The Constitutional Crisis to Come

Donald Trump has set out on a course to radically reshape our government and our democracy.  In doing so, he is and will be violating many laws, both those passed by Congress and those in the Constitution.  

With a compliant Congress, more than 100 suits have been filed in Federal court to stop what Trump is doing.  Many judges have issued temporary retraining orders advising Trump to stop his actions.   It is unknown to what extent Trump is respecting those orders.  In at least two instances, the court has found that Trump has not followed the orders and has restated very clearly that he must do so.

The normal process in civil cases like these is that the lower court order would not be stayed while the matter is being appealed.  And appeal Trump certainly will, as he has recently said that if he is acting to save the country, he is not breaking any law—even if, in fact, he is acting contrary to the law.

The first two cases have now been appealed to the Supreme Court; one concerns Trump's wanting to fire the head of the Office of General Council, an independent watchdog agency with a term set by Congress and not serving at the President's pleasure.  The other concerns Trump's freezing $2 billion in foreign aid payments.

One would hope in these and other power-grabbing cases, both Justices Roberts and Barrett, and perhaps Gorsuch, would join the 3 liberal judges in declaring that Trump had broken the law and acted illegally.

The question then is, "What will Trump do?"  In the first case, he would have no choice but to abide by the Court's ruling because he has no way of forcing the person out of office.  But in the second and other cases, although he has said that he will abide by the Court's ruling, his other recent statement noted above and those of Vice President Vance raise a question regarding that.  

What happens if he doesn't abide by the Court's ruling?  The possible scenarios are not pretty.  If the Executive branch does not submit to the Judicial branch of government as foreseen in the Constitution's checks and balances, we would indeed be in a crisis.  It could come down to the same question as in other dictatorships—the military.  Does the military support the President or does it support our democracy and Constitution?

One can only hope that Trump is not so full of himself that when push comes to shove, he will relent and not foment a civil war.

Proof that Trump Has Deceived His Middle and Working Class Supporters

In his flurry of executive orders since taking office, Trump has not taken one action that will help the middle class or the working class.  ALL of his orders are designed to either benefit big business and the rich, who have great influence with Trump, or to throw red meat to the Right’s culture warriors.

The orders concerning immigration and borders will not help.  Trump says that getting rid of illegal immigrants will help the middle and working class, but it will not.  It will not make this country safer (because the data shows that illegal immigrants are not the source of the crime problem).  It will not make more jobs available, because illegal immigrants take jobs that no other American wants.  What these orders will do is result in an increase in prices of both the food we eat and many other products because illegal immigrants are vital to these areas of commerce.

The orders concerning international trade, business, and the economy will have no beneficial impact on the middle class and working class.  He has ordered federal agencies to review their policies so as to reduce consumer prices, but they have no control over prices.  Their regulations may provide some justification for prices being what they are, but removing regulations will not only harm the public but will not guarantee any price reductions.  Instead, corporations will see any decrease in regulation as an opportunity to increase profits.  As for increasing tariffs, there is general agreement that the tariffs and the trade wars that will accompany such action will result in an increase in prices consumers pay for a wide variety of products.

The orders concerning climate, energy, and the environment will not help.  Trump argues that increasing production of fossil fuels will decrease gas prices at the pump.  While that is a possibility, it will have no impact for at least several years.  And it will do so at a cost of greatly increasing the physical forces that are leading to climate disorder and an increase in the intensity of natural disasters.

The orders concerning diversity, transgender rights, and civil rights will not help.  In fact, they will hurt the middle class and the working class.  A large proportion of the American middle class (41%) and working class (45%) are not White—there is substantial overlap.  Repealing or prohibiting all efforts regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion will harm those people.  So while these orders may well help Trump’s middle class White supporters, it will harm his non-White supporters.

Orders regarding Federal workers and government structure will not help.  Trump officials have told workers at the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau to "halt any supervision or examination activity and all stakeholder engagement" and the offices have been closed for the coming week;  this is not good for consumers, i.e. the middle and working class.  Trump officials claim that the hiring freeze on the IRS will help the middle class and small businesses by reducing the number of audits, making it sound like the IRS was on a mission to audit the middle class, which is not true.  In general, if Trump is successful in drastically cutting the federal work force and cutting Federal funds going to the states, it is bound to have a negative impact on the middle class and working class because some will find themselves out of work and many will be impacted by a reduction in government services which they use.

