#Chairman of Joint Chiefs

[hale-nathan]

Trump Weird News - Trump is: "Fascist To The Core"

"No Person Has Ever Posed More Of A Danger To The United States"

[deadpresidents]

"Twenty men have served as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs since the position was created after World War II. Until Milley, none had been forced to confront the possibility that a President would try to foment or provoke a coup in order to illegally remain in office. A plain reading of the record shows that in the chaotic period before and after the 2020 election, Milley did as much, or more, than any other American to defend the constitutional order, to prevent the military from being deployed against the American people, and to forestall the eruption of wars with America's nuclear-armed adversaries. Along the way, Milley deflected Trump's exhortations to have the U.S. military ignore, and even on occasion commit, war crimes. Milley and other military officers deserve praise for protecting democracy, but their actions should also cause deep unease. In the American system, it is the voters, the courts, and Congress that are meant to serve as checks on a President's behavior, not the generals."

[taiwantalk]

https://x.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1707797970152804569?s=20

[xtruss]

Analysis: What Israel Can Teach the U.S. About Confronting a Constitutional Crisis

Sometimes you not only need to vote—you also need to vote with your feet.

— By Aaron David Miller and Daniel Miller | Foreign Policy | March 18, 2023

A protester waves an Israeli flag during a massive protest against the government's judicial overhaul plan on March 11 in Tel Aviv, Israel (Illegally Occupied Palestine). Amir Levy/Getty Images

Over the past four months, in an extraordinary display of national resolve and resistance, millions of Israelis have rallied in the streets to protest their government’s efforts to revolutionize the judiciary. Because Israel does not have a written constitution or bicameral parliament, these so-called reforms, if enacted, would eviscerate an independent judiciary, remove the one check and balance standing in the way of unbridled government power, and fundamentally undermine Israel’s democratic system.

In a recent conversation with the author, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak noted that the behavior of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government during the current crisis evoked thoughts of the U.S. Capitol insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021.

Can the United States learn anything from Israel in its own efforts to stop democratic backsliding and combat a future constitutional crisis in the event, for example, that a president seeks to hold on to power, overturn the results of a free and fair election, and threaten the very essence of constitutional government?

At first glance, the sheer size of the United States and fundamental differences between the two countries’ political cultures and governance systems might appear to render comparisons moot, if not irrelevant. But a closer look reveals important takeaways from Israel’s situation that are worth considering. If Israelis succeed in checking this judicial juggernaut, and even if they don’t, there are lessons for Americans should U.S. liberal democracy be seriously threatened.

The biggest takeaway from what has been happening in Israel has to do with the size, tactics, and endurance of the protests themselves. For months, the world has watched Israelis engage in sustained, massive, nonviolent protests and civil disobedience in cities and towns across the country, drawing participants from nearly all sectors of society.

The scale, scope, and composition of these demonstrations are unprecedented in the country’s history. Hundreds of thousands regularly attend the protests, which are largely grassroots demonstrations, locally organized with former officials and intellectuals recruited to speak. On April 1, close to 450,000 Israelis took to the streets. That is close to 5 percent of the population, roughly equivalent to 17 million Americans. A recent poll showed that 20 percent of all Israelis have protested at one time or another against the judicial coup.

Given the vast disparity in size, replicating this kind of sustained protest movement is no easy matter. As a point of comparison, the Women’s March on Washington on Jan. 21, 2017, drew between 1 and 1.6 percent of the U.S. population. But that doesn’t mean this is impossible. Indeed, the Black Lives Matter protests that took place in the United States in the summer of 2020 were largely spontaneous and may have included as many as 26 million—and perhaps more—protesters in total.

Size is critical, but so is the character of demonstrations. The essential element is nonviolence. As Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan have demonstrated in studying civil resistance movements that occurred between 1900-2006, using nonviolent tactics—which can include protests, boycotts, and civil disobedience—enhances a movement’s domestic and international legitimacy, increases its bargaining power, and lessens the government’s efforts to delegitimize it. Although the vast majority of Black Lives Matter protests were peaceful (despite the false or misleading media and government claims to the contrary), there were acts of violence, looting, and rioting. Any future protest movement in the United States must shun this kind of destructive behavior.

