Nothing Trumps a Trumpublican’s Feelings

There is nothing more important than a Trumpublican’s feelings. For them, and for you too. Their feelings weigh exactly the same as your facts. Equally applicable and equally valid. Trumpublican’s feelings are facts because they give rise to firmly held beliefs. If enough people have the same persistent, strong feeling, that represents an indisputable fact backed by the empirical evidence of a shared belief.

That’s why the 2020 presidential election results should have been overturned by either Congressional action or insurrection, because Trumpublicans have the feeling the results weren’t correct. They can’t be correct. Trumpublicans, in their unshakeable support of every post election legal action, will bounce from one state to another, from one case to another, and from one affidavit to another, because individual instances of “proof” don’t matter. They’re all equally utilizable until they aren’t. They are all representative of the groundswell of shared belief rooted in their feelings of dissatisfaction, hurt, and anger.

Ted Cruz will tell you, 39% of Americans believe the result was rigged. If that belief isn’t respected, that would be a “profound threat to democracy.”

We see the Trumpublican assertion that their feelings are of pre-eminent import in legislation and legal action and realize these moves are an extension of their fear of losing the “culture wars”. A war they created and perpetually lose.

In many states that have already passed nebulous anti-CRT legislation, the predicate for action is, how someone feels.

Texas‘ anti-CRT legislation: …any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex.

Tennessee’s anti-CRT legislation: An individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or another form of psychological distress solely because of the individual’s race or sex

Iowa’s anti-CRT legislation: That any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of that individual’s race or sex.

Oklahoma’s anti-CRT legislation: any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex.

How someone was made to feel.

Why is it presumed that children are incapable of feeling empathy? Why would one presume a child would identify with the oppressor and not the oppressed? Who is responsible for teaching a child the tools by which they construct their emotional being, a parent or a teacher? Who should be responsible for that?

Which parent is likely to use the predicate of their child’s feelings for action against a teacher and school district? Probably the parent that taught their children to feel hurtsies when oppression is discussed. Probably a parent that instructed their child against empathy and to be on guard for lessons in inclusion and justice. Probably a parent more than happy to punch themselves in the face in order to “own the libs”.

Almost every post-election court action taken by Trumpublicans are based on the fact-free legitimacy of their feelings. King v Whitmer, Case No. 20-cv-13134, has evolved into a sanction case against the cadre of Kraken Lawyers: Sidney Powell, the weeping boo-boo faced Julia Haller, Lin “I didn’t have anything to do with this” Wood, Et al. The judge (extremely, almost maddeningly, patient judge) picked apart the ridiculous affidavits upon which they based their case. The affidavits were speculative and fact free.

Read the whole court transcript. It’s funny and extremely irritating. You’ll have insight into the garbage the courts have been dealing with.

From King v Whitmer:

THE COURT: All right. I want to point everyone’s attention to the next affidavit, which is the Ciantar – certainly, I’m certain I botched this person’s name. I apologize. I will spell it. It is C-i-a-n-t-a-r, set forth at ECF Number 6-7 at Page ID 1312-14. There it is right there. And the amended complaint states that Mr. Ciantar, independent — “independently witnessed,” while walking his dog, a young couple deliver three to four large plastic clear bags that appeared to be, “express bags,” as reflected in photographs taken contemporaneously, to a U.S. postal vehicle waiting. The use of clear express bags is consistent with the — there’s a whistleblower complaint that’s been referenced in the context of this lawsuit. I have not ever seen any underlying documents, but it’s a whistleblower suit by a U.S. Postal Service worker, Jonathan Clark. Putting aside the fact that Plaintiffs have not provided any evidence, as I just stated, regarding the postal service whistleblower claim, here are a few excerpts from the Ciantar affidavit which are now on the screen.


“I witnessed a young couple pull into the parking lot
of post office and proceed to exit their van, had no markings,
and open up the back hatch and proceed to take three to four
very large clear plastic bags out and walk them over to a
running postal service vehicle that appeared as if it was
‘waiting’ for them.”


Let me go further. “There was no interaction between
the couple and any postal service employee, which I felt was
very odd. They did not walk inside the post office like a
normal customer to drop off mail. It was as if the postal
worker was told to meet and stand by until these large bags
arrived.”



“As you can see in the pictures,” the affidavit goes
on to say, “the bags were clear plastic with markings in black
on the bag, and on the inside of these clear bags was another
plastic bag that was not clear, could not see what was inside.
There were markings on the clear bag and what looked like a
black security zip tie on each bag, as if it were tamper
evident, as if it were a tamper type of device to secure the
bag. This looked odd. What I witnessed and considered that
what could be in those bags could be ballots
going to the TCF
Center or coming from the TCF Center.”


