My Blog Week: January 19 to January 25
All the Latest from Torsade!
A Word on the Week
“…in those shrunken fragments of its greatness, lawyers lie like maggots in nuts.”
Charles Dickens, Bleak House, 1853
That interesting new figure Robert Hyde, in an interview with CNN’s Chris Cuomo, made passing reference to, among many things, Michael Jackson. Let’s consider a moment. When Jackson was alive it was rumored his “normal” personality was a different matter from the high-voiced, hesitant, giggly person he portrayed in interviews. He was said to be a shrewd businessman, who understood his interests and with cronies addressed them informedly. (See this article’s video compilation of his speaking voice.) Now, how does this relate to the president, embroiled this week in fresh revelations?
In that there appears not the slightest difference between public and private Trump. Neither recordings taken of him unawares, nor accounts of his behavior by people who know him, suggest you get (that anyone has ever gotten, that there is at all) anything deeper with him than face value. He has no backstage wisdom to impart, no arbitraging sagacity to reassure his acolytes his loutish ignorance is part of a master plan. What then, brings on the fanaticism?
His legal team, along with his auxiliary pep squad, wring their hands and moan. The moanings are lies. Abuse of power and corrupt self-dealing are habits very much worthy of impeachment. It is not unfair in the least for a big boy in office to bear up under the consequences of his actions. As rumors of election-fixing on Trump’s behalf began before the election was decided, that eyes on him envisioned impeachment from Day One isn’t strange, and it isn’t conspiratorial. Don’t we have eyes on the border, whether or not anyone is trying to climb the fence? That only proves vigilance justified where lawbreaking seems probable. (While, as usual, let it be stated asylum seekers are not breaking the law.)
Truly, next election’s opponents of this crop of Republicans ought to, when they cross paths on the campaign trail, dig in their pockets and see if they have a piece of gum, or a couple of quarters.
“I was so sorry to hear about your awfully sad condition. Will this help at all? Here, take it!”
What types of control can be gained to make people do your bidding?
Blackmail is highly specialist, but pseudo-blackmail, the threat of—forgive the expression—trumped up queues of “accusers”, might well be at work. The Me Too movement is great (to the extent proponents remember each case is individual, and all cases have to be decided on evidence), but it gives a template to propagandist exploitation.
There’s the old tactic of inveigling the subject into participating in a crime.
With the sort of crime that gets traded among insular circles as what savvy/cool/uninhibited people do: tax evasion, taking and paying of bribes, trafficking in this and that, it may not be challenging for a domineering leader to force incrimination on underlings. Then, it will be: “If I’m dirty, you’re dirty too. If I go down, you go down.”
Then, pleasure. Certain drugs are shared with the advocate’s recommendation they will improve productivity, let you get by on four hours of sleep a night, etc. Here you would have both inveigling, and the pressure of a supply that can be cut off. And the profligate can be seduced as well with cash and perks.
It remains curious how loyalty to a party can override election results. If you don’t get the votes, that means the people want someone else. To suppose the party agenda can exist outside the public’s agenda would be to suppose the party has nothing to do with elections, therefore with democratic government. It may be exactly what Republicans do think, but why, if this or any goal seems legitimate and defensible, be unwilling to frankly state it? Why whine and file nuisance lawsuits, kick and scream and cry unfair, if they’re not afraid democracy actually rules?
Factual truth matters. The problem with the Republicans’ fake spins on factual truth is that intuitive truth matters equally. Intuitive truth teaches us where to look for the facts. These assertions out of keeping with normal and historical choices, flag even to the dumb that they deserve to be as uncomfortable as they feel.
On Monday, Mr. Boots got put aside for a short opinion piece, “Republicans’ Last Chance”. We little voices in the wilderness have to do our parts too. Tuesday’s Impresario was part twenty-five, with a guilty conscience weighing too heavily for silence. Wednesday, a new Totem-Maker, and the last part of “Use for Use”, the character learning how to trade. On Thursday, Frédéric Boutet’s “A Reputation” concluded, with a twist for the victim. Friday, “Mr. Boots Has Fleas” a flea’s view of life on the cat. Saturday, a new Yoharie, part three of “What It Takes to Fly”, Savannah sizing up her options.
Images on my posts often have a link to related information (click first image), sometimes serious, sometimes whimsical, sometimes in answer to a direct reference. Since people can be leery about links, I include them here: what they are, what sites they point to.
My Blog Week: January 19 to January 25
Republicans’ Last Chance (opinion)
The Impresario (part twenty-five)
YouTube: Tramaine Hawkins, “Amazing Grace”
(Please do give this video a listen. I haven’t heard all the “Graces” ever recorded, but Tramaine Hawkins’s is my idea of the best.)
The Totem-Maker: Use for Use (part six)
Frédéric Boutet: A Reputation (conclusion)
Mr. Boots Has Fleas (poem)
Yoharie: What It Takes to Fly (part three)