Welcome to Stupid America!

From the Associated Press, “Anti-Islam populist Geert Wilders won a huge victory in Dutch elections, according to a near complete count of the vote early Thursday, in a stunning lurch to the far right for a nation once famed as a beacon of tolerance. The result will send shockwaves through Europe, where far-right ideology is on the rise, and puts Wilders in line to lead talks to form the next governing coalition and possibly become the first far-right prime minister of the Netherlands. With nearly all votes counted, Wilders’ Party for Freedom was forecast to win 37 seats in the 150-seat lower house of parliament, two more than predicted by an exit poll when voting finished Wednesday night and more than double the 17 he won at the last election.”… Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who boasts of turning HunI’ve into an ‘illiberal’ state and has similarly harsh stances on migration and EU institutions, was quick to congratulate Wilders. ‘The winds of change are here! Congratulations,’ Orban said. … The result is the latest in a series of elections that is altering the European political landscape. From Slovakia and Spain, to Germany and Poland, populist and hard-right parties triumphed in some EU member nations and faltered in others.” It is never a good sign when dictators praise the win of a far-right party.

Now, the Netherlands has taken a right turn. Let me reiterate what I’ve been saying for years now: Liberal democracies are dying worldwide, and dumbass Democratic f***tards keep wanting to believe that America is immune from this incomprehensible global love affair with authoritarian rule and affection toward hatred. For where they hate Islam, the rest is sure to follow — hate the Jews, hate the gays, hate the Blacks, hate immigrants, and hate women. (I understand the resentment and wariness toward Muslims. Islam is currently the only major religion that seems to invite and condone terrorism wherever it exists. However, I’m not sure re-ordering national governments further to the right is the best tactic to tackle the problem of Islam. I’m just saying.) This is as certain as the Sun rises in the East and sets in the West. As certain as night follows day; and, to be sure, we are entering a global nightfall that will last for as long as the shadow of dictatorship casts its benighted hold over the world. Just as the Nazis gripped Europe with its loathing and promise of order and conformity for years, the same evil tendencies have gained root across the planet. Recall, Nazi ideology flourished in America (the American Bund), Great Britain, and other nations that welcomed closer collaboration — if not downright full-throated support — with Hitler. History is repeating itself. I understand the constant references to Hitler make such warnings banal, but the comparison is most apt because, in a sense, we are not that far removed from this history. Indeed, much of the current world order directly results from the peace made after World War II. Yet this same world order that brought us nearly 80 years of relative peace is ending — nay, it has already ended! The alliances that have kept the world safe are crumbling, yet people have not a f***ing care in the world about what they should be fearfully apprehending.

This seems particularly true in Europe. European countries have become increasingly hostile to the EU and, apparently, to the notion of cooperation. The far-right party in the Netherlands won, in part, on the idea of “Nexit” — exit from the EU. Christ! I’m sure the Dutch have never heard of Brexit. You know, that time Britain elected to leave the EU, and now they regret doing so because it made their economy the opposite of better off, which the pro-Brexit crowd promised. What could possibly go wrong by leaving the second-largest trading block in the world? So, I guess the Dutch are about to f*** around and find out. Oh, well.

I guess it was only a matter of time before the EU would fall apart. Americans incorrectly believe Europe is one homogeneous country or a coalition of like-minded nations. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is a collection of 44 countries (or so, depending on how you count) with different cultures and languages, with each believing they are the most important nation on the continent. Where the disease of dictatorship and illiberalism infects one country, metastasis is sure to follow. A new world war is in the making; I’m just not sure yet if it already started in Ukraine coupled with the advancement of antisemitism (which is nothing new, really) or has yet to start in America with the return of traitor trump, for those who think another American civil war would remain contained within our borders are morons. An America at war with itself is a calling card for the likes of China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran to make their moves of domination across the globe. Sadly, hatred breeds war, and the comforts of liberalism and peace over these last eight decades have bred complacency that, in turn, allows hatred to flourish. It is an unbroken cycle; we are making that next inexorable turn toward conflict. Mark my words! You’ve been warned. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

In the previous post, I discussed the idea of The Great Chain of Being and how the concept was applied by contemporaries in early modern England to maintain societal and government order. I also discussed how the English people broke the Great Chain of Being when they executed King Charles I (1625 – 1649). After an unsuccessful trial run under the Commonwealth of England (1649 – 1660), the chain was rebuilt with the restoration of King Charles II (1660 – 1685). This return to a monarchy reminded me of the reversion to the mean; society and government revisited an order that they knew best. In the last post, I asked how this period of England’s history might be relevant to understanding America today. This, I will answer presently. But I must also qualify that I use the term “reversion to the mean” loosely. I recognize that the form of government societies “select” (or, more precisely, abide) is not accomplished through mere statistical chance. I use the expression as a term of art.