THE COURT: Now, this is quite a — I don’t — I don’t think I’ve really ever seen an affidavit that has made so many leaps. This is really fantastical. So my question to counsel here is: How can you, as officers of the Court, present this type of an affidavit? This is pure — is there anything in here that’s not speculative, other than the fact that the individual saw individuals with plastic bags? They don’t know what were in them, happened to be located at the post office, and then there’s a leap made there. Someone answer that question for the Court.

MS. HALLER: Yes, your Honor. The witness is stating or setting forth exactly what he observed and his information that he bases it on and he includes pictures.


THE COURT: What —

MS. HALLER: He does not say more. He does not say less than what he knows to be true. It is a true affidavit. It is a person with some information, and he is setting forth that information. When we put the case together, we put forth a pattern of evidence that shows fraud. So it’s a pattern of evidence that comes together, and this is one piece of a pattern. He is testifying, in his sworn statement, as to what he knows to be true. He saw these plastic bags. He’s explaining what he saw, and he takes pictures of them.

THE COURT: Okay. (repeatedly judge ends discussion on individual affidavits with, “Okay, moving on…”)


MS. HALLER: I would submit, your Honor, that it’s not fantastical. It’s simply what he knew to be true.

This affidavit is the highest example of the Trumpublican thought process. It is the ultimate expression of feelings turned speculation. If something could be true— it must be, particularly (exclusively) if it aligns with a Trumpublican’s feelings.

The affidavit is a representation of what the observer felt to be true. He’s telling his truth. Surely this weighs something in a court of law. The judge repeatedly, over the course of hours, quizzed the Kraken lawyers, how does believing it, make it true or even reasonable? How is this representative of a theory to the case? Where is the due diligence?

Sidney Powell was probably the most intelligent Kraken lawyer in this case— because she said next to nothing the whole time, which was wise. But, she did defend the importance of the affidavits by stating:

The very fact that we attached 960 pages of affidavits reflect how seriously we took this matter, how concerned we were about the constitutional issues that we raised on behalf of electors, who are, themselves, mentioned in the Constitution.

In other words, it is the sheer, literal weight of the words that are self-validating. If enough people feel it, well…it only follows it is true. Judge answers this assertion:

THE COURT: All right. Well, let me say volume, certainly for this Court, doesn’t equate with legitimacy or veracity. So please understand that is certainly my position.

******************

In the more recent, and equally insane election lawsuit in Colorado, brought against a massive, make-believe conspiracy of defendants on behalf of all American voters for $160 Billion in damages, the judge has dismissed the case for the same reasons as above case which resulted in seeking sanctions against the Plaintiff’s representation.

Judge Neureiter: This Court dismissed the entire case for lack of standing on April 28, 2021

Note to self: every time a Trumpublican says election lawsuits were dismissed merely for lack of standing as if that were an unjust technicality, that doesn’t reflect the nature of the dismissal. Courts are not obligated to hear what appears to be fact-free innuendo and speculation, even if they are predisposed to plaintiff’s bringing a case. And, when they did hear post election lawsuits, they often dismissed them on that very basis, as in this case and the one above. They did observe the affidavits. They were garbage. All of them. Every one.

I use the words “vast conspiracy” purposefully. The Complaint is one enormous conspiracy theory.

In short, this was no slip-and-fall at the local grocery store. Albeit disorganized and fantastical, the Complaint’s allegations are extraordinarily serious and, if accepted as true by large numbers of people, are the stuff of which violent insurrections are made.

But that’s the point. If enough people believe it, it must be true. If it’s true, than an insurrection is just. Obviously.

The personal affidavits Plaintiffs attached to the original Complaint recount the generalized fear and suspicion that the “system” is rigged, and a sense that American democracy no longer works. The affidavits are notable only in demonstrating no firsthand knowledge by any Plaintiff of any election fraud, misconduct, or malfeasance. Instead, Plaintiffs’ affidavits are replete with conclusory statements about what must have happened during the election and Plaintiffs’ “beliefs” that the election was corrupted, presumably based on rumors, innuendo, and unverified and questionable media reports.

This case too, shall find itself in sanctions against the plaintiff’s representation. This is a necessary action to teach Trumpublicans, your feelings are not facts. Hopefully this will dissuade future legal actions in 2022. We’ve arrived at our last lines of defense.

