Bill LaCroix: F.B.I. Loyalty to Trump??!!

Thursday, October 4, 2018

F.B.I. Loyalty to Trump??!!

Former F.B.I. Director James Comey During Congressional Testimony Last Year Receiving Orders From a Coffee Cup Instead of "President" Trump

(Republican Conspiracy Theory #27018-b: see F.B.I. Kavanaugh Investigation appendix)

The firing of former F.B.I. Director James Comey by Trump last year for being “disloyal” to him personally, and the hiring of a millionaire Republican operative to take his place (Christopher Wray) should have been our second constitutional crisis. One of the first issues Mueller was supposed to investigate, in fact, was whether Trump intentionally obstructed justice by firing Comey for not being “loyal” to him and dropping the “Russian matter”. The first constitutional crisis should have been Mitch (Sock Monkey) McConnell’s refusal to schedule Merrick Garland’s confirmation hearings while Obama (“that black guy”…wink, wink) was still president.

Neither of these were dealt with as the crises they were because the Republican majority wanted to give their rich benefactors (and, indeed, themselves) large amounts of money from the public coffers.

This they did, and now we have the spectacle of a “loyal” millionaire F.B.I. director helping Republican senators and the "president" cover up an investigation so the Supreme Court can be stacked with Far-Right Federalist Society members. All of these bad actors have been involved since the beginning of this charade, all started out extremely wealthy, and all are getting wealthier and wealthier each day (and month and year) this charade continues.

Republicans (and corporate media) have this game they play with us. They tell us there are “two sides” of any issue like this, and each side should be equally heard and then we should “move on”. They frame these catastrophic issues of their own making (a standard racketeering tactic) as a “Republican vs Democrat” thing, and since corporate media is owned and operated by extremely rich people, they use this false wedge to further frame anyone who opposes them as “Democrats” and therefore “evil”.

OK then. Let’s just admit that there’s no doubt that a certain percentage of any human population is either amoral, mentally-compromised, hopelessly bigoted, batshit crazy, or a combination of those choices. OK. Now let’s have a reality check with a mere observation: just because our demonstrably-failing society rewards sociopaths with vast amounts of money and power, that doesn’t mean that they are leaders, or even that they have a broad constituency behind them. It means, simply, simply…that they are demagogues.

OK, finally, the question, a simple, simple one: just exactly when did the president start having the right to be telling the F.B.I. who and what to investigate in matters writ large like a SCOTUS nomination (or anything!?) without setting off constitutional crisis alarm bells?!

Jeezus H. (himself) Christ! Remember the Benghazi “hearings”. Remember Bill Clinton’s inquisition (by these same emperious jerks?!) What if Obama or Clinton had pulled this? The Horror!...right?

The real question, as far as I can trace it is this:

Since when, oh mighty millionaires and billionaires, did you become our princes and princesses?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Why I Blog

Thoreau and Emerson had a discussion in May of 1846 about the Mexican War--our first war that set us on the course we still track today. Conquest of nation-states and the inevitable Imperialism that follows. Emerson counseled his friend that we can supersede the transgressions of a well-meaning State by the Muse. Thoreau wasn't so sure that the State was so well-meaning or that the Muse alone would be enough to supersede it. But he tried both the Muse and "other means" to our everlasting benefit. Civil Disobedience, in the American sense, has always been his child, in large part because he raised it to the level of Literature. "Other means" requires the Muse to be lasting and effective, and vice versa. How would anyone know what the hell you were talking about otherwise, let alone emulate what you're trying to do?

The problem with Progressives today, I think, is that we have been in the habit of letting other people--Rupert Murdoch, the Koch Brothers, Sun Myung Moon--tell our stories for us, people who do not mean us well. We haven't plugged our muse into our political discourse very much, and that's a big mistake. Mark Twain didn't make that mistake, and he was among the first American writers to use the new-fangled typewriter. Why do we children of Twain, Emerson and Thoreau make that mistake now with our new-fangled computers?

For all its faults, Corporate America understands that people are story-based critters, like it or not, and I think we progressives should like it. By definition, people make many important social (read: political) decisions based largely on who's the best storyteller. It’s in our nature, and Corporate Media is a classic example of how Nature abhors a vacuum. We’ve collectively created a cultural ‘narrative’ vacuum by allowing ourselves to be so easily entertained by—Corporate Media! And Nature hates that. She’ll allow the same garbage responsible for that vacuum (Corporate Media!) to be sucked in and to rattle around until it ruins our cognative motors before she’ll let that sad state of affairs stand. I'd ask any "America Firsters" stumbling on this blog and reading this far to consider: Rupert Murdoch is from Australia. Sun Myung Moon, now-deceased but whose creatures, the Washington Times and UPI still walk the face of the earth, was from Korea. The Koch Brothers, of course, were from the sheikdom of Texas. All of them were, and the living ones still are, so obscenely rich they apparently believed they own America simply because they paid for it, and we collectively let them define who among us are “real Americans”?! C'mon!

Although it helps to strive toward the goal, progressives don't have to be great writers, and I'm not claiming to be one. We simply have to acknowledge that we have the better stories and we’re sitting on our best ones. Our truest ones. Multi-national billionaires have better versions of American Liberalism and Progressivism than the real ones told by real Americans? Us? We shouldn't put up with that. Why do we?

Like any historic attempt, we need to find our Voice. Significant action will come only after our contemporary, progressive political muse matures, which it hasn't yet. Not to paint with too wide a brush, but too much of our positions have been framed in intellectual, almost-didactic prose, which, if you don't identify as an intellectual, means boring. Not all of it, just a whole lot of it, but never mind. If history's still a guide--and I hope it still is--there's hope, because when any progressive movement's Muse matures, it generally becomes the baseline for much of Western Civilization’s meaningful and therefore lasting literature. For example, "Mein Kampf" is still in print but I'll bet you'd have to turn over a lot of rocks to find someone to call it 'literature'.

So, this blog. It's a call, I suppose, to elevate our critical modern discussions out of Fox-news-landia back to where intelligent, caring Americans can find their feet and fight back, either with the Muse, by other means, or both. It’s not up to some politician to change the narrative. That’s up to us. So by definition we still have as good a chance as we ever had. Don't lose hope. It’s always been this way. At least in literate societies.

In other words, like Emerson advised and Thoreau partially agreed with: stories matter, and may the best Muse win.