For all of my lamenting about the stupidity of Americans who seem hell-bent on ushering in the nation’s first dictator, a question constantly nags me: Could it last? I have written extensively about how once we lose our democracy, we won’t get it back. In truth, I must admit I think perhaps so or perhaps not. The only thing — the only solace, so to speak — that gives me the slightest bit of hope is the fact that Americans have no tradition of living under a dictatorship. People don’t know what they are getting themselves into, and I don’t think the majority will like what they’ve voted for or allowed to happen. As I look back to other examples, the histories of some countries make more sense when viewed in the context of people “electing” a form of government they know best. Obviously, England is the first instance. They flirted with a republic but restored their monarchy. However, the kingship was much changed — from an absolute monarchy under Henry VII (1485 – 1509) to the beginnings of a constitutional monarchy following the Glorious Revolution (1688 – 1689) under William III (1689 – 1702) and Mary II (1689 – 1694). And it’s been a limited monarchy ever since — England’s reversion to a (altered) mean.

Then I thought of Putin in Russia. Here, too, I see a reversion to the mean. Before the Russian Revolution (1917 – 1923), some form of monarchy ruled Russia for nearly a thousand years, specifically by tsars beginning with Ivan IV (1530 – 1584) and ending with the execution of Nicholas II (1894 – 1917), which, like England, was also done in the name of the people. Russians, too, flirted with a form of representative government under communism, but that quickly gave way to a dictator — Stalin (1941 – 1953). Even with the fall of the U.S.S.R. (1922 – 1991), Russians once again tried to implement a democracy (of sorts), but that, again, was eventually co-opted by another dictator — Putin (2000 – 2008, 2012 – present). Russians seem exceedingly fond of this style of government and societal order: A dictator (or tzar) leading their way with elections conducted only for show.

Germany is another example, which may explain how the likes of Hitler (1933 – 1945) came to power. For hundreds of years, the principalities that eventually formed the unified states of Germany as an empire (1871 – 1918) had been governed by kings and princes. It was only following World War I (1914 – 1918) that Germany toyed with a republic, which failed spectacularly — the Weimar Republic (1918 – 1933). In short, citizens clamored for a form of government they knew best and believed would work better: A dictatorship (also known as a non-hereditary form of monarchy). Enter Hitler, who swept into power through elections and then promptly made himself dictator without so much as a shrug from the people — a pure reversion to the mean. To be sure, Germany is not a dictatorship or a monarchy currently. (Although a line of the Hohenzollern dynasty still exists.) So, in some fashion, they broke the chain — for now. Even so, it took a world war and the utter destruction of a nation to oust their autocrat in favor of a democracy.

France is yet another example of a country that has not reverted to a monarchy, but even their history evinces that they tried to do so a few times. Indeed, the French Revolution (1789 – 1799) ended hundreds of years of monarchy with the execution of Louis XVI (1774 – 1792). They, too, attempted a republic (for about a decade, similar to England) that ushered in the Reign of Terror (1793 – 1794) and ultimately led to Emporer Napolean I (1803 – 1814, 1815), which, in turn, eventually led to the Bourbon restoration under Louis XVIII (1814 – 1824). Again, the people basically traded in Emperor Napoleon for the return of a king. Then France veered back to the Second Republic (1848 – 1852) under Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, who crowned himself Emperor Napoleon III (1852 – 1870). This led to the Third Republic (1870 – 1940). What a mess. (France is actually in its Fifth Republic era.) But the point is the same: France reverted to the mean — a monarchy of some sort — a few times before finally settling on a stable republic.

Clearly, I could find other examples of nations that permanently broke the chain, suggesting a reversion to the mean is not always fate or that nations can create a new mean. Nonetheless, what do these select histories proffer about America? To be sure, America has no history of a monarchy or rule by an autocrat. A democratic mean is the only form of government we understand and recognize. (However, some Founding Fathers begged George Washington to consider something more than a four-year presidency. And it is also not lost on me that the founding of our nation was entirely based on throwing off the yoke of monarchy — the penultimate action of breaking the chain.) In short, it is not in our national DNA to be anything other than a representative democracy, despite 40 percent of the population hoping to alter that genetic blueprint. Once traitor trump re-enters to the Oval Office, do we as a country act like England and return to what we know best — a democracy — or do we act like France, which changed their government forever? Note the counter-intuitiveness of this comparison. England struggled to keep their monarchy, while France struggled to shed it. We, in America, are struggling to keep our democracy. What does seem sure is this: The struggle will be long once traitor trump returns to the White House. (Note how diversions from the mean usually last about a decade. Witness the Commonwealth of England, the French Revolution, Nazi Germany, and Russia’s post-U.S.S.R democracy.) As I have suggested many times, another civil war will likely be required to return to our governing mean. I would not count on a Glorious Revolution to win back our democracy. Sadly, I see no way out, only through (a civil war). And like all the nations above — that all f***ed around and found out (in some cases, repeatedly) — we’re about to do the same!