The Israeli movement’s endurance and persistence has also been an asset. The struggle for democracy is not a 100-yard dash—as demonstrated in other countries, such as Serbia. In Israel’s case, the perception that the so-called judicial reform wasn’t just some technical adjustment to the political system, but rather a fundamental threat to Israelis’ way of life, sustained the protests. The profound anger and mistrust toward the Netanyahu government further catalyzed Israelis from virtually all sectors of society to turn out in the streets.

A second essential part of the response to the judicial legislation in Israel has been the active participation of military reservists who have signed petitions, participated in protests, and boycotted their formal and volunteer reserve duty. These reservists play a critical role in both intelligence and air force operations that are key to the current security challenges Israel faces.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) is the most respected institution in the country. In fact, what led Netanyahu to pause the judicial legislation was the surge of protests that followed his (since rescinded) decision to fire Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. Gallant had publicly called for a halt to the judicial overhaul, arguing that it was jeopardizing Israel’s security. Adding to the pressure, a host of former IDF chiefs of staff, commanders, and former directors of Mossad have publicly opposed the judicial legislation. And even active, lower-level Mossad employees have been given permission to participate in the protests.

Such actions by former and current government officials are precisely what is needed to imbue the protests with additional legitimacy and to amplify the seriousness of the moment. Active members of IDF units have not refused to serve, and we’re not recommending that active U.S. military units join the protests. Indeed, given the U.S. tradition of the subordination of military to civilian authority, uniformed military would be hard-pressed to intervene in a political crisis.

Still, before the November 2020 election, when then-U.S. President Donald Trump refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power pending the results, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley issued a public statement that the military had no role in an election and would “obey the lawful orders of our civilian leadership.” And senior military officials might well publicly remind the U.S. military—as the Joint Chiefs of Staff did in the wake of the Capitol insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021—that their mission is to defend the U.S. Constitution.

At the same time, civil servants from throughout the federal government should consider joining the protests and have their organizational representatives (the American Foreign Service Association at the Department of State, for example), issue statements in support. These employees need not resign, at least at first, but they should make clear their nonpartisan opposition to efforts to undermine the rule of law and constitutional norms. The nonpartisan nature of these actions would be reinforced if they involved not just federal employees in Washington, but also the much larger workforce throughout the country. Furthermore, calls to protest could also involve state employees, particularly if the constitutional crisis stemmed from state action.

Third is the importance of strikes. The Histadrut—Israel’s largest trade union, with an estimated 800,000 members—called for a general strike that followed more limited strikes in the preceding months. That decision shut down departures from Ben Gurion Airport. Israel’s research universities and medical facilities (all public hospitals and community clinics) also called to strike, in addition to the closing of banks, businesses, and restaurants (including the ever-popular McDonald’s).

These tactics worked in Israel because, along with other measures (such as closing highways through acts of civil disobedience), they communicated to government ministers and Knesset members that unless they reassessed the situation, the country would shut down, with grave economic and political consequences. The tech sector had already begun to express major concerns that judicial reform as envisioned by the Netanyahu government could turn Israel’s image as a start-up nation into one of a shut-down nation, raising risks that foreign investment might be curtailed and Israeli entrepreneurs might decide to move out of the country.

To be sure, the same tactics could not be so easily deployed in the United States. First, 25 percent of Israeli workers are in a union, compared to 10 percent in the United States. Second, shutting down a country the size of the United States would simply be impossible (although such a strategy might have more success in a small enough state). Additionally, it is unclear if such strikes would help or hurt the opposition politically, particularly in light of the fact that COVID-19 school closures and other lockdown measures were fraught. But strikes should be explored and studied as possible tools. In the summer of 2020, tens of thousands of U.S. workers participated in a “Strike for Black Lives.”

Furthermore, taking a page from the sports strikes in the wake of the 2020 police shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin, there are more creative measures to explore in place of or in conjunction with traditional worker strikes. Sports leagues at both the college and professional level might suspend games until the crisis was resolved. If individual leagues were unwilling to participate, their stars could—and many likely would. What better way to cause a sustained, nationwide conversation about a specific topic that punctures all information bubbles than by forcing the cancellation of college football games, or the NBA playoffs, the World Series, or even the Super Bowl? In recent years, sports figures have increasingly become involved in politics, including ones from places you might not expect.

