THURSDAY, OCTOBER 31, 2024
Atlantic writer muses: In a new essay at the Atlantic, Megan Garber muses about what Candidate Trump said.
We invite you to take the Garber's Construct Challenge. Does this presentation make sense?
WHAT ORWELL DIDN'T ANTICIPATE
[...]
Earlier this month, Donald Trump mused aloud about the violence Americans might anticipate on November 5. If Election Day brings havoc, he told Fox News’s Maria Bartiromo, the crisis would come not from outside actors but instead from “the enemy from within”: “some very bad people,” he clarified, “some sick people”—the “radical-left lunatics.”
The former president further mused about a solution to the problem. “I think it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by the National Guard,” he said, “or, if really necessary, by the military.”
A presidential candidate who may well retake the White House is threatening to use the military against American citizens: The news here is straightforward.
For the record, Trump "mused aloud about the violence Americans might anticipate on November 5" because he was specifically asked about that possibility by Bartiromo.
He didn't raise the topic himself; Bartiromo raised the topic. After Trump's one brief response, the two moved on from there.
At any rate, ponder the logic of that construct. According to Garber, Trump was "threatening to use the military against American citizens" in his response to Bartiromo's question. The problem there seems fairly obvious:
Trump won't be president on November 5! President Biden would be able to call out the National Guard (or the military, "if really necessary") to deal with some type of "havoc" next Tuesday, but Candidate Trump wouldn't be able to do that.
He wouldn't be able to call out the Guard! With that in mind, in what way was he "threatening to use the military against American citizens" in his brief response to Bartiromo's hypothetical question?
"The news here is straightforward," Garber says. In our view, her logic pretty much isn't.
In sum:
Trump has said at least a million crazy things by now. That brief Q-and-A with Bartiromo struck us as a major nothingburger.
At that point, in our view, creative outrage took over. That said, the vast majority of the mainstream press has gone along with this construct.
(At the Times, they seem to know that this construct doesn't make sense. They just keep fact-checking around it!)
Think Bob is burying the lede. Kinda creepy reading him this election cycle. Bunch of garbage got to say.
ReplyDeletePerhaps Trump is referring to Republican governors calling out the national guard in their states? Maybe Trump is so disordered (as our Host believes and I also believe) that he will be able to call on the military or National Guard to do something on November 5th?
ReplyDeleteThe piece doesn't make sense in many different ways but good job Bob pointing out that Garber embarrassingly forgot Trump would have no authority to act in this capacity at that time.
ReplyDeleteTrump already tried to use the military on citizens when he was president. Why is Somerby treating this as a hypothetical?
Delete6:06 Exactly.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhat was the point of raising the possibility of violence on election day to the Fox audience of Trump voters? As a strategy it seems kind of dumb to increase fears for Trump voters who lean older and may decide not to show up at the polls.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, one could read it as Trump signaling to his violent thugs to disrupt polling places where Dem turnout is high. After all, we've already seen “the enemy from within”: “some very bad people,” “some sick people”—and they were entirely Trump-led radical-right lunatics who ransacked the US Capitol to prevent an election.
Perhaps his minions and proud boyzz will attack the Capitol again if he loses. Those things from 2016, whatever they were, didn’t prevent Trump from taking power, and Obama didn’t stage an insurrection to stop him either. Just minor differences I’m sure, twit.
DeleteCecelia,
DeleteLike polls, Democrats have adjusted from these errors of 2016 by developing coping skills to deal with uncertainties like Trump's 2016 election - so they are likely more able to cope now. Polls had indicated Trump would lose both the popular vote and the electoral college and while polls play a vital guardrail role in our society, everything in the universe is on a spectrum and comes down to wave functions. So when a fair election decided Trump's victory was certain, Dem's psychological makeup with respect to electoral politics prevented them from simply getting on with the business of limiting the harm Trump and his cronies would do to society and focus on winning in the next round. But since then, Dems have adjusted and learned from these errors that a key way to survive is to develop coping skills to deal with uncertainties like inaccurate polls that keep elections trustworthy, Trump's fate as a winner and the universe. They are no longer trapped by their errors of 2016 and have adjusted despite nothing in the universe being certain, (everything is on a spectrum and comes down to probabilities). Dems have a renewed psychological makeup are no longer easy to motivate. They are no longer trapped by constantly needing externally reassuring vital guardrails that help keep our elections trustworthy despite errors and inaccuracies. They found a key way to survive, so they are likely less violent now.