One bored day while on Amazon Prime, I perused the selection, looking for something — anything — new. I happened upon “A History of England from the Tudors to the Stuarts,” a 48-episode lecture series by Professor Robert Bucholz of Loyola University of Chicago. Dear Lord in all of Heaven! Where have you been all my life? Initially recorded in 2003, how on earth have I missed this master course in early modern English history? How has this Professor Bucholz been unknown to me? Watching his series made me wonder why I never became the history teacher I wanted to become while taking all those history classes in high school. Alas! The road not taken, indeed! (If you watch this course and don’t like it, then you’re an intellectual heathen. No two ways about it! You’re just a straight-up mindless Neanderthal!)

I binge-watched all 24 hours in about two weeks. What a refresher of everything I’m sure that I learned once upon a time in high school in two Modern European History classes — one regular and one AP. I must admit I was somewhat embarrassed that I had forgotten so much. However, one concept that Professor Bucholz discussed was the Great Chain of Being. That topic is definitely something I did not learn in any high school course. But it reminded me of our current history-making in good ‘ole America. Traitor trump, RepubliKKKlans, MAGA morons, and QAnon kooks are gaining power and popularity, all in an attempt to rebuild and maintain the Great Chain of Being. Indeed, it is the immutable hierarchal pyramid that Medieval kings and the Church relied upon to keep societal order and everyone in their place. Fast forward several hundred years, and nothing has changed! In American style, the Great Chain of Being takes on less Biblical significance — although I may argue not diminished by much (i.e., Mike Johnson’s ascension) — but a potent hierarchal desire all the same. Our Great Change of Being goes something like this: Instead of a king at the top, Americans yearn for traitor trump as “president” (read: dictator) with divine rights. Below him are white male Christian RepubliKKKlans — WASPs — who are the ruling elites. Below them is everyone else, who themselves can be tiered by their ethnicity (Black, Hispanic, other), gender (i.e., women), sexuality (e.g., the gays), wealth (i.e., the bottom 98 percent), non-Christians, and so on, all of whom must battle for a marginally higher rank in the lowest positions of society. Suddenly, the Great Chain of Being metaphor made perfect sense.

Of course, Professor Bucholz’s lecture series also reminded me — without much surprise or astonishment — that there has always been a struggle between those who rule and the ruled, and, indeed, among the ruling class and the class kings rule over. Social tranquility is the exception, rarely the norm. This is particularly true during the English Civil Wars, when, for the first time, the English people killed their king! Talk about upsetting the Great Chain of Being! After roughly ten years of England being governed by a republic, the country revived its monarchy. Indeed! How strange that after all the bloodshed of two civil wars and a clamor to end the corruption of a king, the people invited the restoration of a king. Why? Life seemed to be worse for people under a republic led by the English Parliament. (I won’t get into the whole religious aspect of this period, which played a significant and decisive part in the tumult of the Tudor and Stewart dynasties.) But what struck me most about England’s restoration of the monarchy is the country’s reversion to the mean, so to speak. Then, it dawned on me that societies and governments generally return to what they know best, and in the example of England, that would appear to be a monarchy. So, how does this relate to current America? Hmm. Good question. This, I will opine upon in another post.

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out — because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out — because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out — because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.

Martin Niemöller

I woke up on the side of the bed that has me believing America’s democracy is already lost because I genuinely and most certainly live in the dumbest f***ing country on the planet. Poll after poll has Biden losing to traitor trump as if the previous eight years of the dictator wannabe being in the spotlight never existed. It is incomprehensible to me that given everything we know and witnessed about traitor trump — from the incompetence during his four years in the White House to ending Roe to the f***ing G.D. insurrection on January 6 to Project 2025 — more people want a return to him. I can’t. I just f***ing can’t anymore with this supremely stupid, retarded, messed up country anymore. At some point, all my screaming into the wind will leave me hoarse and speechless. At what point do Americans actually wake up? I contend the answer is never, for they are already awake, contrary to what dumbass Democrats will tell you about voters “not paying attention” yet. Apparently, voters are paying enough attention to form an opinion about the state of Biden’s presidency by telling pollsters that they prefer traitor trump instead.

