This street battle took a huge bite out of freedom
Nick Anderson is a Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist.
Nick Anderson is a Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist.
This article has been edited by Raw Story.
Tennessee’s Ethics Commission could take action against Memphis area residents after dismissing their sworn complaint against Sen. Brent Taylor for critical remarks he made against participants of a “No Kings” rally there.
Commission members and state ethics director Bill Young raised questions this week about whether the residents tried to “weaponize” the process to go after Taylor, a Shelby County Republican who blasted people who rallied against President Donald Trump’s immigration policies in June, calling them “idiots” and warning the police would arrest them for an illegal protest. Taylor spoke on a Memphis radio station and then posted comments on the X, formerly Twitter, calling the protesters “purple-haired Jihadis.”
The Left’s violence masquerading as free speech is a stain on our republic, and it’s escalating at a terrifying pace. From assassination attempts on President Trump—twice in two months—to torching cars at Tesla dealerships during Tesla Takedowns. Members of “Progressive” groups… pic.twitter.com/cQcTUEjcNb
— Senator Brent Taylor (@SenBrentTaylor) June 14, 2025
Five people who filed identical complaints against him said he used his official position “to spread false, inflammatory and dangerous misinformation about a peaceful protest event,” endangering constituents and inciting harassment.
Young told the commission it didn’t have jurisdiction to cite Taylor, in part, because he didn’t benefit financially from the criticism. The executive director also told the commission it could hold a hearing to determine whether civil penalties should be levied against the complainants for filing a “frivolous” complaint, potentially leading to a $10,000 civil penalty.
Commission members agreed it’s “not unethical” for Taylor to state his opinion and that voters should decide whether he remains in office. Ultimately, they decided to defer action until their next meeting when two members who were absent this week could attend.
Taylor’s attorney, Allan Wade, said in a letter to the commissioner the complaints were “merely personal grievances about Brent Taylor’s dislike of complainants and their political views, which is not a proper subject of an ethics complaint under the Ethics Act.”
That could be true, but the ultimate question is whether the Ethics Commission is more concerned with making an example of people who, wrong or right, see it as a last resort for justice or giving politicians the freedom to bad-mouth the public.
This town of 22,000 could be the set for Andy of Mayberry, a Norman Rockwell painting of America.
Patrick sports a military haircut befitting his years in the Coast Guard and steel blue eyes that reflect military determination, compassion — and fear. Fear of what could happen to his town.
We filmed Patrick while he watched the videos of bodies floating face down in another small town, in Kerr County, Texas, where the death toll from a flood in July has reached 136 and counting.
Patrick was shaken. Because it’s a horror he knows all too well.
Twenty years ago this month, Coast Guardsman Patrick was one of the first responders sent in after Hurricane Katrina drowned Gulfport and New Orleans. He told me about recovering the bloated bodies of pregnant women — or pieces of pregnant women — out of the water. He tried to pull one corpse from the flood, but the “arm slid off like a chicken wing.”
The horror still haunts him. Because he knows that drownings in Texas were not an act of God. They were an act of Donald Trump. Trump and his DOGE buddies had, just before the Texas flood, cut the heart out of Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA.
The so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) slashed one out of three FEMA staff employees just before the Texas flood. The head of FEMA’s National Response Coordination Center, Jeremy Greenberg, whose job was to warn of such floods, was forced out just weeks before the Texas catastrophe. And since the DOGE massacre of April, FEMA’s San Antonio office has had no permanent Warning-Coordination Meteorologist.
Supervisor Patrick needs no reminder of the dangers his town faces. Patrick has two rail lines running through his town. In 2023, trains derailed in East Palestine, Ohio, spilling a deadly toxic cloud over the town. If the chemicals hit the fan in Villa Park, who’s he going to call? Trump has announced he’s planning to close FEMA by this December, leaving emergency response — and its costs — to states and local officials like Patrick.
This reporter, in a prior work life, was on the team that wrote an emergency evacuation plan for the very rich County of Suffolk, Long Island. That plan cost $20 million, which the Richie Rich kids of the Hamptons could afford, but an impossible sum for a town of 22,000.
All Washed Away: A Greg Palast Investigation. [Now available on YouTube and Substack]
Trump’s fantasy is, ultimately, to privatize emergency evacuation.
Been there. Done that. The privatization of emergency evacuation led to over a thousand Americans floating face down in New Orleans in 2005.
Patrick still has nightmares about those bodies coming apart in his hands after Katrina. That too, was not an act of God. It was an Act of George W. Bush, specifically, the privatization of the New Orleans evacuation plan.
Back in 2006, I did an investigation of the drownings in New Orleans for a program called Democracy Now! hosted by Amy Goodman.
I’m asking you to watch the film of the investigation, All Washed Away, which I’ve just updated with an exposé of the Trump drownings of 2025 — out today for free on YouTube and Substack.
Back in 2005, as I watched the mayhem of those trying to escape New Orleans, I called FEMA to get a copy of the evacuation plan for the city. FEMA, which Bush had just put under the Department of Homeland Security, said the plan was “classified,” a national security secret.
How the f— do you “classify” an evacuation plan and expect people to evacuate?
Our investigation uncovered the truth: there was no real plan because the Bush gang had privatized the evacuation planning, turning it over to a GOP crony who ran a company called, Innovative Emergency Management (IEM).
When I went to IEM’s offices in Baton Rouge, the company officers literally hid from me. They hid because they knew that I knew they had NO PLAN to evacuate 127,000 residents who did not have cars. They were left to drown.
In our film, I talk to Stephen Smith, who had no car, no way out and couldn’t swim. Nevertheless, Smith floated on a mattress, pulling survivors from rooftops. He told me how Bush’s helicopters flew over the bridge where Black folk were stranded for days without food nor water. Smith closed the eyes of a man who died after he gave his grandchildren his last bottle of water.
Katrina: There was NO PLAN to evacuate the 127,000 residents who didn’t have cars.
And the Bush crew knew it would happen because the Director of the Hurricane Center at Louisiana State University blew the whistle. Ivor van Heerden and his experts at LSU had an expert plan to save the city ready to go, but it was ignored so that the politically connected IEM could cash in.
Prof. Van Heerden, when I asked about the effect of rejecting the LSU plan said, “Well, 1,500 people drowned.”
The professor shouldn’t have told me that. The university’s response was to fire him. The pressure came from Chevron Oil Corporation, but that’s a story you’ll have to watch yourself when you watch the film.
IEM, as so many privateers, won its contract through flim-flam, claiming that its team included the Clinton administration’s evacuation expert James Lee Witt. In fact, Mr. Witt had nothing to do with these scoundrels.
I bet you won’t be surprised to learn that IEM has just received a contract with DOGE.
Donald Trump says he’s deploying the military to Washington, D.C. because of a “crime emergency,” but armies don’t do policing: Their job, and their training, is to blow things up and kill people.
They have no training in evidence-chain-of-custody, arrest procedures, civil rights protections, criminal investigation, or any other aspect of policing. Sending the military to do policing is like inviting the neighborhood butcher to perform your brain surgery.
In America, it’s also illegal. Under Posse Comitatus, the American military is explicitly forbidden from engaging in any police activities against civilian populations. Even though the Trump administration is bragging that the National Guard arrested almost 50 people on Tuesday in D.C., the Posse Comitatus Act consists of just one sentence:
“Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”
Armies are really good, however, at facing down large crowds of protesters.
Trump is planning to go the Lukashenko and Putin route and is determined not to go down the way Yoon did. That — along with distracting us from his alleged raping of underage girls with his “best friend” Jeffrey Epstein — is why he’s militarizing Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles.
These are test runs for when his crimes, corruption, and excesses — particularly if the feds intervene to help Republicans steal the 2026 elections — become so severe that Americans are in the streets in large enough numbers to present a threat to his regime.