Similar strategies could be considered in the realm of Hollywood, the music industry, and other areas where Americans have a shared cultural appreciation and imbue their idols with the recognition and respect once enjoyed by political leaders. To avoid the appearance that these measures were partisan or political, these actions would need buy-in from actors, singers, entertainers, and writers from across the political spectrum, including from those who have always stayed above the political fray or who belong to the opposing political parties.

Fourth is the importance of respected political leaders, both current and former, joining the response to a severe political crisis. In Israel, former prime ministers have participated in the protest movement, including Barak and Ehud Olmert, as well as foreign and justice ministers such as Tzipi Livni. Former U.S. presidents have generally avoided this kind of participation, but in a severe crisis one can imagine former Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush, as well as other former senior officials from across the political spectrum, speaking out and participating in demonstrations.

Leadership extends beyond mere symbolism. Israeli opposition leader and former Prime Minister Yair Lapid made calls for a general strike, among other involvement by elected officials. Similar kinds of bipartisan leadership from those in the U.S. House and Senate would be important to amplify the message of the protests and provide legitimacy. And of course, if the constitutional crisis originated from Congress itself, elected representatives could use their authority to shut it down. In this case, the protesters and other stakeholders, such as businesses, should view their opposition as a way to lobby Congress, including by promising to withhold financial backing to any member who participates in the unconstitutional scheme. There were similar actions in the wake of Jan. 6.

It would also be imperative for leaders to come from outside government, including from media organizations that represent a broad spectrum of U.S. politics. Given the United States’ problem with misinformation, this would be essential to accurately portray what was happening on the ground, including dispelling any untruths—for example, the notions that the protests had turned violent or that they were simply partisan reflections of one political party or another.

Finally, perhaps the most important lesson of all is to look for ways to motivate the public with an inclusive national response that transcends party and partisan affiliation. The reason the Israeli protests have been so effective is that even in a society rent by so many divisions, Israelis have gone into the streets because they believe deeply that their very way of life—the character of their society, and the image they have of Israel as an open, tolerant, and democratic polity with all its weaknesses, including and especially the Israeli occupation—is fundamentally threatened. As journalist Gal Beckerman has written, Israeli protesters have wrapped themselves in their flag—the most visible symbol of the protests. And this is something, according to Beckerman, that Americans should take to heart.

It is important to emphasize, though, that most Palestinians—including both those who are Israeli citizens (roughly 2 million out of a total population of 9.7 million) and those under Israel’s occupation and control—see the protests as an effort to protect Israeli Jewish democracy, not a movement to extend equal rights or statehood to them. Arab political parties in Israel have backed the protests, but the majority of Palestinian citizens of Israel, even while they have a great deal to lose should the judicial legislation pass, feel the demonstrations don’t address their needs, including equal rights and rising crime.

But without holding the line against a government whose objectives include de facto if not de jure annexation of the West Bank, continued second-class citizenship for Palestinian citizens of Israel, and enabling violence against Palestinians—as seen in the settler rampages through the West Bank town of Huwara—there will be no chance for peace, an end of the occupation, or statehood for the Palestinians.

And while we remain gloomy about any chance in the near term for an equitable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this protest movement has imbued Israel with a new energy and dynamism. It has created a focus on democracy, rights, and equality that hasn’t been seen in years and that could, under the right leadership, drive home the message that the preservation of Israel as a Jewish democratic state depends on ending the Israeli occupation and extending equal rights not just in principle but in practice to Palestinian citizens of Israel. One can at least hope so.

For the United States, the greatest challenge would be finding a way to wrap a movement in the U.S. flag and identify a broader set of unifying purposes that creates the biggest tent under which millions of Americans could rally. In today’s perniciously partisan environment, this would be hard—some might say impossible. To quote the historian Henry Adams, politics in the United States has become a “systematic organization of hatreds.” Without a written constitution, Israelis have turned to their Declaration of Independence as a source of inspiration, even as a set of principles for a future constitution. Perhaps the United States could do the same, turning to the basic founding principles that have shaped the country’s self-government.