People are awake alright, but they are just plain old stupid, and if it’s not the stupidity, then it’s the apathy, and if it’s not the apathy, then it’s just a straight-up desire to live in a fascist state. Full stop! I mean, if the squishy middle (5-10 percent) of the electorate that decides and swings elections is incapable of discerning between someone who wants to preserve our democracy and the guy who wants to end it, then America is lost. But that is precisely where we are. Voters who simply can’t tell the difference. All is lost. Mark my words. I’ve been writing about this for years — ever since Biden was elected. I’ve been writing that it’s just a matter of time until the end. My first indication is when traitor trump got 10 million more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. After four years of his presidency, it was clear that more people wanted more of his disastrous policies. Ten million people said, “Yes, more of that traitor trump mess, please!” They liked the hatred and the viciousness that traitor trump embodies and professes. That was my first clue. I have long been warning that Biden is merely the intermission until the end of America’s democracy, and we are right on track for my prediction to come to pass. Americans don’t want democracy.

F***tard Americans think that another traitor trump term would be inconsequential. Maybe they believe that America survived once under traitor trump, what’s another four years? (The last four years of democracy is the answer.) Morons of America simply fail to see that traitor trump is a threat to democracy. Sadly, they lack imagination. Have idiot Americans ever considered what happens if traitor trump declares martial law around the next election? What if he suspends elections? It’s never happened before, and I promise when he does, America will be utterly paralyzed by this Constitutional crisis; and SCOTUS will, no doubt, be unable to cope with it, for traitor trump will simply ignore any ruling not in his favor. Then what? This is a real and almost certain possibility.

Or maybe voters will elect traitor trump, believing that his threats to minorities do not apply to them. They are not Hispanic. They are not Black. They are not Muslim or Jewish. They are not a non-citizen. Or they think they are a member of a protected class as if the judicial system and the Constitution will protect them — you, know, just like the Constitution protects a woman’s right to an abortion. None of us should feel safe, and that is why I started this post with the Niemöller quote, for when traitor trump, MAGA morons, evil evangelicals, and QAnon kooks are finished purging immigrants, Muslims, Jews, the gays, and Democrats, who do you think they will turn on next? Everyone thinks they are immune. Let me tell you: You! Are! Not! Mark my words, f***tards. Mark them well. I warned you first, and I’ve been doing it for years, but people just don’t care. Perhaps the only question that remains is this: Do Americans roll over and accept traitor trump as the new Führer, or do we rise up? Are Americans willing to engage in a second civil war to save the country, or do morons of America say, “Oh, well.” I have my intuition about the answer. (Hint: If Americans are too stupid and too disinterested in voting to avoid fascism, why should I believe they’ll take up arms to get America’s democracy back?) Welcome to stupid America!

Looks like pure, unadulterated hatred is going to get traitor trump elected and Biden unelected in 2024. The RepubliKKKlan, MAGA moron, evil evangelical, and QAnon kook hatred that traitor trump will represent on the ballot is well known, but now it seems hatred on the far left and among the yutes is going to either keep them home, vote for a third-party candidate, or vote for traitor trump. Any and all of these actions will result in a Biden loss and the end of our democracy. Once again, I refer to recent poll results to make my argument. From USA Today, “President Joe Biden is trailing former President Donald Trump in a hypothetical general election matchup among young voters, an NBC News poll released Sunday found. Among voters ages 18-34, Biden saw 42% support. That’s compared to Trump, who led him with 46% support. The poll is an early warning for Biden’s campaign ahead of the 2024 presidential election that young voters could be peeling away from him.” What does the youth hate? Apparently, the Jews. Oh sure, the youth vote has soured on Biden for years because they elected Biden as president but, in their infinite stupidity, failed to give him the majorities in Congress required to actually get anything done that they’ve expected him to do.

I would love to know how many yutes cast their ballot having only filled out the top line; that is to say, they voted for president but left all the other federal, state, and local races blank. I’m sure enough to actually make the difference because that is precisely what I would expect from our sh*t-for-brains country. But I digress. Back to the hate. So, the yutes hate the war and, by extension, Jews. It’s classic antisemitism, which cuts across all races, ages, and demographics. It’s the “Jews,” stupid! And, apparently, yutes love terrorist groups. You can’t hate the Jews and embrace Palestinians without tipping your prejudices in favor of the Gaza Strip “freedom fighters” (aka Hamas). Welcome to stupid America! Too dumb and too filled with hate to endure. The end is here! Mark my words, f***tards!