He learned that lesson from the George Floyd protests, and may well be visiting Putin in Alaska this week to get further instruction in how to deal with protesters. It’s why the Pentagon is proposing a “Domestic Civil Disturbance Quick Reaction Force” made up of military members who can deploy within hours to any city in America to put down “civil disturbances.”
If Trump really intended to do something about crime in D.C., he would have directed his efforts toward fixing the root causes of crime: poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, drug addiction, homelessness, and lead in the water pipes, all areas where D.C. ranks among the worst of American cities.
If D.C. was truly lacking policing resources, he’d be sending in Military Police (who are actually trained in policing) or shifting budgets around to give more money to the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department itself.
But, of course, he did none of the above; instead, he’s sending in troops.
The last time Trump was confronted with protesters he demanded Gen. Mark Milley have soldiers “shoot them in the legs.” Milley refused, so Trump and Hegseth have decapitated the senior ranks of the military, replacing them with toadies willing to do whatever Dear Orange Leader wants.
You can see where this is going.
We’re in the early stages of autocratic breakthrough, the consolidation-of-power phase when a leader who’s planning to turn a democracy into an autocracy seizes control of all the various branches of government and makes sure the military is entirely loyal to him, rather than the rule of law.
So, now he is testing how far he can go and what kind of pushback his actions will produce from the public, the press, and the legal system.
The Trump administration has arrested a Democratic mayor, a Democratic judge, a Democratic member of Congress, and beaten a Democratic United States Senator to the ground. They’ve deployed the military, over the objections of the governor and mayors, into first Los Angeles and now Washington D.C.
The nation’s chief law-enforcement officer, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, said:
“We are staying here to liberate the city [of Los Angeles] from the socialists and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor have placed on this country and what they have tried to insert into the city.”
And the National Guard troops are still there. Angelinos and D.C. residents — and, by extension, all Americans who monitor the spectacle on TV — are expected to get used to having heavily armed military forces in our streets. Soon, Trump’s people hope, it’ll seem “normal,” just like they’re trying to normalize secret, masked Rosgvardiya-style police who refuse to identify themselves, abuse citizens, and routinely break the law themselves.
The president demanded a military parade for his birthday and is threatening to revoke broadcast licenses from television networks. He’s shut down funding for NPR and PBS. The Trump regime is ignoring court orders, including one from the Supreme Court, and Trump’s press secretary says:
“The courts should have no role here. There is a troubling and dangerous trend of unelected judges inserting themselves into the presidential decision-making process.“
The Republicans on the Supreme Court have given him immunity from prosecution for crimes he commits while president, and rolled over repeatedly as he openly and blatantly violates both Constitutional requirements and historic political norms.
Republican members of Congress, with the possible exception of Kentucky’s Thomas Massie, are terrified of Trump and have already sacrificed their independence and power. In the Senate, only Thom Tillis of North Carolina meaningfully stood against Trump and he was forced into retirement as a result.
With all three branches of government under his effective control, Trump is now threatening the media, crushing the independence of colleges and universities, receiving tribute and bribes from major corporations, and demanding changes to our voting systems that will make it harder for anybody who’s not white and upper-middle-class to vote.
Don’t be fooled. Trump and the billionaires and fascists he’s assembled into his cabinet are right in the middle of the process of permanently ending democracy in our country. First he went after immigrants and trans people. Now he’s targeting poor people in D.C.
Next, as he follows the Putin/Lukashenko/Orbán/Erdoğan playbook, it will be Democrats and white protesters. Particularly if he tries to steal the 2026 election.
Standing against this coming onslaught will take considerable courage. Hitler put down the White Rose Society, Putin killed Navalny and arrested his lawyers and supporters, Lukashenko and Erdoğan had their troops fire on angry crowds.
Our best hope is that, when the crackdowns come, enough of us can mobilize to bring about a rebooting of our democracy like average people did in South Korea last year as they restored democracy to that nation.
This is not a drill; these people have revealed themselves as genuine white supremacist fascists and they’re not planning to back down or go away. Trump’s deployment of troops to LA and D.C. prove it.
When we left convicted sex offender Ghislaine Maxwell, she had just received several remarkable gifts from the Trump administration.
First, while serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking minors as Jeffrey Epstein’s procurer, she got an unprecedented meeting with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, the second highest official in the Justice Department. Blanche was also U.S. President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer in the hush-money trial resulting in his 34 felony convictions. That such a meeting even occurred astonished legal observers across the political spectrum.
Second, only a week later, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Prisons transferred Maxwell out of the Florida Correctional Institution in Tallahassee, a minimum security prison with horrendous conditions. Her new home is the Federal Prison Camp in Bryan, Texas—a “Club Fed” that houses white-collar criminals and celebrities who have far better living quarters and relative freedom of movement.
Now independent journalist and podcast host Allison Gill (“Mueller, She Wrote” on Bluesky) reports, “I have Ghislaine Maxwell’s security score, custody level, transfer code, public safety factor, and sex offender waiver.”
If accurate, Gill’s information confirms my earlier observation that sex offenders are not eligible for placement in a federal prison camp. Someone has to waive such a prisoner’s mandatory “public safety factor” that would otherwise bar a transfer to one.
Gill also notes, “What stands out here is the custody level ‘OUT,’ which allows her to leave the minimum security campus for work assignments.” [Italics in original]
In some respects, Maxwell is following in the footsteps of her mentor. In June 2008, federal prosecutors in Florida had identified 31 victims whom it was prepared to name in an indictment of Jeffrey Epstein. President George W. Bush’s deputy attorney general had determined that federal prosecution of Epstein was appropriate.
But then-U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Alex Acosta negotiated a non-prosecution agreement with Epstein’s high-powered lawyers. The federal charges were dropped. In return, Epstein pleaded guilty to two state charges: one count of solicitation of prostitution and one count of solicitation of prostitution with a minor under the age of 18.
I predict that Trump will now blame the courts for his own lack of transparency.
Epstein served a 13-month sentence in a private wing of a Palm Beach jail. He was allowed to leave 12 hours a day, six days a week, to work out of a nearby office. After his release, he resumed sex trafficking in minors with Maxwell as his coconspirator. In 2019, Epstein was indicted on new federal charges.
Acosta had agreed to keep the non-prosecution agreement confidential. In 2019, a federal judge ruled that prosecutors had violated the victims’ rights by failing to notify them of the plea deal. By then, Acosta was secretary of labor in Trump’s first administration. After the revelation of his role in the earlier Epstein plea deal, he resigned.
Trump has tried desperately to walk away from the Epstein conspiracy theories that he had pushed to energize his MAGA base. But nothing has worked. As the MAGA core cracked, pressure mounted and he made a hollow pledge: Trump ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek the courts’ permission to release grand jury materials relating to Epstein and Maxwell.
As I observed previously, that was a head fake toward transparency because: 1) grand jury materials are a tiny slice of the Justice Department’s files on Epstein; and 2) the courts could refuse to release anything at all.
And the courts have done just that. So far, Bondi is now 0-for-2 in her effort to obtain judicial release of the Epstein-Maxwell grand jury materials.
Bondi’s latest rebuke came on August 11 in New York. In a blistering opinion, Judge Paul A. Engelmayer called out Trump’s subterfuge. The court observed that the “special circumstances” required for releasing Maxwell’s grand jury materials are not present.
The Government’s invocation of special circumstances, however, fails at the threshold. Its entire premise—that the Maxwell grand jury materials would bring to light meaningful new information about Epstein’s and Maxwell’s crimes, or the Government’s investigation into them—is demonstrably false.
The court continued:
A member of the public familiar with the Maxwell trial record who reviewed the grand jury materials that the Government proposes to unseal would thus learn next to nothing new.