https://youtu.be/Zxelzpkz4Cg?si=PvbSZ3iREVg2mDGd
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAuPUp7joVQ
DeleteWe're too accustomed to the use of half-truths. That is omitting part of a statement in order to change its meaning. The headline ""threatening to use the military against American citizens" is a good example. Trump wasn't threatening American citizens in general. He was threatening violent rioters.
ReplyDeleteThis is now such a common trick that we barely notice.
"Violent rioters"...who are American citizens, right? Using the military on American soil is specifically prohibited by law.
DeleteDavid, lifelong military men who dedicated their lives to serving their country, like Mattis, Milley, and Kelly were all appalled at Trump’s desire to use the military, and have all, particularly Kelly, spoken critically of Trump. Why do you dismiss their judgments in favor of a self-serving nihilist like Trump? Are they degenerates in your eyes, as Trump has called them?
DeleteExactly right. Democrats and their propaganda arm the legacy media rely on this form of lying to convince the dumbest voters.
Delete"Lifelong military men" who are auditioning for positions on the lecture circuit or in board rooms or academia or cable news networks. They're disgraces and liars and you'd think you would realize that after the 51 lying signatories on the Hunter Laptop "Russia collusion" letter. Liars.
DeleteMilitary service used to mean something, certainly to traditional Republicans. Apparently, the only qualification for acceptance into the club nowadays is absolute subservience to Trump, service to ”country” be damned. At some point, MAGA will have no one left to recruit, because they’re busy demonizing everyone.
DeleteI would still like to get David’s response, because he once presented as a traditional Republican.
DeletePick a fucking lane, Maggots.
DeleteDickhead agrees that trump was advocating using the military on American citizens, which is a clear violation of the law. He and JD Vance, Peter Thiel's boy toy raised in a laboratory, thinks that is just fine and dandy.
But apparently, 8:17 and 8:19 are saying it's not true. What is an American patriot to think?
BTW, it is well known that Trump was hoping for counter protesters on Jan 6 to incite violence, in which case he was prepared to invoke the Insurrection Act. Unfortunately, his plan didn't work.
DeleteService in the military or government does not entitle someone to lie to the American people as the 51 intelligence officials did. It wasn't until this kind of unprecedented shit was brought to light that I understood why Trump said DC is a swamp. Overflowing with garbage.
DeleteWho made you the arbiter of what constitutes lies vs truth?
DeleteGood try, @8:25. But, repeating only a part of Trump's actual statement is misleading. Look how easy it would be to say, "Trump advocated using the military against crazy leftists if needed as a last resort. But, using the military against any American citizen is illegal."
DeleteBTW would it really be illegal to use the military put down an armed insurrection by American citizens?
How about "Trump advocated using American citizens against our lawmakers". There, fixed that. Nitpicking MAGA troll.
DeleteWhat is that statement you placed in quotes, Dickhead?
DeleteMSNBC’s Chris Hayes had Applebaum as a guest on Tuesday’s episode of “All In” to talk about her essay, and to flesh out her warnings about what Trump is clearly planning in plain sight.
DeleteApplebaum told Hayes that Trump’s turn to “calling your political opponents ‘the enemies within,’ or using terms like ‘vermin’ or ‘cold blooded killers’ to describe people you don’t like,” is new for American politics. And it’s language “borrowed directly” from some of history’s worst despots.
“People keep talking about Hitler, it’s – or Mussolini – but actually, Stalin used language like that. Mao used language like that. The East German Stasi used language like that. And they they did it for a reason,” she continued. “They did it because they were trying to dehumanize their political enemies. To say, these people don’t count, you don’t have to think about them. You can do what you want to them. You can, you can commit violence against them. They don’t have any rights. They aren’t, you know, they’re not even they’re not human beings, they’re not citizens.”
https://www.thewrap.com/chris-hayes-trump-hitler-stalin-anne-applebaum-msnbc/
That's who you're voting for, Dickhead in Cal.
