Digby's Hullabaloo Posts

Paul Krugman talks about the Trump administration’s National Security Strategy document in his news letter today, pointing out that there was a time when the U.S. was earnestly called “the leader of the free world.” But the assault on Europe is truly astonishing. He writes:

The political scientist Henry Farrell sums it up this way:

This is, quite straightforwardly, a program for regime change in Europe, aimed at turning it into an illiberal polity. Accomplishing this transformation would involve undermining existing liberal governments in cahoots with Europe’s own far right, and turning Eastern Europe into an ideological wedge against its Western neighbors.

Where is this attack on Europe coming from? Some readers may remember the old slogan from the War on Terror days, “They hate us for our freedom.” Clearly, MAGA hates Europe for its freedom. The people trying to turn America into an authoritarian, white supremacist state, who want us to forsake democratic ideals in favor of Volk, of blood and soil nationalism, want to see Europe go down the same path.

There’s also the role of the tech bros — billionaires who still describe themselves as libertarian but have in practice become hardline authoritarians with enormous sway over the Trump administration. After the European Commission imposed a modest fine on X for failing to obey its rules on transparency, Elon Musk declared that the EU should be abolished and threatened personal retribution against the “EU woke Stasi commissars” responsible for the ruling. And the Trump Administration is acting as the tech bros’ enforcer against Europe, threatening to keep steel tariffs high unless the EU scales back its tech regulations.

Moreover, this is part of a general pattern: the broligarchs hate Europe because the Europeans are trying to impose sensible limits to protect their societies from the well-documented psychological and economic harms that are inflicted by an unrestrained Silicon Valley agenda. For example, the EU is trying to limit the proliferation of digital hate speech as well as the pernicious effects of social media on the young. And more so than the US, it has sought to constrain the monopoly power of the tech titans like Google and Facebook. We should remember that the moderate antitrust and AI regulations adopted by the Biden Administration prompted the tech broligarchy to swing hard behind Trump in the 2024 election.

He points out that this leaves the field clear for China to step into the breach:

As of now, China is clearly the world’s largest single economy. But the group of nations that constituted the “free world” (as we knew it) is a much greater economic power than China. So by treating Europe and Canada as enemies rather than allies, Trump has destroyed any plausible capacity to stand up to China. In effect, Trump has chosen white supremacy over actual national greatness.

Second, that goes for Russia as well. Although Russia is far weaker than China, the US or the EU, the war in Ukraine has shown that an emboldened Russia can wreak long-lasting devastation. By attacking the EU, notably on the same blood and soil grounds that Putin attacked Ukraine — as well as by insulting Zelensky and releasing a “peace plan” that was clearly a Russian wish list — Trump has made it clear that our erstwhile allies cannot rely on us to stand up to Russian aggression. Should we be surprised that some allies have recently begun to refuse intelligence sharing?

Now, it’s important to admit that America often failed to live up to its own ideals in the past. For decades we championed freedom and equality abroad while practicing Jim Crow at home. We were a force for democracy and freedom in Europe, but we often propped up dictators and sometimes engineered the overthrow of democratically elected governments — often at the behest of American business interests — in Latin America, Asia and the Middle East. So in a very real way, the tech broligarchy is trying to use the power of the US government to subjugate the EU the same way the United Fruit Company once used the power of the US government to subjugate Central America.

In truth, Europe is much closer to being Reagan’s shining city on the hill than Trump’s America. Yet it’s important to acknowledge that in the face of economic and immigration challenges, it too is having a hard time preserving its liberal democratic values. Those “patriotic” — i.e., neo-fascist — European parties are indeed on the rise. Yet, on the whole, Europe is dealing with its economic and social strains without giving up on its core values. For example, the recent Dutch elections, while not a decisive victory for the center, did at least push the far right out of government.

He concludes by pointing out that most Americans aren’t with Trump on this and still do have some ideals about freedom and democracy. (And they may value them much more than they did in the past after this brush with fascism.) All is not lost, by any means, but it’s going to take whole lot of work to get us back to a place where we can pursue those values.