Turning the government’s words back on it, the judge ruled:
A “public official,” “lawmaker,” “pundit,” or “ordinary citizen” “deeply interested and concerned about the Epstein matter,” Motion to Unseal at 3, and who reviewed these materials expecting, based on the Government’s representations, to learn new information about Epstein’s and Maxwell’s crimes and the investigation into them, would come away feeling disappointed and misled. There is no “there” there.
Judge Engelmayer’s most insightful and telling passage was also his most direct:
The one colorable argument under that doctrine for unsealing in this case, in fact, is that doing so would expose as disingenuous the Government’s public explanations for moving to unseal. A member of the public, appreciating that the Maxwell grand jury materials do not contribute anything to public knowledge, might conclude that the Government’s motion for their unsealing was aimed not at “transparency” but at diversion—aimed not at full disclosure but at the illusion of such.
Judge Engelmayer’s powerful condemnation is remarkable. He blasted Bondi’s attempt to use the court as a vehicle for Trump’s deflection, distraction, and diversion playbook.
Another federal judge in New York is considering the Justice Department’s request to release Epstein’s grand jury materials. I predict that Bondi goes 0-for-3.
I predict that Trump will now blame the courts for his own lack of transparency.
And I predict that the Ghislaine Maxwell scandal will live on….
I am back to pondering how in the hell we got here, because try as I might, I will never understand how a thoughtful, caring person who truly loves his or her country, could vote for a racist monster and America-attacking convicted felon like Donald Trump, or any politician who supports him.
I can’t get past it, but more than that, I refuse to.
And let’s get this out of the way early: Yes, I understand that the Democratic Party has issues, and a severe image problem right now, but it is preposterous to think that our democracy wouldn’t be on far safer footing if they were in charge.
It’s preposterous to think our environment, women’s rights, human rights, rights to healthcare, JOBS, and clean air and water would be in jeopardy if Democrats were in charge.
It’s preposterous to think that measles would be making a comeback, cancer research would be canceled, and our personal information would be in the hands of some snot-nosed, 28-year-old tech bro if Democrats were in charge.
I was triggered again today by a classic New York Times clickbait piece headlined: “These are the voters who should scare Democrats most”
Subhead: “Working-class Americans who until recently voted Democratic said the party should not count on a backlash to President Trump to win them back. Still, there were pockets of opportunity.”
The Times talked to “30 predominantly working-class voters who supported Mr. Biden in 2020 before defecting or struggling deeply with their choices last year, and many had a stinging message for the Democratic Party.”
These “working class” voters are disillusioned by seemingly everything, which I actually understand during all this chaos, even if I am getting sick and damn tired of this overused term, “working class.” That they think Republicans are doing a single thing for them, except taking more of their money and their rights, is what I don’t understand.
If you want to say, America deserves better from its two major political parties, you have a sympathetic ear. But if you want to say both parties are the same after watching the first seven months of this morally busted GOP regime, then you are intellectually lazy, completely dishonest with yourself, racist, or likely some combination of all three.
Democrats demonstrably stand up for America’s best ideals: Liberty and justice FOR ALL. Republicans demonstrably stand up for the few, and these bloated billionaires, who are currently standing on our throats thanks to the big pay day they just got in that galling big, beautiful bill.
As I was researching this piece with a steady grumble, I came across another NYT story written by Thomas B. Edsall and headlined: How liberalism went to die on the Texas-Arkansas border
Edsall’s deep dive starts this way:
Few communities in America prospered as much as Texarkana during President Joe Biden’s four years in the White House, and few communities were more ungrateful than the voters of that region, which is anchored around twin cities spread across the Texas-Arkansas border.
In 2024, in spite of economic growth under a Democratic president at rates unheard-of in decades, residents of Texarkana turned around and cast a higher percentage of their ballots for Donald Trump than ever before.
Read that one again.
What the hell are we suppose to do with this? What the hell is a politician or a political party supposed to do, if not providing the voters with better opportunities to improve their lives? What the hell is a politician or a political party supposed to do if they are penalized for that?
More from the piece:
During the four years from January 2021 to January 2025 — the years of Biden’s presidency — the unemployment rate in the Texarkana metropolitan area fell to 4.2 percent from 6.8 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The metro region’s gross domestic product had experienced sluggish growth from 2010 ($5.04 billion) through 2020 ($5.8 billion). After Biden took office, however, the region’s G.D.P. shot up, reaching $7.2 billion in 2023, the most recent figure available at the Federal Reserve.
And what did Biden and Democrats get for all this?
In 2020, Texarkana, which is made up of Miller County, Ark., and Bowie County, Texas, voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump — 72.3 percent to 27.7 percent for Biden, a 44.6-point margin. In 2024, despite the growth of green industry and economic improvement during the Biden years, Trump beat Kamala Harris in the Texarkana counties with 75.4 percent of the vote and 24.6 percent for Harris, an immense 50.8-point margin.
They actually LOST votes. It really is mind-blowing …
It’s not the economy, stupid.
We have just passed the eighth anniversary of the repulsive Charlottesville chapter of our country’s bumpy history that is forever chained to its original sin.
Thousands of white men marched on this Virginia city and for white supremacy on August 11-12, 2017, in something called a “Unite the Right” rally replete with their toxic hate and Tiki torches for effect.
On the second day of this ode to hate, James Alex Fields Jr., a self-proclaimed admirer of Adolf Hitler, plowed his car into the crowd which had assembled to peacefully oppose the racist hell that had arrived on their streets.
A young activist and daughter of Charlottesville, Heather Heyer, was killed instantly and scores of others were injured by the speeding vehicle. I have learned many have not fully physically recovered, and still more are suffering from the psychological impact of that day.
Trump, a career racist, who only a year earlier couldn’t garner the endorsement of a single major newspaper during his dirty run for the presidency, but did get a ringing nod from the KKK, could not bring himself to properly condemn the gruesome event. Instead, extolled the virtues of the “very fine people on both sides” of this terrorist attack.
Like his surrender to Vladimir Putin in Helsinki the following year, it will always be impossible to un-hear or un-see these appalling events.
Joe Biden has said it was the revolting incident in Charlottesville that spurred him to run for the presidency three years later, because he, too, knew he could not live with himself or in a country that promoted this kind of detestable hate.
Which brings me full circle in my reckoning with a country predominated by people who are impossible to love or respect. I believe what happened on that tragic day in Charlottesville eight years ago explains better than anything else what the good people who believe in liberty and justice for all in this country are up against.
It certainly explains what is happening in Washington, D.C., right now in yet another quaking moment, because even if you disagree with everything I have typed here today, you damn well better understand this:
Trump didn't invade our capital again because there is some invented crime problem ... Just as he didn't invade it four-plus years ago, because there was some invented election problem ... He did it both times to throw red meat to his racist base who elected him across the country. He did it to appease the people, who live in ungodly places like that Texas-Arkansas border, who hate our cities — but mostly the people of color who live in them.
And I just can’t get past it. But more than that, I refuse to ...
By James M. Thomas, University of Mississippi
Historian Nell Painter remarked in 2011, “Being white these days isn’t what it used to be.”
For the past decade, wave upon wave of protests against police violence and mass incarceration have drawn the public’s attention toward the continued significance of America’s color line, the set of formal and informal rules that maintain white Americans’ elevated social and economic advantages.
Meanwhile, an explosion of popular literature scrutinizes those rules and places white people’s elevated status in sharp relief.
How are white people making sense of these tensions?
In his 1935 publication “Black Reconstruction in America,” sociologist W.E.B. Du Bois described the “public and psychological wage” paid to white workers in the post-Reconstruction era on account of their being white. Today those “wages of whiteness” remain durable as ever. Nearly 60 years removed from the high water mark of the Civil Rights movement, its aims have not been met.
White people still enjoy better jobs, health care, housing, schooling and more.
I’m a sociologist of race and racism. My team of graduate student researchers and I have spent the past four years interviewing white people to understand how they make sense of their white racial status today. We concentrated our efforts among white people living in the U.S. South because that region is seen as more responsible for shaping what it means to be white, and the social and economic advantages of being white, than any other.