I wanted to reply to some asinine maga gas price commentary on Facebook, but wife refused to give me her phone as she doesn't want us to get killed. Pre compliance with these authoritarians came home. Makes me ill.
DeleteMAGAs have been harassing people in line to vote, shouting at them from trucks in drive-bys. And they have disrupted voting by refusing to remove Trump regalia in polling places. This has been in early voting. Their trained “poll watchers” may try to deter voters using actual or threatened violence. That may provide an excuse to challenge results. Why is Somerby being obtuse about this other stuff?
ReplyDeleteJacksonville Beach, FL: teenage Rump supporter arrested for threatening Harris supporters with a machete.
DeleteHe had his chance to show us how he would react when “the enemy from within,” “some very bad people,” “some sick people” violently strike at the heart of our democracy. As his radical-right lunatic supporters attacked Capital police ransacked the US Capitol to prevent a free and fair election his reaction was watch with glee and to do nothing for 187 minutes. His negligence and dereliction led to violent harm and death to our brave capitol police.
ReplyDeleteWhat's laughable about this story is that no seemed to have noticed that the reporter could have asked Trump why he didn't do anything to prevent violence occurring a short distance away from the White House on that day.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-J6-REPORT/html-submitted/ch7.html
There were no deaths to our brave capitol police.
Delete
DeleteWithin 36 hours, six people died: one was shot by Capitol Police, another died of a drug overdose, three died of natural causes, and a police officer died after being assaulted by rioters. Many people were injured, including 174 police officers.
January 6 United States Capitol attack - Wikipedia
A police officer didn't die after being assaulted by rioters.
DeleteWhat does it say about Democrats that they have such a hard time beating someone like described above?
DeleteThey live in a country with legacy-media owned by corporations that love tax breaks.
Delete11:38, it is unfortunate that people like you continue to gaslight the events of January 6, and the multi-faceted plot leading up to it. We live in a country where a corrupt SC6 prevented the full and complete story of Trump's treasonous attempt to stage a coup from being revealed in all its hideous details before this upcoming election. Donald J Chickenshit had to run to the corrupt SC6 begging them to grant him complete and total immunity for his criminal conduct. And Roberts and the rest of the gang abused their position of honor and trust to invent new additions to our Constitution.
DeleteDown in Florida another corrupt federal judge just completely and inexplicably threw out a 40-count federal indictment on the grounds that the appointment of a Special Counsel violated the Constitution. That specious ruling is now under appeal, but the damage has been done. Trump has been shielded by a corrupt justice and the American people have been denied a full public airing of the criminal conduct of a man running for president of the United States.
Down in GA, facing a RICO federal indictment, trump's lawyers decided to put the prosecutor on trial and the good old boy judge happily allowed that farce to completely derail the trial and denied the American people the opportunity to have that case go to a jury before the election.
Donald J Chickenshit sat on his fat corrupt ass for over 3 hours watching his insurrectionists invade our Capitol, drinking a diet coke, and didn't lift a finger to stop it.
Are you too stupid to understand you're powerless to do anything about it and are just pissing in the wind every day when you cry like a woman about it? When you find a planet that's free of corruption, hypocrisy and cowardice, let us all know. Until then why not deal directly with the mental issues are the true root of this idiotic indignation?
Delete8:16, Somebody above asked why Democrats are having such a hard time defeating such an abomination (was it you?)
DeleteI offered something in the way of an answer to that question.
Now go fuck yourself, trollboy.
Why don't you address your real problems?
DeleteThat election campaigns are funded by rich people who want tax breaks?
Delete8:16,
DeleteThe trick is to hold huge protests on weekdays. Then you'll see who is powerless.
"What does it say about Democrats that they have such a hard time beating someone like described above?" It says Magats are garbage people.
DeleteTrump attacks Liz Cheney, says GOP critic wouldn't be such a ‘war hawk’ if she had guns pointed at her
ReplyDeleteAt a rambling event in Arizona late Thursday, the former president also said that vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. "can do anything he wants" on health policy if Trump wins the election.
This is pure insanity.