I think Andrew McCarthy at National Review has this right. NBC reported that the first boat strike was based upon some list of alleged “narco-terrorists.” Since they are claiming that drug runners are the equivalent of ISIS and Al Qaeda, they are apparently using the rules of engagement that were used in the drone war over the past decade under every president since Bush. As McCarthy points out, however, that was authorized under the AUMF passed by Congress after 9/11 to fight terrorism. Just calling these people terrorists, or “narco-terrorists” doesn’t change the fact that they are trying to stuff the drug war into the war on terrorism without the congressional authorization that makes those actions legal. Neither does it change the laws of war, or the criminal code that makes these strikes shockingly immoral.

He surmises that Hegseth believes he’s just “killing terrorists” and what could be wrong about that? Well, as McCarthy explained, narcotics traffickers are not analogous to Jihadist terrorists for a variety of reasons. But he points out another twist in logic that I haven’t heard anyone else discuss:

These rudimentary distinctions inexorably caused the press and the public to question the double-tap strike in a way they would not have questioned a follow-on strike against actual terrorists (especially if, say, such terrorists had been transporting explosives rather than cocaine). In response to the intense criticism (as I related here), President Trump distanced himself from the double-tap strike, and an effort was made to distance Hegseth from it. The administration also pivoted to a defense that focused on the boat and its cargo rather than the operators against whom Hegseth had said it had been his intent to apply “lethal, kinetic strikes.”

This seemed to work for a few days because, habitually zeroing in on the wrong thing, the anti-Trump press had made the issue about whether the double-tap strike was a war crime, whereas the real issue is whether the campaign of lethal strikes against suspected drug boats without congressional authorization is illegal. Once it was clear that Hegseth hadn’t issued a second order specifically telling Admiral Bradley to kill the shipwrecked survivors, many lost interest in the underlying, flawed analogy between drug traffickers and jihadists and between cocaine and bombs.

Nevertheless, the NBC report regarding Bradley’s briefings to Congress shifts the spotlight back onto the boat operators. Indeed, according to NBC’s sources, when asked if Hegseth gave an order along the lines of “Kill them all,”

Bradley told lawmakers that the orders he received from Hegseth were to kill the individuals on the approved target list, which included everyone on the boat, then destroy the drugs and sink the boat.

Translation: the priority was killing the people who were on the boat; the drugs and the boat were secondary concerns. Now, while I am not a military veteran, it doesn’t make sense to me to think about the missile strikes in such sequential terms. The U.S. strikes simultaneously kill people, destroy cargo, and damage vessels to the point that at least some of them are instantly sunk — you don’t kill the people, then destroy the drugs, then sink the boat. Still, if NBC’s version of Bradley’s account is correct, what matters is that the top military priority was the people. That’s why there’s a list of them.

As Rich Lowry observed in his column (and I contended in the aforementioned discussion of Obama’s drone strikes), such a priority makes perfect sense when one is dealing with actual terrorists or the military forces of a foreign enemy…

But it is impossible to apply such logic to drug traffickers, which is why federal law’s extensive definitions of terrorist activity do not include narcotics-dealing. With drug dealers, the priority is always to prevent illegal narcotics from entering the U.S. market. Capturing and prosecuting the drug dealers is important but secondary. (You may notice that the Justice Department and law enforcement agencies host big press conferences every time they seize a significant narcotics shipment or stash, even on occasions when they arrest few if any of the drug traffickers.)

[…]

Bradley was also adhering to the Trump administration’s conceit that the boat operators are terrorists and that the cocaine packages are akin to bombs. By his lights, then, even though this seems perverse, it was okay to kill the boat operators as long as they weren’t too badly wounded. That is, if they were hors de combat (such that it would have violated the laws of war to kill them), there would have been no double tap. But, since they were still alive and functioning, they remained viable targets for “lethal, kinetic strikes” because they could theoretically have continued their “mission” of transporting the “weapons” (cocaine packages) that were strapped inside the remnant of the ship’s hull to which they clung.

Trump says that every boat blown to smithereens saves 25,000 American lives. That’s just insane, particularly since most of the boats they incinerated are carrying cocaine, which isn’t killing people, and that cocaine is going to Europe rather than the U.S.

We all know this is really about deposing Maduro (and possibly Petro in Colombia) and seizing the oil thus proving that Trump and his minions have the huge male appendages supposedly required to dominate the Western Hemisphere. They think they can scare everyone into bowing down and sucking their toes because they’ve been so successful at getting virtually every American elite institution (and plenty of foreigners) to eagerly demonstrate their eagerness to do just that.