There is not much research on how white people think about what it means to be white. Meanwhile, popular and scholarly treatments of white Southerners as overwhelmingly conservative and racially regressive abound.
Some white Southerners we spoke with fit those tropes. Many others do not. Overall, we found white Southerners across the political spectrum actively grappling with their white racial status.
As Walter, 38, from Clarksdale, Mississippi, told us, “It’s a complicated time to be a white Southerner.” We use pseudonyms to protect anonymity.
The Italian political theorist Antonio Gramsci defined a crisis as a historical period in which “the old is dying and the new cannot be born.” Within this space between, Gramsci argued, “morbid phenomena of the most varied kind come to pass.”
Many people we spoke with lived through the defining ruptures of the 20th century that forever changed the South, and America too: the formal demise of Jim Crow rule, violent and bloody struggles over integration, and the slow, uneven march toward equal rights for all Americans.
Still others came of age against the backdrop of the defining shocks of this new century: 9/11 and the war on terrorism, Hurricane Katrina, the racial backlash to the election of Barack Obama, and the Black Lives Matter movement.
For some, the political rise of Donald Trump and his willingness to traffic in racist rhetoric constituted a crisis, too. “He embodies everything that is immoral,” said Ned, 45, from Vardaman, Mississippi. The town Ned is from is named for James K. Vardaman, former governor of Mississippi who once declared that “if it is necessary every Negro in the state will be lynched; it will be done to maintain white supremacy.”
Taken together, these crises cast a long shadow of uncertainty over white people’s elevated social position and anchor how white Southerners understand their white racial status.
Miriam, 61, from Natchez, Mississippi, grew up under the last gasps of Jim Crow. She recalled her parents pulling her from public school and sending her to a nearby private school shortly after the Supreme Court’s 1969 Alexander v. Holmes ruling, which ordered the immediate desegregation of Southern schools.
Her new school was one of hundreds of “segregation academies” founded across the South in the aftermath of the court’s ruling.
“You didn’t go over there, by the Black school,” Miriam recalled. “You stayed over by the white school. … I remember as a kid that made quite an impression.”
Reflecting on what it means to be a white Southerner today, Miriam drew from these experiences living under the region’s long shadow of segregation.
“There’s been so much hatred and so much unpleasantness. I want to do everything I can to make relations better,” she said. “I think that is part of being white in the South.”
Daryl, 42, a self-described conservative, lived in several Southern communities as a child, including Charlotte, North Carolina, in the mid-1980s as the city wrestled with its court-ordered school busing program. Daryl recalled his parents and other white people complaining about the poor quality of newly integrated schools, including telling him “stories of things like needles on the playground.”
Daryl rarely, if ever, talked with his own parents about race, but he broaches these topics with his own children today.
A self-described “childhood racist,” Daryl draws from his experiences to frame his conversations with his own children. “I remind them that there used to be this day where this was OK, and this is how things were thought of,” he says.
The region’s history also includes more contemporary crises.
Lorna, 34, is a registered Republican from Marion, Arkansas. She described how recent protests against police violence are affecting her understanding of America’s color line.
“I feel like Black people are mad or angry. They’re tired of violence and, you know, profiling,” she said. “And I don’t think it’s just in the South. I think it’s all over the United States. And they have a good reason to be mad.”
Kenneth, 35, lives in Memphis. Like Lorna and others, Kenneth’s sense of what it means to be white has been shaped by more recent crises, including the racial backlash to Obama’s elections in 2008 and 2012 that motivated Trump’s election in 2016.
Reflecting on these episodes, Kenneth believes he has an obligation as a white Southerner to become more informed about “the legacy of racism in the South and the impact that it still has today.”
Becoming more informed, Kenneth says, “will cause me to reflect on how I should think about that, and what, if anything, I should do differently now.”
Our interviews reveal a range of beliefs and attitudes among white Southerners often discounted or dismissed altogether by more popular and scholarly treatments of the region.
Contrary to research that finds white people minimizing or ignoring their elevated social status, the white Southerners we spoke with showed a profound awareness of the advantages their white racial status affords them.
“I have to admit I’m glad I’m white,” said Luke, 75, from Melber, Kentucky. “Because in the United States you probably have a little advantage.”
Our research also shows that how white people make sense of who they are is also a matter of where they are.
Places – and not just Southern ones – are imbued with ideas and beliefs that give meaning and significance to the people within them. The region’s history of racial conflict, meanwhile, renders the “wages of whiteness” more plain to see for white Southerners in ways we are only beginning to understand.
Put plainly: Place matters for how race matters.
Emphasizing this more complicated understanding of race and place allows for a more complete account of the South, including how the unfolding racial dramas of the past several decades continue to shape the region and its people.
James M. Thomas, Professor of Sociology, University of Mississippi
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
On Friday, on American soil, Donald Trump will entertain a brutal war criminal whose critics are poisoned, imprisoned, or dropped from high story windows. As Vladimir Putin continues reducing Ukraine to rubble, Trump will generate headlines with no grasp of the underlying history at issue.
In 1991, the dissolution of the Soviet Union led to the formation of 15 states, including Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus. In the process, Ukraine was left with an outsize stockpile of nuclear weapons, including 1,700 nuclear warheads, 176 intercontinental ballistic missiles and 44 strategic bombers, which put Ukraine in possession of the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world.
In 1994, in exchange for Ukraine’s agreement to move these weapons into Russia, the US, the UK, and Russia agreed, jointly and severally, to protect Ukraine and to secure its borders. This was consistent with the US’ global efforts to control nuclear proliferation through diplomatic, legal, and operational channels. The terms of Ukraine’s disarmament were hammered out in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances.
The US, UK, and Russia gave their security assurances to Ukraine in an express exchange under which Ukraine gave up the weapons, joined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation pact, and became a non-nuclear state.
Ukraine, to its peril, kept up its end of the deal. Russia did not.
Because we effectively disarmed Ukraine three decades ago, the US has a continuing obligation to help defend it against Russian aggression, but more crucially, US military aid is prophylactic. Before Trump, the US upheld democratic values and international order, including respect for sovereignty and existing borders, as a matter of self-preservation. Last year the U.S. Department of Defense described Ukraine’s fate as a battle between freedom and tyranny, and a defense of the rules-based international order. U.S. officials shared the EU’s belief that supporting Ukraine advanced global stability and thereby U.S. national security by strengthening NATO, and perhaps most importantly, by deterring future Russian aggression.
Enter Trump, who promised to end the Russian-Ukraine war on “Day One” of his presidency, a promise he now calls “sarcasm.”
Rejecting NATO’s interests, and dismissing military alliances that have kept America safe since WWII, Trump has instead consistently advanced Putin’s interests. Since Trump returned to the White House in January, Russia has more than doubled the number of drones and missiles fired at Ukraine; recorded aerial attacks from Moscow have now reached their highest levels since the invasion began.
Trump has paved Putin’s way, by:
There’s little doubt that Trump has nursed deep, personal animus toward Zelensky ever since Trump was caught trying to condition military aid on an “investigation” into Joe Biden’s son, which Zelensky never did. There’s also little doubt that Trump is openly protecting Putin’s interest. The question is, why?
What kompromat or career-ending evidence might Putin have over Trump? Perhaps Putin is holding proof of steps he took to assure Trump’s electoral wins, and threatening to go public if Trump crosses him. Perhaps Trump really was Russian agent Krasnov in the 1980s, as many believe. Or perhaps Trump is neck-deep in Russian money laundering schemes, including the financing of Trump Tower, going back to the 1990s.
The only thing that’s certain is that Trump’s on again, off again efforts to look like he’s “pressuring” Putin somehow never materialize. Trump last week “declared” that peace between Russia and Ukraine would involve “some swapping of territories,” parroting Russia's demands for territorial concessions from Ukraine. He then invited Putin to a personal Ukraine “summit” in Alaska, as if carving up nations after a meal were a game of monopoly.