The orders on health care will not help.  On the contrary, they will definitely harm the middle class and working class.  By repealing President Biden’s orders making it easier to enroll in Medicaid, be covered by the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), and lower prescription drug costs, Trump is harming millions of middle class and working class Americans.

The orders on foreign policy, national security and America First will not help.  And they are a slap in the face to all the Muslim-Americans who voted for Trump after being assured by Trump envoys that he was sensitive to Palestinian needs.  He has deceived them.

Bottom line, Trump has, not surprisingly given his history, let his middle and working class supporters down in every way but the culture wars.  He has done nothing to improve their financial situation and instead his actions are likely to increase prices again, which is a major policy reversal of the promise he made which was the reason why many people voted for him.

The middle and working class people who voted for Trump, together with the Muslim-Americans he deceived, should take to the streets and protest Trump's deceit and mendacity.  He used these people to win, and now has dumped them as irrelevant to his aims.

Misuse of the Pardon Power

The Constitutional provision that grants the President the right to pardon individuals or commute their sentences includes no guidelines or limits upon its use.  Historically, however, the pardon has been used mostly to show mercy (e.g. someone has already served many years for committing a crime and is now very ill) or to serve justice (e.g. someone was convicted for a crime and new evidence indicates that he either was not guilty or had an unfair trial).

Recently, both President Biden and President Trump have used the pardon power in ways that go beyond these rationale and should not be allowed.  Biden used it to pardon his son, who had been convicted of a felony.  There was no claim that his son wasn't guilty, just that this was a political prosecution.  The pardon power should not be used to free family members or friends.  The possibility of misuse is too great.

Trump pardoned nearly all of the 1500 people who were convicted of crimes in connection with the January 6 storming of the capital.  His pardon included both those convicted of non-violent crimes and those convicted of violent crimes, such as attacking a police officer.  These are all people who acted at Trump's behest and support him.  A president should not be able to pardon people who  he is connected with or who help him.  He did this previously with Roger Stone.

There have been other misuses in the not-so-distant past—pardons that have had nothing to do with mercy or serving justice;  Biden and Trump are not alone in their misuse of this power.  But both are guilty of perhaps the most egregious examples of misuse.

Congress should act to provide guidelines for the use of the pardon power.

“YMCA” and Trump

At the Trump rally on Sunday before his inauguration, the Village People were on stage with him, singing their iconic song, “YMCA,” which has become a standard at Trump rallies and which Trump does a little dance movement to.

How ironic that this gay anthem has become so connected with Trump.  In response to other comments regarding this, the head of the Village People, who wrote the song, said that it was never intended to refer to gays.  He said that the line about hanging out with the boys was an expression that Blacks used; it has nothing to do with gay cruising and sex at YMCAs throughout the country.

How ridiculous and mendacious.  First, it is well-known among gays that YMCAs in many cities across the country were and are hot spots for gay cruising and sex.  So the song title and lyrics definitely are consistent with the meaning that made the song a gay anthem in the late 70s and 80s.

Second, supporting its gay context is the look of the Village People.  You have a collection of macho stereotypes, most associated with gay fantasy.  There is the leatherman/biker, the cowboy, the construction worker, the policeman, and the sailor.  The only one not known to me as a gay fantasy is the Native American.  Not only are they gay fantasy characters but when they pose for photos, all buff muscles, they hit another gay fantasy.

Then there is the name of the group, the Village People.  The village is an area of New York City that was the center of gay social life in the second half of the 20th century.  It was the site of the Stonewall riots, which were the start of the gay liberation movement.  Gay bars were concentrated there and at night the sidewalks were filled with gays. The village was NYC’s answer to the Castro in San Francisco.

Put it all together, and the claim that “YMCA” had nothing to do with gays is ludicrous.  That neither Trump, nor anyone around him, nor his supporters were aware of this connection says much about their disconnect with aspects of our culture beyond their own; they are clueless.  Even if the song at its conception had nothing to do with gay life, the knowledge that it had become a gay anthem would make the song anathema to most of the MAGA world.

More Hitler - Trump Analogy

I wrote a post on October 7, 2024 noting an analogy between the state of Germany and Germans in the 1920s that facilitated Hitler's rise to power as well as Hitler's propaganda tactics and that of the United States and Trump.