All of this horrific murderous behavior is in service of that twisted, sick agenda.

America’s new landlords

Let’s not talk about affordability. Let’s talk about pain.

“We have a housing crisis, as you probably, painfully, know,” writes Annie Lowrey in The Atlantic. “Wouldn’t you like to have someone to blame for it?” I already knew who to name, but her headline was a dead giveaway: Private Equity Is America’s New Landlord.

Rental costs here in the Cesspool of Sin are out of control like most other places. But in fact single family home rentals here are ranked the highest in North Carolina. Apartments are not as high as Chapel Hill, but that’s not saying much. The average rent here is $1,451/month for a 781 sq ft apartment. I mentioned a month ago a 20-yr-old summer intern struggling to save any summer cash on his stipend while paying $1200/mo. for a short-term apartment. (It might have been $1500.)

The housing crisis has many fathers, Lowry explains: “restrictive zoning codes, arcane permitting processes, excessive community input, declining construction productivity, expensive labor, and expensive lumber.” It’s the kind of problem Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson complained about in “Abundance” while ignoring the gobbling of existing housing stock by private equity. They may be bit players in the grand scheme of things but that depends on where you live and work.

Lowrey writes (gift link):

Last month, the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and the Center for Geospatial Solutions published a report showing that corporations now own a remarkable one in 11 residential real-estate parcels in the 500 urban counties with data robust enough to analyze.  In some communities, they control more than 20 percent of properties.

I figured that big investors might be picking up vacation rentals in Colorado and expensive apartment buildings in the Bay Area and the Acela Corridor. They are, the report’s authors told me. But these investors are pouring the most money into “buy low, rent high” neighborhoods: communities, many of them in the South and the Rust Belt, where large shares of families can’t afford a mortgage.

Struggling 20- and 30-somethings here feel the pain. So does Cleveland:

In Cleveland, corporations own 17.5 percent of residential real-estate parcels. In the city’s East Side, which contains many predominantly Black neighborhoods, just one in five homebuyers in 2021 took out a mortgage. The rest—many investors, presumably—paid in cash or took out a loan from a non-traditional financier.

Private equity is not why housing is so expensive in traditionally expensive cities, Lowrey explains, but “investor money is distorting the housing market in communities with low wages and decent-enough housing supply, pushing thousands of Black and Latino families off the property ladder.”

Owners of lower-priced apartments in historic neighborhoods here are letting maintenance lapse to force out renters and make the properties unaffordable to renovate. This renders them less-habitable and makes them easier to sell off to developers who buy them for the land and raze them to build high-rent condos and town homes in this tourist town. And further reduces affordable housing supply. What America saw Donald Trump do to the East Wing we’ve seen developers do to Victorian homes that once offered affordable apartments for lower-income residents.

Or private equity snaps up existing older single-family homes, does some modest renovation, and rents them out at high-dollar. And that’s in largely white neighborhoods.

Neighborhood activists typically find out about such plans after they are already done deals. By then their protests are to no avail. Out of curiosity, I perused new online property transfer records one Sunday for half an hour. I found that a real estate investment firm out of Boca Raton had snapped up four older homes on one street near downtown. They paid $1,050,000 for all four on 8/17/21. One they renovated was a 1925 2 BR, 1 BA, 1280 sq ft home they rented for $3,000 per month. I rented a similar one (1,000 sq ft) in ~1998 for ~$350/mo.

What activists might do instead is divvy up neighborhoods and assign someone to do what I did for a half hour once a month. If out-of-town investors begin snapping up homes on a street, a nonprofit collective might spot it and purchase key properties to thwart plans to raze the whole block to build town homes or new hotels. Better to intervene early than protest too late. Citizens are having to defend their communities from ICE. Why not from private equity?

Something must be done. Lowrey concludes:

If nothing is done, what’s happening to majority-Black communities in Ohio and Virginia and Georgia and Michigan might start happening in communities around the country. Private equity might not be causing the housing crisis, but corporate owners could end up making it a lot worse for everyone.

What are their names and on what streets do they live?

* * * * *

Is this a private fight, or can anyone join?