The United States is perhaps the only nation in history founded on an idea: self-government in the interest of securing life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Fundamentally, no matter the differences between Americans, what makes the United States special is its ability to self- correct, reinvent itself, and make progress toward guaranteeing opportunity, equality, and dignity for all. A truly national protest movement must be grounded in this dream and the aspiration of making it more accessible to everyone. We are hopeful and inspired by the younger generations in the United States today—by their commitment to making the country a better place for all Americans, and by how they would rise to meet the challenge if the United States were truly tested.

Of course, the best way to avoid illiberal backsliding, let alone a constitutional crisis, is to vote for candidates who respect the rule of law, abide by the Constitution, and adhere to democratic norms and standards. Once authoritarians entrench themselves in power, they can use their authority to remain there. But sometimes you not only need to vote—you also need to vote with your feet.

Some of this may seem naive and Panglossian. But the fight for U.S. democracy has always mixed the pragmatic and the aspirational. What has happened in Israel these many months has shown the power that people possess to safeguard their democracy when threatened. It’s not an easy conversation to have. But it’s worth having now because the stakes are so very high, and sadly, the dangers to the United States’ own democratic system are all too real.

— Aaron David Miller is a Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a former U.S. State Department Middle East analyst and negotiator in Republican and Democratic administrations. He is the author of The End of Greatness: Why America Can’t Have (and Doesn’t Want) Another Great President.

— Daniel Miller is a Lawyer and Activist. Since 2016, he has engaged in various forms of Pro-democracy work and has written for the Washington Post, CNN, Daily Beast, and New York Daily News on democracy issues.

[panlight]

Guess who's watching the WW again.

But seriously: they both come in through the doors and both are framed in a "this guy is important" way.

Every time I see gifs of Carlisle’s entrance/introduction I’m reminded of another all time great entrance: President Josiah Bartlet in the West Wing.

(The context is he was walking into a meeting where people were arguing over what the first commandment was.)

[minnesotafollower]

President Biden’s Inspiring Praise of John McCain and Criticism of Donald Trump  and MAGA 

On September 28, 2023, President Joe Biden was in Tempe, Arizona to  announce a major federal grant to the state of Arizona to help design and build a new McCain National Library at Arizona State University. The President’s remarks on that occasion honored his deceased friend, John McCain, followed by the President’s blistering attack on Donald Trump and his Make America Great Again (MAGA)…

[oldpoet56]

A Few Things For Us To Consider ( #1284 )

A Few Things For Us To Consider ( #1284 ) 1.) Repetitive excellence only comes from repetitive exercise of the event! 2.) Education teaches us just how little that we do know! 3.) The fruit of the truth is worthy of the exercise that is required to obtain it! 4.) Every single morning we have two choices if we awake, to be evil, or to be Holy! 5.) A little bit of some alcoholic drinks or some…

[bikerpoliticalreport]

Trump: Leaked Bedminster Audio an ‘Exoneration’

 Former President Donald Trump is speaking out against CNN’s release of audio it obtained of him speaking with associates at his Bedminster golf club in July 2021 about a military document concerning Iran, saying the report exonerates him in the federal charges he is facing in connection to classified documents kept at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.

   “The Deranged Special Prosecutor, Jack Smith, working in conjunction with the DOJ & FBI, illegally leaked and ‘spun’ a tape and transcript of me which is actually an exoneration, rather than what they would have you believe,” Trump said on his Truth Social page Monday night after the audio aired on CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360.”

   “This continuing Witch Hunt is another ELECTION INTERFERENCE Scam. They are cheaters and thugs!” he wrote.

   The recording included details from a conversation special counsel Jack Smith used in his indictment accusing the former president of mishandling classified information, as well as some commentary that was not included in the indictment.

   The network has not said how it obtained the recording, and Smith’s office and the Department of Justice have not commented on the leak.

   The tape was said to have come from a July 2021 interview Trump gave to people who were working on the memoir of Mark Meadows, his former chief of staff. According to Smith’s indictment, a writer, a publisher, and two of Trump’s staff members were present and shown classified information about a plan of attack on Iran.

   At the time, Trump was reportedly angry about an article from the New Yorker concerning arguments that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley had made against a strike on Iran, and his concerns that Trump would escalate the situation.

