REVOLUTION: Revolutionary madness is in the air!

TUESDAY, AUGUST 19, 2025 

Who is the sitting president? On this very morning, the madcap madness of revolution was possibly in the air.

To appearances, that madness maybe possibly seemed to be lurking in several major headlines. In this morning's New York Times, one news report starts like this:

Trump Wants to End Mail-In Voting Ahead of Next Year’s Midterms

President Trump vowed on Monday to lead a movement to eliminate the use of mail-in ballots, continuing his legally dubious crusade against the nation’s voting rules, which he has long attacked and falsely blamed for his 2020 election loss.

Mr. Trump, who has opposed mail-in voting for years, wrote on social media that he would sign an executive order to “help bring HONESTY to the 2026 Midterm Elections,” though neither he nor White House officials provided any detail about what the order would entail. Later on Monday, while meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, Mr. Trump said the executive order was being written “by the best lawyers in the country” to end all mail-in ballots.

As we noted yesterday afternoon, the president's vow was driven along by his usual wild misstatements. Adding to the air of madness, the news report includes this:

Last week, Mr. Trump said President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia had discussed the issue of mail-in voting during their summit on Friday in Alaska. Mr. Trump said in an interview with Fox News that the Russian leader had agreed with him that the 2020 election had been rigged in favor of Joseph R. Biden Jr.

“You know, Vladimir Putin said something, one of the most interesting things,” Mr. Trump said. “He said, ‘Your election was rigged because you have mail-in voting.’ He said, ‘Mail-in voting, every election.’ He said, ‘No country has mail-in voting. It’s impossible to have mail-in voting and have honest elections.’”

Having flown to Alaska to discuss a war, the pair were now talking about mail-in voting? At any rate, the upshot was this—after Dear Vladimir allegedly trashed the procedure, the sitting president jetted home and made a vow to ban it.

In fact, many countries have mail-in voting. The madness of the president's personal culture of endless misstatements is marbled all through this crusade. With respect to that personal culture of madness and crazy misstatement, this report is sitting on the front page of this morning's print editions:

An Ohio City Faces a Future Without Haitian Workers: ‘It’s Not Going to Be Good’
Springfield faced a crisis after Donald Trump falsely claimed Haitians were eating pets. Now his policies are driving out workers like Wilford Rinvil, who left for Canada.

Springfield, Ohio now seems be facing some problems. That's the story that was driven by the crazy misstatements, by the president and by the disordered beast at his side, about the way the Haitian residents were eating the city's pets.

Mail-in voting takes place all over the world; no one was eating the pets. That said, madness tends to accompany revolution. Skipping past this additional headline—"Trump Administration Scraps Research Into Health Disparities"—we'll note that a different type of revolution gripped China way back when. 

It was called the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. Just like that, and with great fury and great ardor, madness was in the air:

Cultural Revolution

The Cultural Revolution, formally known as the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, was a sociopolitical movement in the People's Republic of China (PRC). It was launched by CCP chairman Mao Zedong in 1966 and lasted until his death in 1976. Its stated goal was to preserve Chinese socialism by purging remnants of capitalist and traditional elements from Chinese society.

In May 1966, with the help of the Cultural Revolution Group, Mao launched the Revolution and said that bourgeois elements had infiltrated the government and society with the aim of restoring capitalism. Mao called on young people to bombard the headquarters, and proclaimed that "to rebel is justified." Mass upheaval began in Beijing with Red August in 1966. Many young people, mainly students, responded by forming cadres of Red Guards throughout the country. Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung became revered within his cult of personality. In 1967, emboldened radicals began seizing power from local governments and party branches, establishing new revolutionary committees in their place while smashing public security, procuratorate and judicial systems. These committees often split into rival factions, precipitating armed clashes among the radicals. After the fall of Lin Biao in 1971, the Gang of Four became influential in 1972, and the Revolution continued until Mao's death in 1976, soon followed by the arrest of the Gang of Four.

The Cultural Revolution was characterized by violence and chaos across Chinese society. Estimates of the death toll vary widely, typically ranging from 1–2 million, including a massacre in Guangxi that included acts of cannibalism, as well as massacres in Beijing, Inner Mongolia, Guangdong, Yunnan, and Hunan. Red Guards sought to destroy the Four Olds (old ideas, old culture, old customs, and old habits), which often took the form of destroying historical artifacts and cultural and religious sites. Tens of millions were persecuted...

Estimates of the death toll range from 1–2 million? Nothing like that has happened here, even as our own revolutionary cadres struggle to smash our own society's alleged versions of "the four olds."