No King’s One Million Rising movement 
50501 
May Day Strong
Freedom Over Fascism Toolkit
The Resistance Lab
Choose Democracy
Indivisible: A Guide to Democracy on the Brink 
You Have Power
Chop Wood, Carry Water
Thirty lonely but beautiful actions
Attending a Protest Surveillance Self-Defense

THAT, you see, would be the appearance of a conflict of interest

They’re not even trying to hide that fact that Javanka is pulling strings with the White House. Why should they? Nothing will ever be done about it:

Affinity Partners, the private equity firm led by Jared Kushner, is part of Paramount’s hostile takeover bid for Warner Bros Discovery, according to a regulatory filing.

Paramount is telling WBD shareholders that it has a smoother path to regulatory approval than does Netflix, and Kushner’s involvement only strengthens that case.

• Paramount is led by David Ellison, whose billionaire father Larry is a major supporter of President Trump.

Zoom in: Affinity Partners was not mentioned in Paramount’s press release on Monday morning about its $108 billion bid, nor were participating sovereign wealth funds from Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi and Qatar.

It’s just straight up corruption, no holds barred. Kush and the Saudis are affiliating with Trump’s MAGA buddy David Ellison and Trump’s going to approve the merger. He said over the weekend that he’d be involved in the decision.

In a way it’s at least clarifying. They’re robbing the country blind and taking over the media the way they did in Russia and Hungary. At this point I think the only way to survive will be for the people to just stop buying what they’re selling. The only “guardrail” left is financial losses.

🚨 BREAKING: In an explosive moment on 60 Minutes, Marjorie Taylor Greene claimed Trump was “furious” that he signed the Epstein files discharge petition, because “it was going to hurt people.”

Let that sink in. pic.twitter.com/n57QsnlJu2

— Brian Allen (@allenanalysis) December 6, 2025

That’s not the first time he said it. See this interview from before the election:

Fox News’ Rachel Campos-Duffy (wife of Trump’s current transportation secretary, Sean Duffy) began by asking the then-candidate whether he would declassify government files related to 9/11, and Trump said he would. She then asked about declassifying John F. Kennedy assassination files, and he again said he would. The co-host went on to ask, “Would you declassify the Epstein files?” referring to the federal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, the late millionaire pedophile who was arrested during Trump’s first term.

What viewers saw at the time was Trump replying, “Yeah, I would.”

But what those who tuned into the interview didn’t see was the rest of his answer.

In a video that resurfaced in light of the ongoing controversy surrounding his team’s handling of Epstein-related documents, Trump, after saying he supported access to the files, quickly added, “I guess I would. I think that less so because, you don’t know, you don’t want to affect people’s lives if it’s phony stuff in there, because it’s a lot of phony stuff with that whole world. But I think I would.”

Asked if such a move would help restore public trust, he added, “Yeah. I don’t know about Epstein so much as I do the others. Certainly about the way he died. It’d be interesting to find out what happened there, because that was a weird situation and the cameras didn’t happen to be working, etc., etc. But yeah, I’d go a long way toward that one.”

He loves to hurt people. Who is he so worried about?

I’m sure one person is himself. But who else?

The “peace president” accepted a very special honor last week. Having been denied the Nobel Peace Prize he so desperately covets, Donald Trump was awarded the inaugural FIFA Peace Prize, which was invented only last month by global soccer czar Gianni Infantino. The prize is a large trophy accompanied by a medal that made Trump so excited he snatched it from the box like a furtive five-year-old with a box of chocolates and put it on himself. Infantino, who is president of FIFA and one of the newer members of Trump’s admiring entourage (for some reason, he showed up a few weeks ago at a ceremony for the Gaza peace process), showered Trump with meaningless praise, saying, “You definitely deserve the first FIFA Peace Prize for your action, for what you have obtained — in your way — but you obtained it in an incredible way…”

He did not elaborate on exactly what actions he had in mind, but before the ceremony Trump had to pretend that he didn’t know he was receiving the prize and was asked whether that might conflict with a possible military strike against Venezuela. He replied that he had settled eight wars and that a ninth was coming, “which nobody’s ever done before.” He added, “I really want to save lives, I don’t need prizes, I need to save lives and I’ve saved millions and millions of lives and that’s really what I want to do.” He didn’t mention the killings in missile strikes on Caribbean fishing boats. Presumably, those lives aren’t among the “millions” he says he’s saved.