According to CNN, “Javier Milei won Argentina’s presidential elections on Sunday, wrenching his country to the right with a bombastic anti-establishment campaign that drew comparisons to that of former U.S. President Donald Trump – all against the backdrop of one of the world’s highest inflation rates. … Milei’s victory marks an extraordinary rise for the former T.V. pundit, who entered the race as a political outsider on a promise to ‘break up with the status quo’ – exemplified by his rival Sergio Massa, a career politician. … Milei, a social conservative with ties to the American right, opposes abortion rights and has called climate change a ‘lie of socialism.’ He has promised to slash government spending by closing Argentina’s ministries of culture, education, and diversity, and by eliminating public subsidies. … Similarities to Trump have not gone unnoticed in the United States as it prepares for its own presidential elections. Milei succeeded in attracting attention at home not only because of his political style – including wielding chainsaws and raging outbursts – but also because of the novelty of his positions and eagerness to upset the status quo.”… Outside of his controversial plan for dollarization, Milei’s political program includes slashing regulations on gun control and transferring authority over the penitentiary system from civilians to the military; both measures are part of a tough-on-crime approach. He proposes using public funds to support families who choose to educate their children privately and even privatizing the health sector, which in Argentina has always been in public hands.”

Another populist carnival barker T.V. showman gets elected on the promise to make Argentina like MAGA. What could possibly go wrong? To be sure, aside from all the cultural issues in the country, which I’ll get to in a minute, it looks like economic conditions provoked voters to sweep in a right-wing nut job into the presidency. More from CNN, “Milei’s economic platform rested on a desire to dollarize the Argentinian economy. Dollarization means the country would give up the Argentine peso and use the U.S. dollar as its currency. If enacted, the policy would hurl the nation into unknown territory: No country of Argentina’s size has previously turned over the reins of its own monetary policy to Washington decisionmakers. … Argentina has one of the world’s highest inflation rates; data released last week showed that prices rose 142% year-over-year. Milei’s proposal to switch Argentina’s currency from the peso to the U.S. dollar rests on the argument that the dollar is stronger than the peso and, unlike the peso, cannot be printed at will.” I guess this is the opposite of Argentina First. Make no mistake, relying on a foreign currency puts the future of an economy in the hands of that nation, not the home country. While America’s economy is the most stable and predictable (for the most part) in the world, countries tend not to be so excited about losing autonomy to influence their own economy through monetary policy at home. Now, that policy relies on the U.S.’s vicissitudes. But you know, when people elect a dictator, then they must abide by the dictator’s wishes, no matter how crazy or humiliating.

Then we come to the social or cultural aspects of a Milei presidency, which is being praised by traitor trump and Bolsonaro. These two endorsements tell you everything you know about Argentina’s new direction. Milei is anti-abortion, so abortions will become illegal. Oh, well. This was not a secret platform of his campaign. This is what people wanted; this was their vote! Of course, wherever anti-abortion sentiments lurk, so does anti-LGBTQ rights. I’m sure that’s soon to follow. Not to mention, the president-elect essentially was to destroy the “deep state” (aka closing Argentina’s ministries of culture, education, and diversity). And I can’t believe he wants to loosen gun regulations. Unbelievable. Apparently, everyone in Argentina is oblivious to the situation in the U.S. Good luck with that, morons! But, whatever. This is what people want, as made very clear by their vote.

The final point I want to make is this: Argentina is yet one more example of liberal democracies dying around the world, and f***tards of America are about to kill it here. Mark my words. Idiots in this country (and worldwide) apparently are sick of liberal democracies that aim to expand rights for everyone. Looks like morons of America want their dictator to be like other “great” nations of the world. The end is here. Argentina is more proof of where the world is headed, and America is not immune. We are entering the age of dictators. And no one cares. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

U.S. CONST. amend. XIV, § 3.

Let my id (maybe super-ego) rage for a minute before getting into some not-too-intense (but lengthy) legal analysis. In short, a Colorado judge found that traitor trump did, in fact, engage in an insurrection against the United States of America, but he’s allowed to do so. Un-f***ing-believable. The end is here! America is doomed because there is no judge or court in the land that will hold traitor trump accountable; they dare not cross the dictator in training for fear of God knows what. How can a nation survive when a judge recognizes that a former President of the United States of America surely engaged in a movement to overthrow the government, but there is nothing she can do about it, so why not let traitor trump run and try again? The country is so f***ing lost, and 50 percent of the sh*t-for-brains in this nation blindly follow the fascists right until the end of America’s democracy is assured.