   Smith’s office declined to comment to CNN about the audio release, but Trump’s campaign spokesman, Steven Cheung, said in a statement that the tape “provides context proving, once again, that President Trump did nothing wrong at all.”

   Trump further railed against the indictment against him and about Smith early Tuesday, posting in an all-caps message on Truth Social a call for someone to “please explain to the deranged, Trump-hating Jack Smith, his family, and his friends, that as president of the United States, I come under the Presidential Records Act, as affirmed by the Clinton socks case, not by this psychos’ fantasy of the never used before Espionage Act of 1917.”

   He added that “Smith should be looking at crooked Joe Bidden [sic] and all of the crimes that he has perpetrated on the American public, including the millions & millions of dollars he extorted from foreign countries!”

   Most of the audio’s contents include conversation included in Smith’s indictment but also include the sounds of papers being shuffled.

   In the tape, Trump is also heard saying that he has a “big pile of papers, this thing just came up. Look. This was him. They presented me this – this is off the record but – they presented me this. This was him. This was the Defense Department and him.

   “This was done by the military and given to me,” Trump continues, before noting that the document remained classified.

   “See as president I could have declassified it,” Trump says. “Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.”

   “Now we have a problem,” a staffer responds, to which Trump is heard saying, “Isn’t that interesting.”

   In the indictment, there are ellipses in places where the recording shows Trump and his aide talking about Clinton’s emails and her former aide Anthony Weiner, whose laptop led the CIA to reopen its investigation into her handling of classified information before the 2016 presidential election.

   Last week, during an interview with Fox News’s Bret Baier, Trump denied having classified documents with him during the meeting, reports The New York Times.

   “That was a massive amount of papers and everything else talking about Iran and other things. And it may have been held up or may not, but that was not a document. I didn’t have a document per se,” he said. “There was nothing to declassify. These were newspaper stories, magazine stories, and articles.”

   The audio release comes as the information continues to grow concerning President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

   Last week, photos of Hunter Biden on his abandoned laptop show him at his father’s home in Wilmington, Delaware, on the day he included his father’s name in a 2017 WhatsApp message to threaten a Chinese business associate.

   The investigation is also continuing into allegations that several members of the president’s family were receiving bank transfer payments from foreign entities, with the House Oversight Committee, led by Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., investigating alleged influence peddling schemes by Joe Biden and his family.

[c-rowlesdraws]

okay, one more politics post for the night:

tonight, Trump is doing a rally in Latrobe, Pennsylvania. I'm watching clips of it thanks to this brave man on twitter posting through it; I call this man brave because for me, watching a Trump rally live and unfiltered feels like looking directly at a solar eclipse, if a solar eclipse was also kind of like a racist, demented relative making a toast at Thanksgiving. And there's Some Stuff coming out of Trump's face tonight. He's talking about deporting "gang members" (read: latinos) by invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, the same Act that Roosevelt invoked to force Japanese-Americans and others into internment camps during WWII. He's saying that "[America] couldn't have an act like that now, because now everything's woke". He goes on to call out "woke generals" Mark Milley, a Catholic, highly-decorated army general and Trump's former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and General Jim "Mad Dog" or "Chaos" Mattis, a career Marine and Trump's former Secretary of Defense. He also added a fun local detour to his stump speech sure to make the fine folks of Latrobe smile: an anecdote about Arnold Palmer impressing all the other golf pros in the showers with his incredible, absolutely enormous penis. Trump wants this audience to know Arnold Palmer's thang was Swangin'. "This is a guy that was all man."

and I had to pause while writing this post and come back, so he probably said a bunch more wild stuff after that that I don't even know about yet!

The point is. My point is. This guy cannot be allowed to be president again. Ideally, he can eventually be pushed as far away from any sort of power as possible; but first, we have to vote to stop him from becoming the president again. And by "we", I don't just mean registered Democrats (hello)-- I mean everyone, of any political persuasion, who is eligible to vote. The folks in Trump's audience tonight applauding as he praises Arnold Palmer's huge hog on live television are beyond help, so it's up to the rest of us.

[izooks]

From: JoJoFromJerz

Dear Ma & Pa MAGA,

You say that Donald Trump “loves our troops.”