The optics of this silly flattery by FIFA, juxtaposed with the burgeoning Pentagon scandal, in which it appears that Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth are overseeing a policy of repeated war crimes against people in small boats thousands of miles from U.S. shores, was stark. Members of Congress emerged from a briefing with the Navy admiral in charge of the Sept. 2 strike, in which two survivors were summarily executed as they floated on broken pieces of a small speedboat. Legislators looked ashen and somber, and one of their number, Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., declared it “one of the most troubling things” he’d ever witnessed.

Some Republicans, however, such as Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, seemed highly aroused by these same images, reveling in the gruesome deaths of what seemed to be low-level local operators, probably paid a few hundred dollars to take their cargo from Venezuela to a Caribbean island, whence it may be shipped to Europe. Hegseth himself gave a fiery speech in California the next day, promising that the U.S. intended to continue the killing and telling the audience:

These narcoterrorists are the al-Qaida of our hemisphere, and we are hunting them with the same sophistication and precision that we hunted al-Qaida. We are tracking them, we are killing them, and we will keep killing them so long as they are poisoning our people with narcotics so lethal that they’re tantamount to chemical weapons.

It’s estimated that 42 million Americans have used cocaine, the drug that is most likely being trafficked to Europe from Venezuela. (If that many people have ingested chemical weapons, we have bigger problems.) Fentanyl, which is a genuinely deadly drug, is almost all trafficked over the southern border — and usually imported by Americans. Will Team Trump be executing those “narcoterrorists” too? Cotton says no, but there’s no logical reason why they should stop, given their current rationale.

As the president performed his “Trump dance” and the Village People delievered “YMCA” at the FIFA prize event, the U.S. military struck another boat, killing four more people. The strange dissonance became even more jarring when the administration finally released its long-awaited “National Security Strategy.” Salon’s Andrew O’Hehir makes short work of that embarrassing document:

It’s a long-term, deep-horizon manifesto for the reactionary-revolutionary Red Caesar regime dreamed of by [Stephen] Miller, [JD] Vance and the bro-genius billionaires. It imagines unilateral U.S. domination of the Western Hemisphere — the Monroe Doctrine, but with drones and AI — a Crusader-style reconquest of secular Europe by the white right, and a chummy division of the rest of the world into old-school spheres of influence, involving Russia, China, the Saudi monarchy and whoever else gets invited.

Meanwhile, here at home, Trump continues his war against all immigrants. He is now engaging in rank racism, calling Somali immigrants “garbage” and threatening to revoke the citizenship of anyone he finds distasteful, which by pure coincidence seems to mean all people of color. He is banning half the world’s population from entering the U.S. and virtually ending the asylum process for everyone except white South Africans. The sight of masked, armed secret police in unmarked vehicles brutally assaulting anyone they choose on streets all across America is straight out of Nicolae Ceaușescu’s Romania. The language he uses is hostile, cruel, vulgar and degrading.

As the president performed his “Trump dance” and the Village People delievered “YMCA” at the FIFA prize event, the U.S. military struck another boat, killing four more people.

Now consider the absurdity of Trump’s insistence that he’s a prince of peace and just cares about “saving lives, millions of lives.” He actually said, “As president, my highest aspiration is to bring peace and stability to the world.” Sycophants are knocking each other over to give him prizes and kiss his ring, telling him exactly what he wants to hear. But the bigger question is whether anyone’s actually buying it?

This inconsistency has always been present in the MAGA coalition but until recently it hasn’t been quite as obvious. It’s not clear that his base is happy about it. Trump has always sold himself as a strongman, and his bizarre phony machismo has had inexplicable appeal for his followers. Now he’s falling asleep in public, spending most of his time redecorating and partying, and otherwise looking weaker every day. His paeans to peace strike a discordant note with the people who love him best for his nasty, smart-ass cracks and strong-arm tactics. Meanwhile the minority of old-style Republicans who would love for him to stop acting like a nasty schoolyard bully aren’t happy either, since they still hope he may behave like a serious president.The Pece

There hasn’t been any specific polling on this weird MAGA-world contradiction. But if you believe the overall numbers, Trump is now unpopular with a majority across all issues, even those that have traditionally been his strength. His approval ratings are now in the high 30s and low 40s. Independents are abandoning him in droves.