And let me just say from the top that this judge, Sarah B. Wallace, started with the end in mind and then backward-engineered her opinion to find a way to keep traitor trump on the ballot. This is a classic example — that seems to be more and more popular with conservative judges and justices — of picking the desired outcome of a case first and then using tortured reasoning and a misreading of the law (or the Constitution) to make their preferred conclusions believable to the rest of us. If you read her opinion (which I did), then the flaws in her logic and her misconstruing text and meaning of the Constitution become apparent as she tries to make the end justify the means.

This judge spends the first 95 pages of a 102-page opinion painstakingly explaining in detail through an expansive review of the case’s facts, case law precedent, Constitutional law as it applies to the First and Fourteenth Amendments, textualism theory, histories and traditions reasoning, and dictionary definitions to conclude that traitor trump had, in fact, “engaged” in an “insurrection.” (The words are in quotes because the judge spent much time making sure the definitions of these “contentious” words fit the facts of the case, and I have the word contentious in quotes mockingly because judges like to make the obvious overly complicated.) The critical summary paragraph in her opinion reads, “Consequently, the Court finds that Petitioners have established that Trump engaged in an insurrection on January 6, 2021 through incitement, and that the First Amendment does not protect Trump’s speech.” (p. 95) (Norma Anderson et al. vs. Jena Griswold and Donald J. Trump, No. 2023CV32577, District Court, City and County of Denver, State of Colorado Nov. 17, 2023.)

Then, in the final, scant seven pages, she “explains” with weak and insubstantial reasoning why everything she just analyzed is worthless, as if she were tired of writing and simply wanted to end the opinion quickly like a high school student finishing up a term paper at the eleventh hour. Unlike the judge, I referred to a scholarly analysis to help me understand the Fourteenth Amendment. (See Bause, W. and Paulson, M. S., “The Sweep and Force of Section Three,” [2023].) The first — and most obvious — point of contention is why the President and the Vice President are not listed in the named offices to be disqualified. One taking a cursory and jejune reading of the Amendment may be easily persuaded that the Framers must have intended to omit the two highest offices in the land. They must have specifically barred insurrectionists from being disallowed from serving as President or Vice President. Of course, they must have! It only makes sense given the just concluded Civil War. Naturally, Davis and Stephens should have been eligible to run for and potentially win an election to lead the actual United States of America after forming the Confederacy. Makes total sense! On its face, the notion is ridiculous, and — sure — it is arguably equally absurd that the Framers specifically failed to include the President and the Vice President in the Fourteenth Amendment, but there is language in the Amendment and external supporting evidence that indicates the Framers took a more sweeping approach to “naming” disqualified persons. As usual, originalists and textualists miss the forest for the trees when understanding the Constitution, as seems to be true with this idiot Judge Wallace. She really does evince the often vast chasm of knowledge between scholars and practitioners that can be crucial to making informed decisions, especially (and particularly) in the field of law when novel and untested questions arise. I contend such questions should not be left in the hands of an unsophisticated judge.

But back to the analysis. Wallace’s conclusion on the question of the list of disqualified individuals states, “Here, after considering the arguments on both sides, the Court is persuaded that ‘officers of the United States’ did not include the President of the United States. While the Court agrees that there are persuasive arguments on both sides, the Court holds that the absence of the President from the list of positions to which the Amendment applies combined with the fact that Section Three specifies that the disqualifying oath is one to ‘support’ the Constitution whereas the Presidential oath is to ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the Constitution, it appears to the Court that for whatever reason the drafters of Section Three did not intend to include a person who had only taken the Presidential Oath (pp. 100-101).” She arrives at this reasoning by parsing words and the list of offices in the Amendment — and she admits that the arguments cut both ways — but she elects to take a hyper-technical reading of the Amendment to dismiss some evidence and accept other evidence in favor of her preferred conclusion. I might also add that she thinks traitor trump is eligible to be on the ballot because running for President as an insurrectionist is not barred — by her “logic” — and because he was already President, for even if he were on “the list” of disqualified offices, then he still qualifies because didn’t take the “correct” oath; therefore, he could not have possibly offended the Constitution or the United States of America as the Framers intended by the language of the Amendment. In a sense, Judge Wallace claims he’s doubly safe from being disqualified. You can’t make this sh*t up if you tried; well, I guess you can. She did.

I contend that Bause and Paulson understood the true intent of the Framers when they advised on how to read the Fourteenth Amendment in the opening paragraph of their argument:

First, the language of these provisions should be read in as straightforward and common-sense a manner as possible. The text must be read precisely, of course, but also sensibly, naturally and in context, without artifice or ingenious invention unwarranted by that context. Some constitutional provisions embody precise terms of art that must be attended to. But a reading that renders the document a “secret code” loaded with hidden meanings discernible only by a select priesthood of illuminati is generally an unlikely one. Keep this in mind as we proceed: we think readers should be wary of any interpretation of Section Three that would impute to the text a hyper-technical set of hidden distinctions not fully warranted by the language. Where the simplest and most plausible explanation of minor textual differences is merely stylistic or accidental variation, that explanation should not lightly be cast aside.