So, I want to know why that is.

Is it because he received 5 deferments from the draft for military service during the Vietnam War?

Is it because he demeaned a POW, attacked a Gold Star family and told a military widow that her deceased husband “knew what he had signed up for.”

Was it the time he downplayed the traumatic head injuries suffered by our troops after a missile attack as “not real” because they weren’t ‘missing hands and limbs.’

Is it due to all the years he tried to slash benefits for our veterans, the time he said he didn’t want to be seen with war-wounded amputees, and to keep them forever out of his sight, or the time he called our fallen heroes of war “suckers” and “losers”?

Is it the all the times he called our military leaders “dumb” and “overrated” while calling terrorists like the Taliban & Hezbollah “very smart”?

Was it the time he demanded the flags after McCain’s death be returned to full mast, or the time he demanded that a ship bearing his name be blocked from view?

Was it when he stole, hid and lied about our national security secrets, potentially imperiling countless men & women in uniform all over the world?

Or was it when he suggested that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff deserved to be executed?

Maybe it was when he asked Gen. John Kelly (who lost his son in combat) at Arlington National Cemetery, why anyone would sign up for service because as far as he saw it, there was “nothing in it for them.”

Perhaps it was hearing him say that as President he would allow our adversary to attack the same allies this county’s Greatest Generation fought beside and died defending?

Or was it when he insulted Nikki Haley’s husband for currently serving our country overseas?

Which of those things was it that made you believe he loved our troops?

Because I’d really love to know.

[progressivepower]

In response to Donald Trump, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, GEN. MARK MILLEY, U.S.A. RET.) saI’d what EVERYONE who’s ever served should be saying right now: “We don’t take an oath to a king or queen or tyrant...We don’t take an oath to a wannabe dictator. We take an oath to the Constitution!” http://dlvr.it/T8cy87

[justinspoliticalcorner]

It is hard to imagine a worse candidate for the American presidency in 2024 than Donald J Trump. His history of dishonesty, hypocrisy and greed makes him wholly unfit for the office. A second Trump term would erode the rule of law, diminish America’s global standing and deepen racial and cultural divides. Even if he loses, Mr Trump has shown that he will undermine the election process, with allies spreading unfounded conspiracy theories to delegitimise the results. There are prominent Republicans – such as the former vice-president Dick Cheney – who refused to support Mr Trump owing to the threat he poses. Gen Mark Milley, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff under Mr Trump, calls his former boss a “fascist”. America was founded in opposition to absolute monarchy. The Republican nominee models himself after the leader he most admires: Russia’s autocratic president, Vladimir Putin. Mr Trump’s authoritarianism may finish US democracy. He has praised and promised to pardon those convicted in the January 6 insurrection. He has suggested bypassing legal norms to use potentially violent methods of repression, blurring the lines between vigilantism, law enforcement and military action, against groups – be they Democrats or undocumented immigrants – he views as enemies. His team has tried to distance itself from the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 and its extreme proposals – such as mass firings of civil servants and erasing women’s rights – that poll poorly. But it is likely that, in office, Mr Trump would adopt many of these intolerant, patriarchal and discriminatory plans. He aims to dismantle the government to enrich himself and evade the law. If Republicans gain control of the Senate, House and White House, he would interpret it as a mandate to silence his critics and entrench his power. Mr Trump is a transactional and corrupting politician. His supporters see this as an advantage. Christian nationalists want an authoritarian regime to enforce religious edicts on Americans. Elon Musk wants to shape the future without regulatory oversight. Both put self-interest ahead of the American people. Democracy erodes slowly at first, then all at once. In office, Mr Trump appointed three supreme court justices, who this summer blocked efforts to hold him accountable for trying to overturn the 2020 election: their immunity ruling renders the president “a king above the law”, in the words of the liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor. Since Kamala Harris stepped into the spotlight following Joe Biden’s exit, her campaign has been a masterclass in political jujitsu, deftly flipping Mr Trump’s perceived strengths into glaring weaknesses. With a focus on joy, the vice-president sharply contrasted with Mr Trump’s grim narrative of US decline. In their sole televised debate, Ms Harris skillfully outmaneuvered Mr Trump, who fell into her traps, appearing angry and incoherent. She is confident and composed. He sounds unhinged. [...] Political hope fades when we settle for what is, instead of fighting for what could be. Ms Harris embodies the conviction that it’s better to believe in democracy’s potential than to surrender to its imperfections. The Republican agenda is clear: voter suppression, book bans and tax cuts for billionaires. Democrats seek global engagement; the GOP favours isolation. The Biden-Harris administration laid the groundwork for a net zero America. A Trumpian comeback would undo it. A Harris win, with a Democratic Congress, means a chance to restore good governance, create good jobs and lead the entire planet’s climate efforts. Defeating Mr Trump protects democracy from oligarchy and dictatorship. There is too much at stake not to back Ms Harris for president.