The Case of Candace Owens

I have listened to Candace Owens speak before. I recently listened to her performance at CPAC and she struck me as exactly the person I had already concluded she was. Not a mind of significance except in any need to measure her influence on a sector of the populace. Her shtick lies somewhere between the complete idiocy of Jesse Lee Paterson and the argumentative, pseudo-intellect of Ben Shapiro. She is most closely related to Charlie Kirk, in style and fact.

Candace Owens is an angry person. Her divisiveness properly belongs in so called “conservative” circles. Her previous mocking of Donald Trump turned to deification as the second coming, accurately reflects the rebel in search of a cause. Owens’ settling on the Trumpesque philosophy that “all things are in fact equal,” and the belief that empirical data is useless except to create victim labels and pesky narratives contrary to the truth of her opinions, is well-suited to the current state of Conservatism. To state her opinion’s “truths” weigh exactly the same as fact, is self-evident by its mere existence, and if she states her truths with the proper level of righteous fury, her opinions tip the scale as far as she is concerned.

To cry, “racism!” is to be a racist. To receive help is to be weak. To address inequity is to reaffirm the need for inequity. Self determination is her calling card. In other words, she is perfectly suited to supporting GOP’s traditional legislative agenda for less social causes and more money for the rich. This is not a problem- it’s admirable. This is not a bug- it’s a feature.

Now, I have read the manifesto of this wretched, evil thing in New Zealand. We shall not name the beast nor transcribe its thoughts here. Suffice to say, it has listed Candace Owens as it’s prime motivation. Honestly I cannot make that connection in good faith. It is true she hates the label of race, but has not ever promoted violence so far as I know. In a roundabout way, I suppose her self-determination could easily feed into the warped mind of the beast.

I would have said I absolve Candace Owens for myself, as her particular flavor of ugliness shares very little space with what has transpired in New Zealand. I would have said that, except for these things, in order:

The set-up for the Trump-style and Tucker Carlson run playbook-

I personally never use this silliness “LOL,” and if ever there were a time to not use it, that time would be now.

I have numerous problems with all of this madness. What is wrong with her? A little self-reflection would be ideal in this case. I don’t need an apology from Candace Owens, really no one does. What would be of-the-moment to a well adjusted person is a drive to state their horror. Their fucking horror that their name was used in connection with pure evil. Sadness, clarification, concern…all of these emotions would bubble up in us…wouldn’t it? Wouldn’t we be sick to our stomachs, tearful, angry, sad?

This last tweet makes me cringe. Candace Owens is literally using this tragedy as a moment for self promotion in exactly the same fashion Tucker Carlson did, but on a more horrific scale of magnitude.

I do not absolve Candace Owens for myself, I now firmly dislike her for the ugliness she represents even if it has nothing to do with what happened in New Zealand.

Trump’s GOP Have Lost Their Goddamn Minds

Georgia’s Lt. Governor, Casey Cagle, publicly threatens extortion against Delta Airlines unless they resume their preferential arrangement with the NRA.

7ef8c19a-3a92-4e62-9aec-a028f06002d6.png

Cagle apparently takes Delta’s recent business decision as an “attack against conservatives”.  The well funded, GOP front-runner to win the governorship of Georgia, really used twitter to make his public decree of extortion.  Have Republicans lost their goddamn minds?

They have.  The recent CPAC cult pep-rally proves the GOP has lost their damn minds.

We’ve all seen by now the video of conservative Mona Caren taking some boos and cries of “NOT TRUE,” when she dares to tell the truth in front of the Trump faithful.  Here’s a fucking fabulous quote:

“There is nothing more freeing than telling the truth,” Charen wrote. “And it must be done, again and again, by those of us who refuse to be absorbed into this brainless, sinister, clownish thing called Trumpism, by those of us who refuse to overlook the fools, frauds and fascists attempting to glide along in his slipstream into respectability.”

Another CPAC highlight was CPAC Coms Director Ian Walter maligning former GOP Party leader, Michael Steele, with the choice quote, “We elected Mike Steele to be the RNC chair, because he’s a black guy; that’s the wrong thing to do.”

https://twitter.com/LevineJonathan/status/967456456625807367/video/1

Let’s face it folks, this is the deranged party of Donald Trump.  They don’t care what you think, so long as they can hold on to 35-38%, they don’t care what you think.

I’ve been hearing a lot lately, the current guiding light of the GOP is any and every action in which they can stick a finger in the eye of liberals.  It doesn’t matter how that is achieved.  It doesn’t matter if it serves no good to anyone.  Hell, it doesn’t even matter if it’s illegal.

They suffered through 8 years of a progressive liberal black man and now everyone has to pay.  The party of obstruction has transformed into the party of directionless hate.

 

What’s Wrong With Stephen Miller? He’s Gay.