Mind you, the hardcore base is sticking with Trump so far because, like their idol, they can never admit they were wrong. But even they are starting to feel the dissonance of hearing this feeble, elderly man yammering about peace amid daily news footage of grotesque attacks on immigrants, boat strikes and increasingly bellicose warmongering. Some who took him seriously about America First isolationism are ready to abandon ship.

Whether this ends up truly splitting the Republican base remains to be seen. But this fault line in the coalition is widening by the day. No wonder so many GOP members of Congress are retiring next year. Who wants to stay around for the ugly implosion that’s just about to happen?

Salon

The hide-your-parents stage is here. You’re next.

The family of a deported Babson College student raised a public stink after her Nov. 20 arrest at Logan Airport. First, let’s review from last week:

Any Lucia López Belloza was flying home from Boston to surprise her parents for Thanksgiving. Instead, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrested her (The Guardian):

She was allowed a phone call to her parents, who contacted a lawyer. The next day, a federal judge issued an emergency order barring her removal from the US for at least 72 hours until her case could be reviewed.

But the next morning, she was shackled at her wrists, ankles and waist and deported to her native Honduras, a country which she left at the age of seven and of which she has virtually no memory.

After all the press her arrrest received, immigration agents targeted her parents in Austin, Texas. (I’m assuming that the Sunday mentioned below is Nov. 30, the aftrenoon the New York Times ran this interview with her father, and not yesterday.) The Times ran this followup on Dec. 7 (gift link):

On Sunday, immigration agents appeared at the family home of a recently deported college student in Austin, Texas, according to the family and their lawyer.

The agents arrived in three unmarked vehicles, and one agent in a green vest marked E.R.O. — Enforcement and Removal Operations — rushed toward the student’s father, Francis López, as he washed his car, Mr. López said. He ran into his backyard and closed a latched gate. The agent forced open the gate and proceeded to enter the backyard.

Mr. López entered his house and locked the back door, he said. After about two hours, the agents left, without ever trying to communicate with the family or knocking on the door.

Rep. Greg Casar (D) represents the López family’s district. He said on Sunday that the government meant to send a message:

“To be clear, the Trump administration is targeting a college student’s family because that college student spoke out about the unjust way that she was treated by the federal government,” Mr. Casar said.

Jacob Soboroff of MS Now interviewed Any Lucia Lopez Belloza. The video ran on Dec. 4.

Author Madiba Dennie announced on Bluesky, “aaand we are officially in the hide-your-neighbors stage.” That was October 10. Now we are at the hide-your-parents stage. Soon we will be at the hide-yourselves stage. If the budding 2nd American Revolution Will Bunch teased on Sunday does not materialize and soon, it’s not a matter of if but when.

Unsubtle Hint: This is not a private fight.

* * * * *

Is this a private fight, or can anyone join?

No King’s One Million Rising movement 
50501 
May Day Strong
Freedom Over Fascism Toolkit
The Resistance Lab
Choose Democracy
Indivisible: A Guide to Democracy on the Brink 
You Have Power
Chop Wood, Carry Water
Thirty lonely but beautiful actions
Attending a Protest Surveillance Self-Defense

And it walks, talks, and acts like it

The America right has long harbored a soft-focused yearning for the good old days when white men were dominant, women were docile homemakers, the “negroes” knew their place, cars had no seat belts, and TVs were black-and-white and topped with “rabbit ears.”

I’ve been thinking regularly about the sign above. After the Roe decision, American women had reason to think their reproduction was their business. Now that Roe has been overturned by the Roberts court, the left might be tempted to view the intervening years with nostalgia similar to the right’s 1950s fantasy.

The postwar years in general look like the good old days now that the world is again fighting fascism. The sign above has so many applications.

View on Threads

Melissa Ryan considers the Trump administration’s open xenophobia and racism and recalls a time when Americans frowned on anyone who expressed theirs publicly:

For me, the most troubling aspect of Trump’s attacks on Somali-Americans is how acceptable it’s become for the president of the United States and members of Congress to speak this way, and how much we’ve desensitized ourselves to it. There used to be a political cost for racist rhetoric and words intended to incite. I think a lot about former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott’s resignation in 2002 over divisive remarks praising Strom Thurmond and how his words cost him one of the most powerful roles in Congress. And on Bluesky, writer Jamelle Bouie made the point that even President Richard Nixon, who certainly held racist views, knew that it wasn’t acceptable to air them publicly or from the White House. This kind of rhetoric was considered unacceptable for decades, but since the emergence of Donald Trump as a candidate, that’s changed.