The Sweep and Force of Section Three (pp. 104-105)

Judge Wallace does precisely this: Cast aside the most plausible explanation of minor textual differences. Chiefly, the judge believes that the absence of “President and Vice President” in the list must be absolute and exhaustive, and those two offices could not possibly be subsumed in the “hold any office, civil or military, under the United States” clause of the Amendment. Granted, it is a curious construction to omit the president and Vice President, but odd construction should not prevent someone from being informed about the whole. Again, she refuses the “straightforward and common-sense” reading of the Amendment in favor of hyper-speculation about what the Framers did or did not do.

But fear not! Wallace tackled the plausibility that the offices of the President and Vice President could not possibly have been intended in the “hold any office, civil or military” language because, as she puts it, the President and Vice President are not “‘an officer of the United States.’” This, on its face, is absurd. If they are not office holders, then what are they? If they are not officers of the state, then are they? The State? Are they to be King and Vice King (a Prince)? Have we devolved into reading the Constitution as a royal manifesto? Should the presidential seal now read “L’état, c’est moi” ala the Sun King? But irrational logic yields absurd results, no matter how much she tries to engage in “ingenious invention unwarranted by that context,” as Bause and Paulson caution others against doing, which they summarize in their conclusion in the following excerpt:

In short, the ordinary sense of the text; the structure and logic of its provisions; the evident design to be comprehensive; the text’s many references to the office of the Presidency as an “office”; the seeming absurdity of the prospect of exclusion of the offices of President and Vice President from triggering the disqualification fashioned by the Radical Reconstruction Congress that drafted the Fourteenth Amendment; the fact that the only legislative debate over the language discussing whether Section Three inadvertently omitted the offices of President and Vice President rejected any such suggestion; and the fact that no one ever suggested that the “under/of” difference meant the presidency was not a covered office triggering Section Three, all convince us that the natural conclusion is the correct one: Section Three includes in its coverage, or “triggering” language, insurrectionists who once served as President and Vice President. And Section Three excludes disqualified insurrectionists from subsequently holding the office of either President or Vice President.

The Sweep and Force of Section Three (p. 111)

I conclude with the most important question yet to come: WWSD? Indeed, what would SCOTUS do? Nothing else matters, not Judge Wallace’s opinion or any scholarly analysis. The only thing that matters is how the six uber-conservative supermajority theocratic wing of the Court rules, and I think we have a good idea of their leanings. They believe in an imperial (conservative) presidency. While they have not had the opportunity to rule whether traitor trump is above the Constitution explicitly, I think this will be their chance to place him beyond the bounds of the Constitution when it comes to allowing an insurrectionist to become the head of the government because, of course, that’s what the Framers intended. Of course, they did. Any plain reading of the Constitution would more than suggest the opposite, but then lawyers read the document, and then suddenly, meaning becomes meaningless. Welcome to stupid America! Too f***ing stupid to apprehend the obvious. Oh, well!

From Newsweek, “Joe Biden may be on the backfoot with Hispanic voters in the upcoming presidential election after Donald Trump courted executives from the nation’s most influential Spanish-language network last week. The former president and frontrunner in the Republican primaries hosted executives from Univision, which merged with the Mexican media company Grupo Televisa in 2021, at Mar-a-Lago last week while the network interviewed him, per The Washington Post.”

Of course, Biden is being outmaneuvered by traitor trump! Of course, he is. Dumbass Democrats need to wake the f*** up. To be sure, the majority of Hispanic voters will never vote for traitor trump, but that’s not his intention. He just needs a few points here and there in the right states to make all the difference in a tight election. That goes for the Black vote as well as the youth vote. And I want to be clear about some common misconceptions regarding the Hispanic vote that I think RepubliKKKlans apprehend, but dumbass Democrats don’t; Hispanic machismo and economic concerns are driving more voters to traitor trump. Look, f***tards! Traitor trump is every bi the a**hole that whites and Hispanics love. One may be inclined to believe that a politician attacking immigrants or a particular ethnic group would be repudiated by Hispanics more generally — an attack on one is an attack on all. That is far from the case. I don’t think people understand that Hispanics really do all kinda hate each other. Cubans hate Puerto Ricans, and vice versa. Everyone hates the Haitians. Mexicans hate Hispanics from Central and South America and vice versa. Light-skinned Hispanics (i.e., those of European descent) hate the indigenous peoples, who are dark-skinned. Imagine Mexico, Central and South America, and the Hispanic Caribbean people all being the melting pot of the U.S. Now you understand how these ethnicities hate each other. This means when traitor trump calls out one Hispanic segment to hate on, then all the Hispanic groups who are not of that class agree with him.

