broke out, I joined in, with enthusiasm,” wrote Steven Van Cleave, a resident of nearby Winterville. “And I have another confession to make. I do not feel the slightest need to apologize to anyone for doing so.”

The chant, Van Cleave wrote, had been directed at four congresswomen who “have nothing but contempt for this country” and who “should leave and go to a country they admire such as Cuba or Venezuela.”

The four congresswomen, who have been told by Trump to “go back” to where they came from, are all people of color. Three were born in the United States; the fourth, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), was born in Somalia and came to the United States as a refugee when she was a child.

At the dental office where she works, Serrano challenged co-workers who support the president to defend his words — and the crowd’s.

They did: The chant, she was told, was all about the congresswomen and their political beliefs, not about their race, ethnicity or religion.

Serrano was unconvinced. She felt “hurt and betrayed,” the crowd’s words settling in her mind like a slur against entire groups of people. It’s something, she said, she couldn’t have imagined only a few years ago.

“There was a filter, and now the filter has been broken,” she said. “My Hispanic friends are afraid to go to the store. They’re afraid to do anything. It’s scary.”

Newcomers to Greenville say that they, too, have noticed a shift.

Tareq al-Hilali, 33, came to the city as a refugee five years ago after fleeing his native Iraq. He and his family soon opened a convenience store, where they serve fried chicken to an appreciative clientele and field inquiries about the finer points of their religion.

“Why don’t you eat pork? Why does your sister wear a hijab?” said Hilali. “People ask questions, but they’re nice questions.”

His sister is less convinced that the interest is so benign. When she first moved to the United States, she said, she felt no fear walking around the city while wearing her hijab.

That has changed. Trump, she said, is responsible.

“I don’t feel safe anymore,” said Sura al-Hilali, 24.

Something else has changed, too. A few months ago, after hours of study crammed in between work at the store and her university classes, she passed her citizenship test.

“They can’t send me back now,” she said. “I have my rights.”

No, they can’t send her back. But that won’t stop them from chanting and cheering Trump’s ugly xenophobic language, obviously. After all, the four members of the squad are citizens.

Think for a moment about the fact that these people are embracing “love it or leave” from a man who routinely disparages this country in the harshest of terms, calling its leaders (other than himself or his sycophants) “stupid”,condemning any state that doesn’t vote for him, denigrating its cities and calling its military leaders incompetent among dozens of other insults toward the very country his allegedly patriotic followers claim to be defending.

Trump and the Republicans have turned over a rock and all this ugly racism and hate has come slithering out. And way too many of our fellow Americans are delightedly embracing it.

.

There is nothing too small for him to lie about

There is nothing too small for him to lie about

by digby

Daniel Dale of CNN made note of this Trump boast on twitter:

At least seven times since November 6, 2016, including at his rally last night, Trump has claimed that he was once named Michigan’s Man of the Year.

All signs point to this never having happened.

If you once gave Donald Trump the Michigan Man of the Year award, or work for Trump and want to set me straight about this very real award, please email me at daniel.dale@cnn.com.

Someone finally stepped up:

I have made progress on the Michigan Man investigation. Former GOP congressman Dave Trott calls to say Trump claimed to him that he was given the award at a Lincoln Day dinner Trott invited him to speak at in 2013. But Trott says there was no award, just a speech.

Trott says that Trump thanked him for the alleged award at a 2017 roundtable with auto CEOs. Trott says he wasn’t about to correct Trump in front of CEOs while in Congress, but now he’s out of office and doesn’t care, so he can say Trump made it up.

Trott adds that the speech was well-received. He also adds that Trump insisted he had to tell the press that it was the largest Oakland County Lincoln Day Dinner crowd ever, even though Trott told him he had no idea if that was true. He says Trump claimed CBS said it was.

This is revealing. Trump doesn’t just make these petty dishonest boasts on his own. He actively enlists other Republicans in his childish lies and they go along with it.

In fact, they don’t just go along with it, they actively support this addled narcissist. It’s astonishing.

.