There is another unfortunate analogy that must be pointed out.  Hitler became all-powerful with the craven support of corporate titans and the conservative political establishment. Neither of these groups could stand Hitler, but they knew he was the new game in town and they played to his ego, thinking that sooner or later, he would fail and they would seize power.  Of course. that eventuality didn't happen until Germany was reduced to rubble and conquered.

In the case of Trump, we are seeing much similar behavior, but thankfully there are some who are not craven.  First the similarities.  Both politicians and billionaire corporate titans who spoke very poorly of Trump at one point, changed their tune when they realized that he had captured the soul of the Republican base and was a man who would brook no disagreement.

In general, when primary battles are all over, everyone supports the nominee.  That's as it should be.  But here there was a difference.  In the Republican primary (both 2016 and 2020), those trying to defeat Trump didn't just disagree on policy, they vilified the man in the harshest of terms.  Yet once he got the nomination and had obviously captured the party, they all fell in line, one after the other, and kissed his ring.  The fact that they had defined him in such negative, dangerous, and unfit terms was now irrelevant.

Then there were those, such as George W. Bush, who refused, even when implored by his daughter, to come out against Trump.  He didn't support him or say good things about him, but in this situation, remaining silent was the equivalent of endorsing him.  It's like Niemöller in Germany who didn't speak out against the Nazis and when they came to get him, it was too late.  (See my post, "Hitler-Trump Analogy.")

But thankfully there were a brave few who refused to forsake their principles—Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, Mitt Romney—as well as those behind the Lincoln Project, who tried to convince fellow Republicans to not support Trump.  It was to no avail, but their actions are a bright light during this sordid period of the Republican Party.

Unless Trump starts a nuclear war, he will not leave the United States in a heap of rubble.  But he can devastate our institutions and severely damage the country.  

One thing is certain: he will not Make America Great Again.  That has been a great marketing tool, but as is often the case with marketing, it bears little relation to reality.  (See my post, "The 2020 Election Is about the Survival of American Democracy, of our Historic Values.")

Whatever Happened to the Devil?

This may seem like an odd subject for this blog, but given the state of conflict in the world, it is very relevant.  Read on and see why.

There is no question that the Devil has gone missing in most religious teaching.  It's a common observation.  The only explanation I've seen is that modern man is not receptive to talk about demons and squirms when the subject matter is raised.  Instead, in modern theology and preaching, the emphasis is on doing good, on following the word of God.  There is little mention of the Devil's influence in people's lives.

Yet given the seemingly endemic nature of conflict and violence in the world, whether in the home or between nations, we have dismissed the Devil from spiritually-correct discussion at our peril.  Anyone with an open mind can observe the Devil at work everywhere around us; the devil is alive and well.

Why do people squirm when someone talks about the Devil?  Is it really because they are modern and don't believe this talk about supernatural or dark forces?  Given the odd things that modern man believes in, I doubt this is the case.  I think it's more likely that they have had experience with dark forces and they squirm because they are in denial and don't want to admit that that is what they have had contact with.

Before going any further, I should make clear what I am talking about when I used the word "Devil."  Just like when I talk about God, I am talking about the divinity within us, not the bearded guy in the sky who controls everything (see my post, "God Is Not Dead, We Just Look for God in the Wrong Places"), when I talk about the Devil, I am talking about the devil within us, not the being with the pointed tail.

In my previous writing, I have said that man's insecurity is behind all violence and conflict in the world, whether in the home or between nations.  How does that square with what I'm saying now?

There are two things to distinguish:  the devil influencing people and someone becoming the devil incarnate, a dark force.  When someone reacts to something with insecurity, that is certainly not the guidance of God, but it is the guidance of the Devil because insecurity makes man weak, and weakness is fertile ground for the Devil.  So to say that insecurity is the cause of all violence and conflict in the world is the same as saying that the devil is the cause; the devil can only work through man.

In the other case—when someone becomes the devil incarnate, a dark force—he or she has sold his soul to the devil.  This person is no longer human.  He is a fallen man who lives his hell on earth.  He rejoices in torturing people, in causing them to suffer.  Such a person is not acting out of insecurity but out of malevolence.  And unfortunately, it has been my experience that such dark forces are around in large numbers.