GOSSIP OF THE WEEK!

Yeah, it’s just a guess.  But do me a favor, go get your friend with pro-grade gaydar, like I have, and ask them what they think.  Go on.  I’ll wait.

Here’s the thing, to me, everything about Miller’s speech, body language, and effected nature, screams self-hate.  In a public setting, he spits his ugly words out of his mouth and perpetually glances sideways, away from his target.  As if he doesn’t own the thoughts propelling the words, nor them him.  He is merely the messenger of the “truths”.  Not to mention, the more base fact…dude looks and acts gay.  And trust me, gay is totally fine.  It would be awesome to know Trump’s policy advisor and speech writer was openly gay, but he’s not, is he.  No, he’s exactly the opposite, and that’s bad news.

Miller was a quiet introvert in high school, until he got his hands on a copy of the hate-fest “Guns, Crime, and Freedom,” by the NRA’s Wayne LaPierre (Certified anti-gay).  There began his extroversion and directed hate.

Having decided on a hate-filled outlook on life, he dumped his good friend, because his friend was Hispanic.  Is that why he dumped his buddy?  Or was that the reason given by which to justify the action?  It’s not clear he had any real friends after that, male or female.  He became keen on writing and forcibly arguing for his hate filled views.

Stephen’s high school paper on political correctness:

“And while we are on the subject of personal accomplishment, should any student accomplish the opportunity to have sex, our school is happy to help. As district policy says: “Condoms are available to students in grades 9-12 in a manner which promotes greatest accessibility.” Problem here?

Legally speaking, sex between minors is statutory rape. Not to mention 14-year olds are a little young to be having sex regardless of the law. And just in case your son or daughter decides at their tender age that they are gay, we have a club on campus that will gladly help foster their homosexuality. Do they notify parents if their teenagers have chosen an alternate lifestyle? Of course not.”

Read the whole thing, it’s full of hate.  But here I want to highlight-

“Should any student accomplish the opportunity to have sex…,” which is a strange turn of phrase for sure in it’s active words, “accomplish,” and “opportunity.”  As in: difficult to come by and difficult to complete.  Maybe Stephen is just a wee bit jealous, hm? There is his stated fear, that if someone is gay, they might be helped to fulfill that recognition.  “Do they notify their parents…,” would it be awful if a child’s parents found out that their child was gay?  But Stephen, you presume that your parents won’t be told, so that might give you your freedom, wouldn’t it?  Isn’t that scary?

It’s not a self righteous superiority Miller feels, it’s a frightened hate of a liberal environment where he might be found out; where he might have a supportive structure to explore his fear.  An environment in which he would be known to be gay and free to accept that fact.

A quote from a Oscar de La Torre, a school board member, concerning Miller’s difficult high school years:

84c27df6-3ac3-4607-b44e-11705ce914ae.png

In his storied college career, there are several examples of Miller’s awkward interactions with women. In the column which he wrote for the Duke Chronicle he mentions interactions with women twice over the time he contributed to the paper.  In both instances women are portrayed as being insufferably stupid.  Barely tolerable.  Here and here.

He jumped into the middle of a women’s track meet to prove men were physically superior.

“jumped, uninvited, into the final stretch of a girls’ track meet, apparently intent on proving his athletic supremacy over the opposite sex.”

From the same article, Miller under the guise, again, of making a higher point, gets sexy for male colleague:

Miller “set off on a patriotic semi-striptease before the editor of the student newspaper, according to the editor, Ari Rosmarin, theatrically removing a button-down to reveal an American flag T-shirt in protest of an article he found inconsistent with the national interest.”

A list of cultural representative of the US, according to Miller: “Our culture includes Jimmy Stewart, John Wayne, Frank Sinatra, Bing Crosby, Elvis Presley, Johnny Cash, Jackie Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, Douglas Macarthur, Milton Friedman, Edgar Allen Poe, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Thomas Edison and again, for emphasis, Elvis Presley.”  Half of the population is conspicuously absent in representation.

According to Miller, “alternate lifestyles” and sexuality should not be portrayed in Hollywood productions.  We should not, cannot see it!  It will be real.

This dude is so deep, deep in the closet, that it has a basement with a dungeon in it.  This is the kind of guy so focused on self avoidance, he would spend hours and days pouring over tomes and treatise of ways in which to cultivate dissatisfaction and hate for others, as a tool by which to avoid his own self-examination.

Stephen Miller has no friends.  Zero.  He can’t stand women and he can’t stand to entertain the ways in which he likes men.

I bet he has cuts on his arms and scars on his back from self-flagellation.  I bet you.