By inviting Putin to meet on US soil, Trump is conferring legitimacy onto a mass murderer credibly accused of war crimes by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Putin has been isolated since 2023, when the ICC issued arrest warrants for him and several advisors for crimes against humanity. Putin has been unable to travel outside Russia, because many of the ICC’s 125 member states have agreed to arrest and detain him if he sets foot on their territory.
The crimes for which the ICC issued the warrants include well documented abductions of over 19,000 Ukrainian children aged four months to 17 years. The Yale Humanitarian Research Lab is tracking Russia’s systematic campaign to kidnap Ukrainian children and move them to Russia where they are issued new identities and advertised for adoption after they undergo “re-education” to erase their emotional connection to their families, language and heritage. Putin has set up an online “catalog of Ukrainian children,” a photo database searchable by personal characteristics such as size and hair color, as Ukrainian parents wail.
The Alaska “summit” will be Putin’s first international trip since the warrants. European leaders question the invitation while Russians crow over it as a national coup, since Trump’s invitation came without any concessions from Putin.
A King’s College professor of Russian history said, “The symbolism of holding the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska is horrendous — as though designed to demonstrate that borders can change, land can be bought and sold.”
No one knows what the outcome will be, but it’s a safe bet that Trump will issue platitudes that sound tough on Russia while delivering Putin’s ultimate goal: cementing his territorial gains in Ukraine, thereby rewarding Russia for its aggression.
Zelensky will reject the plan, Trump will demand the Nobel peace prize, and pundits will continue to wonder if Putin’s get out of jail free card is a product of blackmail.
Democrats are at least 17 years late to the party and damn well better catch up soon if they want to win the House (or Senate) in next year’s election. The history — and lack of Democratic response — is shocking.
While a state must go to court to take away your gun, five Republicans on the US Supreme Court have refused to enforce the “right to vote” provisions of the National Voting Registration Act of 1993 so states don’t even have to notify you when they steal/take away your vote.
And, wow, are Republicans committed to taking away your vote!
Back in 2008, following Barack Obama’s win, Chris Jankowski of the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC) organized a program called REDMAP (Redistricting Majority Project) to create, as closely as possible with the aid of sophisticated computer analyses, a permanent Republican majority, both in control of individual state legislatures and in the US House of Representatives.
They’d been running voter suppression scams for years, of course; an analysis by the Center for American Progress found that decades of gerrymandering had given Republicans a more-or-less permanent 19-seat advantage in the US House that they wouldn’t have had without it.
But that wasn’t enough for the GOP, which was facing the headwind of promoting unpopular policies like tax cuts for the rich and gutting the social safety net. So REDMAP was launched with the goal of creating a permanent Republican majority in the House.
The first step was to seize such complete control of a handful of decisive states that they could then engage in outrageous levels of partisan gerrymandering after the 2010 census; this was done with roughly $30 million (much from the US Chamber of Commerce) spent in usually sleepy state house and senate races.
That money spent on 107 state legislative races across 16 states, including pivotal then-swing states Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Florida, flipped 19 legislative bodies from Democratic to Republican control.
As a result, following the 2010 election 10 of the 15 states that were set to redraw their congressional maps in 2011 were firmly in the hands of the GOP.
Then they set about surgically gerrymandering those 10 states and the result, according to research by the Brennan Center for Justice, was that Republicans picked up (and Democrats lost) 16 additional seats in the US House of Representatives and would be able to hold onto them with a high level of confidence in future elections.
REDMAP worked spectacularly: in the 2012 congressional elections, despite Democrats receiving over 1 million more votes for House members nationwide, that gerrymandering campaign helped Republicans capture a 33-seat majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.
That year in Pennsylvania, for example, Democrats won 51 percent of the congressional vote but only five of 18 US House seats; in Ohio, Democrats also won 51 percent of the statewide congressional vote but because of the extreme gerrymander got only four of 16 seats in the House. In North Carolina, Democrats received 50.6 percent of the vote but ended up with only four House seats compared to 9 held by Republicans.
While Republicans were pulling off this evil deed, “good government Democrats” (encouraged by local rightwing media) were embracing an end to gerrymandering in their states with California, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, New Jersey, Washington, and Michigan putting nonpartisan or bipartisan commissions in charge of their redistricting to draw maps that are “fair” to both sides.
And now, Trump — looking at an election wipeout next year as he destroys the economy, deploys Gestapo-like secret police, and engages in foreign policy that may well plunge the world into WWIII — is demanding that Texas, Ohio, Indiana, and other Red states make their existing gerrymanders so extreme that they’ll essentially lock out most all House Democrats from those states.
Finally, it seems to be waking up Democrats. California Governor Gavin Newsom wrote a sternly-worded letter to Trump saying:
“You are playing with fire, risking the destabilization of our democracy, while knowing that California can neutralize any gains you can hope to make. This attempt to rig congressional maps to hold onto power before a single vote is cast in the 2026 election is an affront to American democracy. …
“If you will not stand down I will be forced to lead an effort to redraw the maps in California to offset the rigging of maps in red states. But if the other states call off their redistricting efforts, we will happily do the same. And American democracy will be better for it.”
Will he follow through? If he does, it’ll be a huge departure from past Democratic Party practices of simply ignoring Republican voter suppression efforts.
Similarly, Illinois Governor JB Pritzker said of the proposed Texas gerrymander:
“I think cheating the way the president wants to is improper. … What Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is doing … is trying to cheat mid‑decade here. … They’re attempting to change the map.”
But Pritzker won’t commit Illinois to re-gerrymandering. At least not yet.
And even if they do, gerrymandering California and Illinois is a good beginning but frankly is weak tea. Democrats should never have abandoned gerrymandering when Republicans were hanging onto it; it was a stupid form of unilateral surrender in the name of fairness and good government. They’re noble ideas, but they’ve also stripped the Party of its political power.
Every Democratic state should begin gerrymandering right now, regardless of what Republicans do in Texas, Ohio, Florida, etc. It’s necessary to undo the impact of REDMAP, if nothing else.
But Democrats shouldn’t stop there. An analysis by reporter and statistician Greg Palast — using numbers exclusively from official federal and state sources — found that 4,776,706 mostly-Democratic (and mostly minority) voters were purged from the election rolls in the months leading up to the 2024 election.
Republicans had also organized a nationwide campaign to have partisan election judges sit with vote-counters in swing states where mail-in ballots were counted. They challenged so many signatures or found small errors in ballot markings that an additional 2,121,000 mail-in ballots (again, mostly Democratic) were disqualified from being counted.
Additionally, Republican election officials made sure that 1,216,000 “provisional” ballots were rejected and thus not counted, and 3.24 million new 2024 voter registrations — gathered by Democrats in Get Out The Vote campaigns — were rejected or not entered on the rolls in time to vote.
As Palast writes, using official US Election Assistance Commission, Federal Election Commission, and state-level official numbers:
“Trump lost. That is, if all legal voters were allowed to vote, if all legal ballots were counted, Trump would have lost the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia. Vice-President Kamala Harris would have won the Presidency with 286 electoral votes.
“And, if not for the mass purge of voters of color, if not for the mass disqualification of provisional and mail-in ballots, if not for the new mass vigilante challenges in swing states, Harris would have gained at least another 3,565,000 votes, topping Trump’s official popular vote tally by 1.2 million.”
The main weapon the GOP is using to purge voting rolls is called “caging.” They were under a federal consent decree forbidding its use from 1982 to 2018, but that year five Republicans on the US Supreme Court legalized the practice.
In the direct-mail business, when junk mail is returned because it’s undeliverable those pieces of mail were put in a “cage” to be later fed into a computer to remove the bad addresses, which is where the term caging came from.