Then, we come to the issue of immigration. Do not believe that Hispanic Americans naturally defend immigrants. They don’t for the reasons I just described above, but the reasons for their hatred are less complicated than ethnicity. Hispanic Americans hate immigrants because they are taking away their jobs. It’s that simple, and as I have written before, Hispanics are far more sensitive to economic conditions, which is why you see Biden’s support slipping in the Hispanic cohort. The Latino vote will follow the economy, and if that leads them to traitor trump, who is willing to round up, inter, and ultimately expel Hispanic immigrants from the U.S., then so be it! All the better. As usual, Hispanics are supremely oblivious to the notion that an attack on one really is intended to be an attack on all. That is how white supremacists perceive Hispanics: They’re all dirty foreigners — citizens, legal immigrants, or illegal immigrants — no matter their status. Hispanics are all the same in the eyes of white supremacists. And, of course, when conservatives cast aspersions on the Latino community, Hispanics individually and naively think, “Well, they’re not talking about me.” F***ing morons! They’re talking about all of you guys. When Hispanics push traitor trump over the top to become president, then I hope they remember to always take their “papers” with them that prove their citizenship, or they’re going to find themselves rounded up and placed in concentration camps alongside those “other” immigrants they hate. Welcome to stupid America!

No, this is not a setup for a bad joke. Mike Johnson’s gay problem is Santos. According to CNN, “House Ethics Chairman Michael Guest, a Mississippi Republican, introduced a resolution Friday to expel GOP Rep. George Santos of New York from Congress, one day after the Ethics Committee released a damning report on its investigation into Santos.” Now Johnson must decide whether his hatred of gay people — which was on full display during his recent rantings on a Christian podcast when he basically called America Sondom and Gomorrah inviting the wrath of God — trumps his desire to maximize the slim RepubliKKKlan-vote lead in the House. Johnson will have to decide whether he wants to muster the votes to keep Santos. This is quite the conundrum. These white nationalist Christian fascist types love their power above all else, but they really, really hate the gays and now is the chance to get one of “those people” out of the House. I’m going with Johnson’s hatred of the gays cum out on top.

America, and the courts in particular, are incapable and unwilling to hold traitor trump accountable because they all treat him (improperly) as being above the law. Unfortunately, America’s notion of being a nation “not of men but of laws” is a farce and has been from its inception. Of course, many minority groups have long understood this, and so have the poor, but in all these high-profile cases involving traitor trump, the stark differences between the treatment of the dictator wannabe and everyone else are manifest. Granted, America is a nation of laws more than most others, but even that once lauded distinction is losing its truth at face value.

What has my ire this time? Reading from The Guardian, “Barely an hour after a gag order prohibiting Donald Trump from commenting about court staff at his civil fraud trial in New York was temporarily lifted, he was at it again – unleashing a blitzkrieg of social media outrage at a clerk who has become the lightning rod for the former president’s rage. On Thursday afternoon a New York appeals court judge, David Friedman, paused a gag order that had been placed on Trump last month. The move opened a window through which Trump could vent his unrestrained feelings. … At an emergency hearing on Thursday, however, Friedman, sitting in New York state’s intermediate appeals court, found that Trump’s First Amendment right to free speech was of prime importance. He stayed the gag order.”

Part of the problem with everyone in this sh*t-for-brains country is that citizens think all speech is free and that the First Amendment is not absolute and without limit. This, of course, is not true. While political speech may be considered the freest form of speech, for an indicted criminal such as traitor trump, his freedoms — by the very dint of his status as someone out on bail — are and can be restricted, especially if his free speech relates to trial interference. This is true for anyone with a criminal indictment. But not traitor trump! Oh, no! Courts and judges are bending over backward to ensure he is being treated fairly and like any “other man” by granting him favors and status that no other man would be afforded. In trying to show traitor trump no favoritism over the man on the street, the courts are doing precisely that: Showing him favor! The contraction is blatant, disturbing, and disgusting. I should have expected nothing less. But, alas, no one cares because I live in stupid f***ing hell. The courts are going to slow-walk, pamper, and soft-glove the application of justice to traitor trump and, in so doing, hand the country over to a fascist, all because judges wanted to make sure not to hurt traitor trump’s feelings or trample on his (non-existent) right to interfere with his own trails. Welcome to stupid America! The end is here and brought to you in the name of “justice!”