It’s not that Trump or his supporters being racist is new or shocking. It’s the amount of power they’ve amassed and how comfortable they are with attacking entire communities with incitement that will result in threats and violence. Instead of being shamed, Trump and MAGA are routinely rewarded for the hate, harassment, and harm they spread, with little concern for the people and communities who bear the brunt of the constant abuse.

Ah, the good old days of Nixon.

There was a time in this country

Paul Krugman fondly recalls a time when America stood for freedom:

There was a time, not so long ago, when America was the leader of the free world. It was the first among equals within an alliance of nations bound together by shared values — above all a commitment to democracy and civil liberties. From London to Berlin to Tokyo, in the aftermath of genocide and the utter devastation of World War II, America – as Ronald Reagan put it – was the shining city on the hill. We should never forget that Americans played the pivotal roles in the Nuremberg trials, upholding the rule of law in an impartial and transparent manner in the trials of those who had committed unspeakable atrocities and acts of war. “Ich bin ein Berliner,” declared John F. Kennedy in Berlin, as East Germany tried to trap its own people behind the Berlin Wall.

MAGA, however, doesn’t want to be part of that world. In fact, it doesn’t want a world of democracy, civil liberties and the rule of law to exist. The Trump administration has become especially hostile to Europe, precisely because the Europeans are trying to hold on to the values MAGA is trying to destroy at home.

[…]

The language is astonishing. Europe, the document warns, faces “the stark prospect of civilizational erasure.” Why? Because “it is more than plausible that within a few decades at the latest, certain NATO members will become majority non-European.” I don’t know why they bothered with the euphemism: “non-European” clearly means “nonwhite.”

Conservatives (before they self-radicalized) have been gnawing perceived threats nonwhite to their “civilization” like an old bone for decades. They once urged Europeans to fuck their way out of civilizational erasure.

I wrote this in response to Mark Steyn’s “It’s the Demography, Stupid” in the Wall Street Journal back in 2006:

… the Christian world risks being eventually overrun because of “our lack of civilizational confidence.” (The cure for which is, no doubt, civilizational Viagra.) Americans are not afraid enough of the urgent threat posed by Muslim children and must retaliate by stockpiling more of our own.

To plagiarize a quote from a review of one of nuclear-alarmist Jonathan Schell’s old books, “I shudder to think how I’ve failed. I shudder for Mark Steyn, for all the time he’s spent banging away at his typewriter instead of banging away elsewhere.”

But when they’re not banging away to fill their quivers these days, Trump, MAGA, and Christian white nationalists have decided to screw Europeans. If they won’t defend their civilization against the nonwhite hordes, why should we? America first!

“Europe is much closer to being Reagan’s shining city on the hill than Trump’s America,” Krugman acknowledges. It faces a threat from its own resurgent neo-fascist political parties:

Yet, on the whole, Europe is dealing with its economic and social strains without giving up on its core values. For example, the recent Dutch elections, while not a decisive victory for the center, did at least push the far right out of government.

And America itself is not yet lost. Many, and I believe most, Americans still believe in our foundational values of freedom and democracy. For the time being power lies in the hands of people who hate those foundational values — and hate Europe because it still clings to those values. But we can still turn this around and claw our way back to being who we should be.

I get the nostalgia. I can’t believe we still have to protest this fascist shit either.

* * * * *

Is this a private fight, or can anyone join?

No King’s One Million Rising movement 
50501 
May Day Strong
Freedom Over Fascism Toolkit
The Resistance Lab
Choose Democracy
Indivisible: A Guide to Democracy on the Brink 
You Have Power
Chop Wood, Carry Water
Thirty lonely but beautiful actions
Attending a Protest Surveillance Self-Defense

Looks like they’re chickening out:

Multiple Republican lawmakers and aides have told me that an exodus of House Republicans is likely in the coming weeks—one estimate puts the number as high as 20 new announcements—with most retirements expected from members in safe Republican seats and thus unlikely to imperil the majority (the political environment or Trump could do that). Twenty-three of the 39 House members who have already announced plans to retire or run for other offices are Republicans, on track to easily surpass the number of exits during the last Congress, when 21 Republicans were among the 45 House members who left at the end of their terms.