Nothing that sweeping has happened here! But madness comes at times like these, and questions like the one shown below can even be formulated, and then asked, right in the Oval Office:

President Zelensky, are you prepared to keep sending Ukrainian troops to their deaths for another couple years, or are you going to agree to redraw the maps?

In yesterday's Oval Office event, that was the first question directed at President Zelensky. 

Some have said that the question dropped a Kremlin-adjacent framework on the terrible dilemma facing the Ukrainian president, whose country has been under attack for well over three years.

The somewhat peculiar question came from the Fox News Channel. In fairness to its creator, President Trump had offered this somewhat peculiar Truth Social post on Sunday morning at 9:17 a.m., two days after his latest meeting with Vladimir:

Truth Details

Donald J. Trump 
@realDonaldTrump

President Zelenskyy of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight. Remember how it started. No getting back Obama given Crimea (12 years ago, without a shot being fired!), and NO GOING INTO NATO BY UKRAINE. Some things never change!!!

It could almost be said that yesterday's question to Zelensky simply followed the company line.

In fairness, it has always been true! In theory, the leader of any invaded nation can always "end the war" simply by choosing to surrender. Given two days to think about his meeting with Vladimir, that was the somewhat peculiar thought that seemed to be back again in the revolutionary president's mind.

President Trump is the person who has triggered the revolutionary zeal which is apparent all through the land. His performance is characterized by his familiar wild misstatements and by his frequently shifting set of frameworks and rationales.

Last night, Lawrence O'Donnell stated a view about the president's mental functioning with which we're inclined to disagree. (We're glad he said what he did.) In theory, carefully selected medical specialists would have a better shot at assessing the matter at hand, but the mainstream press corps has agreed that such discussions must never occur.

The Cultural Revolution was swept along by the ardor gripping "many young people." In the current revolutionary moment, the wild misstatements of the sitting president are persistently smoothed and disappeared by the array of stooge foot soldiers who got to war on the Fox News Channel every day.

In yesterday morning's report, we showed you the way three of those soldiers fought back last Friday evening after that channel's correspondent has said that the day's Subarctic Summit seemed to have gone rather poorly.

As we noted, that pushback occurred a mere nine minutes later. Four hours later, with midnight approaching, Trace Gallagher was still trying to lay down the law.

At the end of that evening's Fox News @ Night program, he offered feedback from six Fox News Channel viewers. Feedback from viewers had been sought under terms of this chyron:

TRUMP-PUTIN SUMMIT
DO YOU THINK THE MEETING OVERALL WAS A SUCCESS?

Had the Stumblebum Summit been a success? Instant appraisals are often misguided, but battling now to keep hope alive, Gallagher ended his program by reading six alleged responses from alleged viewers. 

At 11:58 p.m. Eastern, he ended his program like this:

GALLAGHER (8/15/25): Steve says, "I believe that, all in all, it was a success. Unfortunately Trump didn't get a ceasefire. We'll get it on the next meeting."

The text of the messages appeared on the screen as Gallagher continued to read them:

Leo says: "President Trump didn't walk out like he said he would from a failed meeting. So there must have been progress."

Jim: "A success in that Putin came TO America. But it's just the first step."

Tammy: "It all depends on your definition of success. Although there was no ceasefire, evidently, Putin agreed to some things."

Joseph: "It was successful. Trump has Putin in the palm of his hand. There will be a trilateral meeting and peace."

And Scott says, "I think the fact that there will be a second meeting proves that this first one was a success."

Gallagher read six texts. The assessment was unanimous. The president had Putin in the palm of his hand. The fact that he didn't walk out of the meeting showed that there had been progress.

That said, the president would soon say that he had changed his mind about a ceasefire, thereby following Vladimir's lead.  By Sunday morning, he was back to angrily saying that Zelensky can end the war any time he wants.

The employees at Fox will continue to drive the messaging forward. Out in the country, six out of six Fox News Channel viewers will agree on the current points.

Some of the fervor comes from religious belief; some of the fervor doesn't. But what's going on with the president? 

We tend to disagree with something O'Donnell said last night, but who is this person? Who is the person who misstates elementary facts so crazily, who lurches from one basic stance to the next?

Tomorrow, we'll return to that basic question. For today, remember this:

Vladimir said mail-in voting is no darn good! Just like that, the commander in chief returned to his crazy misstatements about that topic as he launched his latest crusade.

Tomorrow: His darling Clementine