When I talk to people about my experience of dark forces, their eyes typically glaze over and view me like a kook.  Most often if they know the person, they defend him as a good person.  The devil is a master con man; he has turned such people into enablers by convincing them that the person is good. If they don't know him or her, they say that maybe the person does bad things but they're not the Devil or a dark force.  That doesn't exist in their world view.

The religious establishments have done their flock, man, a disservice by catering to this "modern" sensibility regarding the Devil because the Devil or dark force is very real and without question is the force that tempts people to do bad or inhumane things to others. We see this truth even in cartoons that show an angel sitting on one shoulder given a person advice while the devil is sitting on the other shoulder trying to convince the person to do something bad or mischievous.

There is too much emphasis on supporting/growing the religious establishment, and thus of not doing things that upset the flock and turn them away,  The role of religion is to set man on the right path—both for himself and those around him—to lead him away from the devil, from the emotions, fears, and anxieties of his ego-mind.  Man has never wanted to hear such preaching, but it is necessary.  That is the role of religion.

In many posts, I have talked about the inhumanity of man and how to get man back on the right track ... the track to humanity.  The suggestions I have made in those posts all have merit.  But we will not be able to achieve any of those spiritual goals if we are not willing to recognize that the Devil is in our presence and he does not wish us well.  

I have written that the ego-mind is the source of our emotions, fears, and anxieties, which is the truth. But behind our psychological reflexes is the Devil.  That is why it is so hard for us to get past what our ego-mind tells us to do.

Here again, we must go back to the future.  We must go back to an understanding that there are forces at work in the universe which are supernatural.  We are not the all-powerful, independent person that we want to think man is.  Our only way back to peace and happiness is to realize that we cannot be in control of our destiny unless we stand up to the Devil.  Flip Wilson may have gotten a laugh when his character, Ernestine, said, "The Devil made me do it!"  But it is no laughing matter. 

One Man, One Vote Is Now an Illusion

The New York Times and many other news outlets have just reported that Elon Musk spent over $250 million supporting Donald Trump's campaign for president.  The combined campaigns raised nearly $4.7 billion dollars.  The amount of money is obscene.

This is a natural and inevitable outgrowth of the 2010 Citizen's United decision by the Supreme Court, which found that corporations and other organizations were citizens and so entitled under the free speech amendment to support political candidates, and that the amount of money they spent in support of a candidate, as long as such spending was not coordinated with the campaign, could not be limited.

This decision has been criticized on various levels, mostly as a blow to democracy because of the increased influence on campaigns by corporations and wealthy donors.  And that is true.  But from a legal standpoint, what's wrong with that? This question has not, to my knowledge, been addressed.

What wrong is that it makes the Supreme Court rule of "one man, one vote" meaningless, an illusion.  What is this rule?  It holds that in drawing congressional districts, all citizens in a state should have roughly equal representation.  

Why is that of crucial importance?  Because ours is a representative democracy and in the House of Representatives, as opposed to the Senate, each person's vote should have an equal value.  Each person should have an equal voice as to the direction of our country.

But what if each person's voice is not in an important sense his own?  What if huge amounts of money are spent to influence his vote, if he is bombarded with advertising to make him vote for one candidate or the other?  The outcome of the election is still based on those votes, but how people vote is greatly influenced by the advertising and emotions that are put in play.

And this is not the marketplace of ideas envisioned by the 1st Amendment.  This is biased marketing that appeals to the emotions, not the mind. Even if "alternative facts" were not part of that advertising, it still would be an appeal to emotion rather than rational thought.

A democracy based on emotion rather than rational thought is a democracy in form only.  A democracy depends on reasoned debate, both by the elected representatives and by the public.  Because reasoned debate is a search for the truth.  Whereas emotional debate doesn't get past the emotions; it is not about the search for truth.  And a democracy based on emotion is likely to attract a demagogue as leader and be in danger of slipping into an autocratic state.  Witness the ascendence of Donald Trump.

There is only one way to reverse the impact of Citizen's United.  Adopting Federal financing of elections wouldn't work because the Court's holding would prohibit legislation that sought to limit donations that were not coordinated with a campaign.  The only possibility left would be a constitutional amendment that would reverse the Supreme Court's decision.  And that is a process that is unlikely to succeed, certainly in our current polarized state. 

So until the Court once again has a liberal majority, or at least a neutral conservative majority, which could be persuaded to overrule Citizen's United, we are stuck with elections that are a contest of mega-donors and often appeal to the darkest forces within us.