[…]

Following the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill, the G.O.P. has been aimless and lacking an agenda. They’re fighting over healthcare, they can’t agree on an affordability message (let alone an affordability plan), and many feel an increased, if familiar, lack of respect from the White House. Speaker Mike Johnson isn’t helping, as he hands congressional power to the president and makes the Article I branch of government ever more irrelevant—a concession that has apparently dawned on many only recently.

Meanwhile, legislative productivity continues to decline. It had already hit a record low last Congress, when just 274 bills were signed into law, the lowest number since GovTrack started keeping tabs in 1973. But this Congress is on course to be less productive still, having so far gotten only 46 bills signed into law.

I really doubt they care about their lack of legislative achievements. They are just hanging at being potted plants. They should have known that’s what they signed on for but I guess it’s getting boring. And many of them have probably made enough contacts to cash in and get in on the Big GOP Grift before Trump finally walks into the sunset.

Also, they loathe Mike Johnson which I think we can all relate to. Good riddance.

The good news is that the Democrats are losing mainly the ancient mariners and opening up their safe blue seats for a new generation which is very necessary.

Trump’s New National Security Strategy appears to be written in Trump Truth Social style with equal parts pompous bluster, internal contradictions and ignorant incoherence, setting forth policies pretty much guaranteed to confuse the rest of the world and allow Trump and his minions to fatten their wallets and pursue whatever long held fantasies of world domination they choose. This is to be done all while the United States declares itself “America First” which, as always, really means America Above All (or Uber Alles in the original German). It is a terrifying document and we are seeing the fruits of the philosophy (to the extent there is one) that guides it.

It begins with the standard bootlicking we’ve come out expect from any utterance out of this administration testifying to Trump’s unrivaled genius and magical peace-making skills such as his ability to “surgically extinguish embers of division between nuclear-capable nations and violent wars caused by centuries-long hatred.” (Did I mention the purple prose?) Beyond the tribute and accolades for Dear Leader, which takes up big chunks of the document, it divides up the world into sections that were clearly drafted, or at least influenced, by Trump’s top deputy Stephen Miller, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Vice president JD Vance and Trump himself.

Miller is the top xenophobe of the administration and the disdain for all foreigners is obvious throughout the document, particularly in the sections about mass migration, a human condition since time began and most recently due to climate change and political upheaval. Let’s just say the U.S. under Trump is against it and believes that it must be stopped by any means necessary. There is very little in the document suggesting that there might be any possible way to mitigate these migrations with “soft-power” (such as USAID or Voice of America) which the administration is working overtime to destroy as quickly as possible. They think all problems can be overcome with “deals” and violence.

Rubio is in charge of the new “Monroe Doctrine” which is a colonial wish list he apparently wants to fulfill. JD Vance’s antipathy to Europe is on full display while Trump’s burning desire to suck up to Russia and “do deals” with China reveals America’s new quasi-alliance with both countries.

As Salon’s Andrew O’Hehir puts it in this excellent analysis:

We can’t exactly call it surprising that this overwrought Trumpian manifesto vows to go all-in on “cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations” by encouraging the rise of “patriotic European parties” eager to celebrate their nations’ “individual character and history.” Or that the attitude expressed toward Russia, China and the oil-based monarchies of the Middle East amounts to a shrug emoji: Really far away! Not our problem! Live and let live! Ukraine-Shmukraine!

Or rather, it’s only surprising in the sense that whenever we think the Trump administration can’t outdo itself in overt bigotry, outright lies or vainglorious self-destruction, we turn out to be wrong. One could observe that Trump’s apparent plan to give Vladimir Putin almost everything he wants, Neville Chamberlain-style, in order to end the Ukraine war isn’t working too well, and that JD Vance and Elon Musk’s efforts to meddle in European elections on behalf of the xenophobic far right have at least partly backfired. None of that means, mind you, that this alternately idiotic and delusional document — described in that Economist editorial, using an enjoyable Anglo-idiom, as “a dog’s breakfast” — is not dangerous.

It’s terrifying. Our only hope is that their manifest incompetence keeps things from hurtling totally out of control.