Republicans, though, have elevated caging into a partisan art form. They mail postcards — that intentionally look like junk mail — into heavily Democratic areas that must be returned within a specific time period or the voter will be scrubbed from the rolls for “inactivity.” The typical return rate is 6.8 percent.
When Democrats sued in 2018 to stop Ohio Secretary of State John Husted from caging voters in that state, Sonja Sotomayor wrote in her dissent in the Husted v Randolph case that voters were purged after missing an election and “…after failing to send back one piece of mail, even though there is no reasonable basis to believe the individual actually moved. … At best, purged voters are forced to ‘needlessly reregister’ if they decide to vote in a subsequent election; at worst, they are prevented from voting at all because they never receive information about when and where elections are taking place.”
She added:
“As one example, amici point to an investigation that revealed that in Hamilton County, ‘African-American-majority neighborhoods in downtown Cincinnati had 10% of their voters removed due to inactivity’ since 2012, as ‘compared to only 4% of voters in a suburban, majority-white neighborhood.’”
In his dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer pointed out that only around 4 percent of Americans move every year, revealing the lie that Ohio’s Husted was “just trying to keep the voting rolls clean”:
“The record shows that in 2012 Ohio identified about 1.5 million registered voters — nearly 20% of its 8 million registered voters — as likely ineligible to remain on the federal voter roll because they changed their residences.”
When Democrats are talking about “fighting fire with fire,” organizing partisan ballot challenges, voter roll challenges, and caging in heavily Republican districts should also be weapons in their arsenal.
After all, there are huge, well-funded Republican organizations like True The Vote actively challenging voter registrations and attempting to remove individuals from the rolls. They include:
While there are multiple Democratic-aligned groups working to register voters or encourage election turnout — Stacy Abrams’ Fair Fight Action, Rock The Vote, and Voto Latino — there isn’t even one dedicated to suppressing the Republican vote.
Immediately after the five Republican appointees on the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013, 14 GOP-controlled states moved, within a year (some within days), to restrict access to the vote, particularly for communities of color, students, and retired people.
In North Carolina, for example, 158 polling places were permanently closed in the 40 counties with the most African American voters just before the 2016 election, leading to a 16 percent decline in African American early voting in that state. An MIT study found that, nationwide, Hispanic voters wait 150 percent longer in line than white voters, and Black voters can expect to wait 200 percent longer in line to vote.
This is how Republicans work to win elections, and although it’s not a legal crime (under interpretations by the Republican majority on the Supreme Court), it’s certainly a moral crime and an all-out assault on what remains of our democracy.
In Indiana, then-Governor Mitch Daniels' new rigorous voter ID law — the first in the nation at the time (2005) — caused an 11.5 percent drop in African American voting. Students sued for their right to vote and lost, and in Red states, retired people who no longer drive but care passionately about their Social Security and Medicare are routinely turned away at the polls by the tens of thousands for lack of a “current” drivers’ license, another GOP trick. In 2008, around six million eligible voters did not vote because of difficulties associated with registration requirements, according to the Census Bureau.
In the months leading up to the 2012 election in Pennsylvania, Republicans had just passed that state’s first voter suppression law. It eliminated the right to vote of 758,000 registered voters because they lacked a Department of Transportation-issued ID, meaning over 9 percent of that state’s then 8.2 million registered voters could no longer cast a ballot.
As the US Commission on Civil Rights noted about the 2000 election after Governor Jeb Bush purged over 90,000 mostly-Black voters and Republicans began seriously challenging voters’ right to vote:
“14.4 percent of Florida’s black voters cast ballots that were rejected. This compares with approximately 1.6 percent of nonblack Florida voters who did not have their presidential votes counted. … [I]n the state’s largest county, Miami-Dade, more than 65 percent of the names on the purge list were African Americans, who represented only 20.4 percent of the population.”
It’s not like Republicans don’t know what they’re doing. This is at the core of their ability to seize and hold power. As Pennsylvania’s GOP House Majority Leader Mike Turzai famously bragged:
“Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”
But the GOP was just getting warmed up. In 2018 in Georgia, then-Secretary of State Brian Kemp purged 340,134 mostly Black and entirely legitimate voters (out of the 534,000 total purged) from the state’s rolls. He then “won” the election for governor against Stacy Abrams by about 55,000 votes.
Florida and Texas are among other “close” states where Republican officials hang onto office in part through aggressive culling of voters from the rolls. The DeSantis administration has purged almost a million voters from the Florida voter rolls using the excuse that they failed to vote in a midterm election.
Just between 2020 and 2022 fully 19,260,000 Americans — 8.5 percent of all registered voters — were purged, flipping control of the House to the GOP in the 2022 election. The purge rate in Republican-controlled Red states was 40 percent higher than the rest of the country.
When Florida essentially criminalized voter registration drives ($250,000 fines for even minor errors), the League of Women Voters and other groups simply stopped operating in those states. Similar laws were put in place over the past 15 years by Republican legislators in Idaho, Kansas, Missouri, Montana and Tennessee, and are pending in other Red states (and will probably pass soon).
To make matters worse, in March 2025 Trump signed an executive order to overhaul and exert partial control over our nation’s election systems.
He’s demanding that voters must show a passport or similar citizenship document to register to vote, wants all voting equipment re-certified (only one voting system meets their certification standards and that company’s systems were only certified on July 7, 2025), and is demanding voter lists with sensitive, personal information from Blue states so they can be combed for “fraud.”
Democrats are finally talking about “fighting fire with fire,” but Republicans have been going after Democratic voters with flame throwers for two decades and now have the support of the Republicans on the Supreme Court, along with Trump’s efforts to involve the federal government in even worse voter suppression.
Democrats, in addition to gerrymandering, should start caging operations and challenging Republican voters the way the GOP has been doing against Democratic communities for decades. The resulting squeals that will come from Republican operatives and officials might provoke a change in the law outlawing caging and gerrymandering.
If the Democrats’ goal is to prevent the 2026 and 2028 elections from looking like those in Hungary and Russia, they need to be raising absolute hell and get on the ball quickly. Time’s a-wasting…
Archbishop Desmond Tutu once warned, “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.” Neutrality—that quiet silence born of fear and resignation—is the oxygen every autocrat breathes. They survive by persuading us that resistance is pointless, that solidarity is too dangerous, and that isolation is inevitable.
But history has no mercy for regimes built on fear. They all fall.
We are watching the same authoritarian script play out today, from Vladimir Putin’s Russia to Benjamin Netanyahu’s siege of Gaza, from Viktor Orbán’s Hungary to the United States itself.
On Monday, President Trump invoked the Home Rule Act to seize control of Washington, D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department, installing Drug Enforcement Administration Administrator Terry Cole as its leader. Citing “violent gangs, roving mobs of wild youth, drugged-out maniacs, and homeless people,” Trump’s move stripped local leaders of authority and placed city policing directly under federal control.
Tyranny collapses because people insist on the truth, because they reach for each other even when fear tells them not to.
The rhetoric is familiar: Criminalize the marginalized, amplify public fear, and consolidate power in fewer hands.
This is no isolated power grab. A landmark survey of more than 500 political scientists, known as Bright Line Watch, reveals a chilling reality: The U.S. is rapidly moving away from its democratic foundations toward outright authoritarianism. When Trump first took office in 2016, scholars rated American democracy at 67 on a 0-to-100 scale. Just weeks into his second term, that score plunged to 55.
Autocrats know the math: The more divided and distrustful people are, the easier they are to control. They ban books, criminalize truth-telling, and turn communities into surveillance networks.
But here’s the paradox: By ruling through fear, they also poison the trust and loyalty they themselves need to survive. Paranoia takes root in their palaces. Corruption rots their alliances. Betrayal becomes inevitable.