The Guardian Editorial Board's endorsement of Kamala Harris for the 2024 US Presidential Election (10.23.2024).

The Guardian’s editorial board gave a powerful endorsement for Kamala Harris, as our democracy’s survival depends on her winning.

[porterdavis]

Preaching to the choir

Here are quotes from the people who know Donald Trump best:

Mike Pence — Trump's Vice President

“It should come as no surprise that I will not be endorsing Donald Trump this year.”

Mark Esper — Trump's Secretary of Defense

“Trump is not fit for office because he puts himself first and I think anybody running for office should put the country first.”

James Mattis — Trump's Secretary of Defense

“Trump's use of the Presidency to destroy trust in our election and to poison our respect for fellow citizens has been enabled by pseudo political leaders whose names will live in infamy as profiles in cowardice. Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people - does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us.”

John Kelly — Trump's Chief of Staff

“Trump is a person that has no idea what America stands for and has no idea what America is all about. He's a person who admires autocrats and murderous dictators. A person that has nothing but contempt for our democratic institutions, our Constitution, and the rule of law.”

Mick Mulvaney — Trump's Chief of Staff

“I am working hard to make sure that someone else is the nominee.”

Mark Milley — Trump's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

“Trump is a wannabe dictator. We don't take an oath to an individual. We take an oath to the Constitution, and we take an oath to the idea that is America - and we're willing to die to protect it.”

John Bolton — Trump's National Security Advisor

“There will be celebrations in the Kremlin if Trump is elected in November. Putin thinks that he is an easy mark. Donald Trump wants Americans to treat him like North Koreans treat Kim Jong Un. Get ready.”

Cassidy Hutchinson — Trump's Assistant to Chief of Staff

“If Trump is elected president again in 2024, I do fear that it will be the last election where we're voting for democracy because, if he is elected again, I don't think we'll be voting under the same Constitution.”

Stephanie Grisham — Chief of Staff to Trump's Wife Melania

“I did not vote for Trump in 2020.”

Sarah Matthews — Trump's Deputy Press Secretary

“Trump has a history of making unhinged comments. He helped incite a deadly insurrection on our nation's Capitol.”

Anthony Scaramucci — Trump's Director of Communications

“Trump's going to make things rougher for people. He has already said he's going after his adversaries using the Department of Justice. When someone's telling you they're going to flex and be a dictator on day one and go after their adversaries, this is against the 200+ year experiment of America.”

Alyssa Farah Griffin — Trump's Director of Strategic Communications

“The reason that I cannot in good conscience endorse Donald Trump this year also has to do with the fact that he is walking away. Not just from keeping faith with the constitution on January 6th, but also from a commitment to fiscal responsibility, a commitment to the sanctity of life, a commitment to American leadership in the world.”

Bill Barr — Trump's Attorney General

“I have made clear that I strongly oppose Trump for the nomination and will not endorse Trump. One of the reasons I'm against Trump as the nominee is I don't think he's going to move the country forward.”

HR McMaster — Trump's National Security Advisor

“It would be terribly divisive for our country for Trump to run again.”

Take it from those who know him best!

[maturemenoftvandfilms]

Mark Milley Former US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Damn… this is the first time seeing Mark since he left the Joint Chiefs of Staff and he still looks hot as fuck.

Letting his hair grow. Open shirt revealing he has a thick neck and he might be hairless. And I tell though those pants he has thick calves. Which I love. And bet he still has that thick ass.

That's husband material. Dare I say trophy husband material.