History is full of moments when this internal decay meets public defiance: the fall of the Berlin Wall, the collapse of apartheid South Africa, the first uprisings of the Arab Spring. These changes didn’t come from tanks and bombs alone; they came from ordinary people, choosing connection over isolation and refusing to “live within the lie,” as Václav Havel wrote.
In Gaza’s underground schools, in Moscow kitchens, in Budapest cafés, and in D.C. neighborhoods, networks of care and resistance are already growing. They begin with whispers, small risks, quiet acts of defiance, each one a fracture in the machinery of control.
Freedom outlasts control. Dignity outlasts humiliation. Connection outlasts isolation.
Tyranny collapses because people insist on the truth, because they reach for each other even when fear tells them not to. That is the paradox that topples tyrants, and the promise that still belongs to us.
I don’t know whether Donald Trump’s takeover of the Washington, D.C., police force is a distraction from the Jeffrey Epstein scandal that’s still dogging him. Some liberals say it is. Some say it isn’t. I also don’t know why it must be either/or. I do know this, however: white power is distracting, and we need every tool to break through the distraction.
I’ll explain.
While it might be technically legal for Trump to send the National Guard to commandeer law enforcement (the District of Columbia is a creation of Congress, not a sovereignty), it is a moral abomination.
Federalism isn’t just America’s form of government. It is America’s great moral philosophy. We believe local affairs should be determined by local people who decide their destinies according to their collective will. That DC residents don’t have full local control, as a result of living in a federal city, does not take away from the force of that moral claim.
So it should be straightforwardly offensive to our national moral sensibility for this or any president to push aside local authorities in order to impose his will on residents without their consent. In this case, however, it should also be an insult to our intelligence. Trump’s excuse is fighting crime, but crime rates in DC are at historic lows.
It could be that this dictatorial move by the dictatorial president is an effort to distract us from the corrosive effect that the Epstein scandal is having on his and his party’s standing with the public. But let’s not overlook the obvious — that this is a dictatorial move by the dictatorial president. That may not have the same corrosive effect, but it should.
The Republicans used to be the party of federalism, which is to say, the party that would talk endlessly about the fundamental importance of preserving the history and tradition of state’s rights and local control. Matter of fact, they used to argue that they were the true defenders of liberty, as without their vigilance in maintaining the separation of powers, the federal government would descend into totalitarianism.
Here’s Dixiecrat-turned-Republican Strom Thurmond in 1948:
“[The Civil Rights Act] simply means that it's another means, that it's another effort on the part of [President Harry Truman] to dominate the country by force and to put into effect these uncalled for and the damnable proposals he has recommended under the guise of so-called ‘civil rights.’ … The American people, from one side to the other, had better wake up and oppose such a program, and if they don't, the next thing will be a totalitarian state in these United States” (my italics).
After Americans experienced the crimes and atrocities of World War II, a new consensus emerged in which the public began believing the federal government should serve everyone — the law should be applied equally — even those previously excluded, which is to say, Black people.
With this new national consensus in mind, the white conservatives who would eventually become Republicans began making an abstract argument in favor of state’s rights, with the understanding that such arguments in reality sought to stop the federal government from liberating Black people from the apartheid evils they faced at home.
In other words, state’s rights and local control were never about the state sovereignty or the right of local residents to determine their own destinies, but about defending a power structure favorable to white people and disfavorable to everyone else, but especially Black people. Totalitarianism was okie-dokie, as long as they were the ones doing it.
And because white power has always been the most important thing to the Republicans (and to the segregationists and Dixiecrats before them), not one Republican has anything to say about Trump imposing his morally reprehensible will on a majority-Black city like Washington.
And no, it’s not because the District of Columbia is a creation of the Congress or some other abstraction of law. They are OK with what Trump is doing to Washington, because they are OK with what he wants to do to any big American city, because to them, big cities are not deserving of rights, because in their minds, big cities are Black.
The key place of white power in Republican politics should be obvious now that the president is demonstrating that America’s great moral philosophy — federalism and separation of powers — doesn’t apply if you’re Black. Indeed, everyone should agree with the Rev. Al Sharpton.
“Calling all Black and low-income neighborhoods slums, and throwing away the humanity of homeless people by equating them to criminals, is the beginning of the end if we don’t stand up. This is the ultimate affront to justice and civil rights many of us have dedicated our lives to protecting and expanding.”
But not everyone will agree with Sharpton, because his obviously correct statement will not seem obviously correct to those (white) people who can’t see the place of white power in their own lives.
Perhaps this fact is why Sharpton added that Trump “was inspired to take this disgusting, dangerous, and derogatory action solely out of self interest. Let’s call the inspiration for this assault on a majority Black city for what it is: another bid to distract his angry, frustrated base over his administration’s handling of the Epstein files” (my italics).
It’s as if Sharpton knows a dictatorial move by the dictatorial president is not enough to move most Americans, especially those who believe he should crack down on Black people for the “crime” of being Black.
“The military takeover of Washington is not a ‘distraction’ from Epstein,” one writer said. “It’s a military takeover of Washington, which is an even bigger deal, and those of us who kill brain cells reporting on this stuff know it’s been an explicit goal since before the election.”
True, but most people are distracted by white power. They can’t see a moral abomination of law and morality, even when it’s happening in front of them, even when it’s a “bigger deal” than the Epstein scandal.
Matter of fact, the scandal offers a rare opportunity to break through the biggest distraction of them all. Trump’s anti-Blackness probably won’t have a corrosive effect on his standing with the public, but his relationship with a notorious child-sex trafficker? Well, that might.
The Washington Post recently published an article in which it noted that any chance President Donald Trump has to complete his $200 million "golden ballroom" at the White House in the near term would necessarily require wholly dodging years-long federal rules and regulations that would otherwise oversee such a project.
Democrats should silently cheer such frenetic desecration in homage to the purely pragmatic, a means to best bring about the last good chance to normalize the republic. Build it, and we will all come — history has a ready precedent.
An inclination to green-light this monstrosity may run counter to every preconceived notion of responsible stewardship, but Americans who are looking to end the encampment of a man who already breezily talks about 2028 should hope that he rams the plans through as thoroughly and recklessly as he did the gift of a new personalized 747 jet.
Other than perhaps the Epstein files, the inchoate ballroom may represent the biggest threat to the Trump administration, a standing monument to opulence in trying times, and an undeniable middle finger to America's struggling working class — a massive percentage of Trump's base.
If one begins by noting that Trump has never committed to peacefully leaving office, it is incumbent to start considering scenarios by which Trump might leave, short of a battle. Any efficient and effective solution necessarily involves cratering support among what was formerly his strongest political hold — MAGA men.
We have yet to see a Trump scandal shake MAGA man's confidence and loyalty to Trump, and it is wrong to presume that a sufficiently large scandal exists, even one involving Jeffrey Epstein. Picture it now: "It's all made-up evidence, a hoax!" No, the only sure means by which MAGA will turn on Trump is irrefutable evidence that he first turned on them.
Enter two converging realities.
One, that ballroom looks like it is going to get built. Trump doesn't usually just float development ideas. They have obliterated the Rose Garden, put up a tennis complex, and gilded the Oval Office. Trump is already making the place his personal palace (A scary enough premise).
Two, perhaps you've noticed, inflation hasn't gone away — indeed, it seems to be increasing, especially grocery prices. This is particularly bad news for Trump since he made grocery prices one of his signature campaign promises, and, of course, we all eat, rich and poor alike.
There is a reason every presidential campaign focuses on "kitchen table issues." The economy drives the mind of the body politic. The typical MAGA man has learned to endure nearly every type of Trump scandal, but he has never had to defend Trump on such weak ground, a shrinking economy.
Indeed, one of the few political threats to Trump can only come to fruition when and if he becomes a real threat to MAGA man's stability, his economic well-being. Simply triggering the libs has largely run its course anyway. No, they want him working for them; he's "their" president, they say.
Presidents can and do survive hard economic times, but only when the voters believe that the president understands that things are bad and is working to fix them. We know that Trump appreciates at least that reality: he fired Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner Erika McEntarfer after one particularly concerning jobs report, a decision he may soon very much regret. Dismissing the messenger and denying the problem exists belies someone more invested in creating his own reality than fixing ours.
Americans not only understand reality but are forced to create it, never more so than when grappling with sending kids to school, debating whether to buy a home, or planning a retirement. Most Americans have never been to a ballroom, don't care if they ever do, much less relate to ever wanting one, never mind build it. On those two or three occasions in a life when we might need a ballroom, we rent and decorate halls.
Very little says "out of touch" quite like prioritizing a project that inherently looks like personal ownership of the White House, extravagant luxury, devastatingly out of touch, and — most damaging — now out of MAGA man's reach.
Trump looks to be building a Versailles-like ballroom at the worst possible time from his perspective, as if history has nothing to teach at all on the subject. Indeed, for once, we should be grateful that Trump remains wholly ignorant of past lessons because his decision to build entails such poor timing, such self-indulgent priorities, such reckless disregard for those he considers his people, that all in opposition should [silently] hope that he breaks sacred ground and that audacious and ostentatious plans are released with blissfully ignorant enthusiasm.
To the extent there is an argument that such desecration of a national treasure must be avoided at all costs, it should only be made while noting that there's no evidence that Trump believes the law dictates when he leaves.
If there is another side, another hope for American democracy, it involves cratering support from the people who make Trump possible. To that end, the plans for the ballroom may be more dangerous to Trump than anything found in the Epstein files — defending that type of scandal comes second nature to MAGA voters now anyway.
These same voters have never been asked to defend Trump through a major economic downturn, and nothing, nothing, says "I don't care" quite like the plans for a ballroom juxtaposed against such worry. We can debate whether Trump really ever cared about his voters, but that misses the point. A ballroom in such times means he now resents them.
The last people who built a Versailles-like ballroom made a similar miscalculation. The faster and more outrageously this thing is built, the less economic pain it will take to bring about a political matter/anti-matter end, the ultimate bonfire of the vanities.
Build it, and even they will come.
Sunday, August 10, 2025, 4:11 a.m.
Dear Americans who need my incredible strength even more than I do right now,
After the terrific and fanatical success of the Very Important Letter that I wrote to you exclusively using only my right hand last week, I was urged by Stephen Miller and those who are almost as close to me in my family, to write another letter to you this week.
You are welcome in advance for accepting the request, even if I would rather be on the golf course tackling our nation’s most distressing problems with an 8-iron.
Just so you know, I will be using my right hand to write this ponderous, beautiful letter again this week, even though I am very anti-dextrous and easily could have written it with my left hand.
Thank you for your understanding, and you are welcome in advance for being allowed to think about this breathtaking issue I am facing.
Before I write about incredibly important things today, I want to clear something up so that there is no confusion in the future — that is, if there even is a future …
Many of you contacted me to ask why I didn’t use my right hand to write “Thank you for your attention to this matter” in my Very Important Letter last week. Well, I only write “Thank you for your attention to this matter” when I am writing inconceivable warnings on my Truth Social account, which is free to everybody who agrees with me on everything.
I hope this clears up all the confusion, and you never ask me about this again, because I have enough on my plates.
So let’s get right down to what I know has been on your minds as we come off a week which saw everybody getting richer thanks to my implausible tariffs, gasoline dropping to 99 sense a gallon, and horrible dog and cat eating colored people being rounded up by the brave men of ICE to keep you all safe in your quiet suburbs.
No wonder I was just informed by Stephen that my sensational approvals just reached an unheard of 80 percent. Not even George Jefferson had ratings that high and he was the father of our country.
You’re welcome.
Anyway, incredibly average citizens, the rumors are true, I will be sitting down with Vlad in Alaska this week, and most likely Friday, though this could change, depending on what happens with the Epstein Files which never seem to go away.
In fact, forget I even mentioned that. There are no Epstein Files. Well, maybe a few, but I had nothing to do with them or Epstein, and never met him except for once or twice, or maybe three times.
Four times max.
When he started stealing my girls, I put my incredibly big, size 15 left foot down, and kicked him out of my spa at Mar-a-Lago, home to the thinnest broads and fattest steaks in America. That was the last I saw of him or my girls. And that’s the last thing I will say about the Epstein Files.
Now where was I?
Oh yeah, up on the White House roof. Actually, that was the other day, so forget about that, too. Nobody knows why I was up there screaming at people from that roof except for me, which makes it top secret and irrefutable. The view is really something, though.
So let’s talk about this meeting I may or may not have with Vlad on Friday or one of the other five days of the week, depending on what happens with the Epstein Files, which I really won’t be mentioning anymore in this Very Important Letter.
But why won’t they JUST GO AWAY????? WHY CAN’T SOMEBODY LIKE BILL BARR JUST KILL THEM????
Sorry, I lost my exposure … But as you know all this has been very, very unfair to me. How am I supposed to keep colored people out of the suburbs, and bring down the prices of everything when I am being hounded about something I already forgot about, and had nothing to do with?!
OK, that really is the last I’ll say about this, even though I have a lot more to say about this. And just so you know, those girls weren’t THAT young. Anybody could make a mistake … Ivanka always looked a lot older than she really was. I blame her first mother for that, whatever her name was — the old blonde we buried underneath the first hole of my beloved golf course in that safe. Anyway, Ivanka. But I mean look at her now. All grown up … blonde … legs that seem to go on forever …
Anyway, forget I mentioned that, too, if it’s possible.
Now let’s focus on Alaska.
Even though my vital intelligence tells me Vlad wants Alaska back, I fully intend to hold onto it no matter how much pressure he puts on me to give it up. That’s why I invited him to Alaska in the first place, so I can stand there like a powerful iceberg and defend it.
Even if I’m not sure I really want to ...
It has always surprised me that no other president has used any of our states as bargaining chips. I mean, who really needs 50 states? Do we need three Dakotas and four Carolinas? What if I was to trade him Alaska for Germany? Think of this. We’d get Volkswagens and strudels, and he’d get a bunch of Eskimos, Lisa Murkowski, and snow.
Again, I am not going to do this, but you’d have to be crazy not to at least entertain the terrific idea.
And because I’m a master-state chess player, I also imagine Ukraine might just come up in these powerful discussions. You never know with Vlad. He’s very clever, but I’ll be ready for that, too.
Now king me.
You have my ironclad promise I will not be trading Alaska for Ukraine. I’d like to hold onto both, unless maybe I can get him to throw in France. So he gets Alaska and we get France, Germany and the Ukraine, which I really don’t even want. You have to admit, that would be quite a deal, folks.
But we’ll see how it goes.
Friday is a long way off, and I have many, many things I want to accomplish before then, like redecorating the master bedroom in the White House. As you know, I have already gotten rid of the roses in that stupid garden RFKJ’s family planted. I have installed a patio on top of them just like we have at Mar-a-Lago. We are currently offering gold-plated crypto memberships to the new patio to the first 10 billionaires who apply. But these are going quickly so please act now.
And speaking of RFKJ, how about that incredible work he did this week getting rid of those terrible vaccines and saving me $500 million that I can now spend on renovating the White House?
Just more terrific things that were accomplished while I was wandering around on the roof hollering at people and admiring that memorial. You never know what’s going to happen each day while I’m running America. I can tell you, I certainly don’t.
But you’re welcome for all of it.
Well, now I need to give my righthand a rest. Please wish me God’s energy and strength while I prepare for my meeting with Vlad that may or may not happen depending on whether anybody keeps talking about Epstein or not.
Sending you sincere welcomes,
Copyright © 2025 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 |
Masthead
|
Privacy Policy
|
Manage Preferences
|
Debug Logs
For corrections contact
corrections@rawstory.com
, for support contact
support@rawstory.com
.