Ants and Their Unified Purpose

 

Once, waking up in nature early in the morning, I noticed something surprising. Several dozen ants had fallen into a five-liter bottle of water that had been left open the night before. They waved chaotically in the transparent water, as if each one was fighting for its life. At first, it seemed to me that they were drowning each other, saving themselves at the cost of the death of others.

This thought made me repulsed, and I turned away, deciding not to intervene. However, after two hours, curiosity got the better of me, and I looked in the bottle again. My astonishment knew no limits: the ants were alive! Furthermore, they had formed a true living island, a pyramid, in which some were supported by others, staying afloat like an entire colony.

I held my breath and began to observe. Those at the bottom were actually submerged in the water, but not forever. After a while, they were replaced by ants from the upper layer, which voluntarily descended. Those who were tired went up, without hurrying, without pushing the others.

Nobody tried to save themselves first. On the contrary, each one made an effort to go where it was most difficult. This coordinated system of mutual aid touched me to my core. I couldn't resist. I found a spoon that easily passed through the neck of the bottle and carefully inserted it. Seeing salvation, the ants began to come out one by one, without generating even a drop of panic.

Everything was going well, until one of them, weakened, slipped back into the water, without reaching the edge. And then something happened that I will remember all my life. The last ant, almost outside, suddenly turned back. He came down, as if to say: "Hold on, brother, I won't leave you!"

She dove into the water, clinging tightly to the drowning one, but she couldn't pull him out on her own. I couldn't resist, I brought the spoon closer, and then they both came out, alive, together.

This episode moved me more than any movie or book about friendship and sacrifice. I felt a storm of emotions: first, condemnation, for having taken the ants for insensitive beings; then, amazement at his resistance; admiration for his discipline and brave sacrifice... And in the end, shame.

Shame on humans. For us. Because of indifference, because of how we lose each other in pursuit of benefits, because of how rare it is that someone comes back to save the weak. We build walls, instead of creating living bridges.

If ants, small creatures, are capable of such coordination and selflessness, why are we humans so often deaf to the suffering of others? That day I understood one thing: true strength is in unity. And if someone still doesn't know how to live correctly, let them learn from the ants.

-David Attenborough

Massive Database, Immigration, Tariffs, HIV Vaccine Research...

·       Donald Trump has reportedly enlisted the data analytics company Palantir to help build a massive database containing information on every American citizen.

·       As anticipated by critics, the federal government—through the Department of Governmental Extraction (DOGE)—has aggregated vast amounts of personal data from various agencies. That information is now reportedly being transferred to Palantir, the data analytics firm co-founded by billionaire Peter Thiel. Donald Trump has tapped Palantir to construct a sweeping database containing records on virtually all-American citizens.

·       Observers note that Thiel, a longtime advocate for strong centralized power and a self-described political disruptor, has spent years positioning Palantir at the intersection of government and surveillance. The move is raising fresh concerns about privacy, civil liberties, and the future role of private tech firms in state intelligence efforts.

·       U.S. immigration authorities are collecting DNA from migrants—including children—and uploading it to a national criminal database, according to newly released government documents. While the FBI-run system is typically used for individuals arrested or convicted of crimes, most migrants whose DNA is being gathered by Customs and Border Protection haven't been charged with any felonies, raising concerns about what experts are calling a sweeping expansion of genetic surveillance.

·       The Trump administration has admitted to wrongfully deporting another Salvadoran man despite a court order blocking the removal, citing a “confluence of administrative errors.” His attorney now plans to seek his return to the U.S.

·       Donald Trump announced on Truth Social that he plans to raise tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from 25% to 50%, effective June 4. The move marks a significant escalation in his protectionist trade agenda and is likely to provoke strong responses from both international trade partners and domestic industries.

·       College and university leaders have been quietly meeting with senior White House advisor May Mailman, a close aide to Stephen Miller, in an effort to avoid the kind of federal pressure recently aimed at Harvard. As the administration intensifies its campaign against schools over how they handle alleged antisemitism, officials are warning that federal funding may be cut, calling universities "incubators of discrimination" that can no longer count on taxpayer support.

·       Despite claims made by RFK Jr. earlier this week, the CDC’s updated immunization schedule still recommends COVID vaccines for healthy children—as long as it's approved by their doctor.

·       The Trump administration has delivered a major setback to HIV vaccine research by shutting down a $258 million program that was considered vital to ongoing development efforts.

·       A federal appeals court ruled Friday that President Trump’s plan to carry out mass firings across multiple federal agencies will remain on hold. The decision is a significant setback for Trump’s push to downsize the government through sweeping layoffs—known as reductions in force—after a lower court found he lacked the authority to implement them without Congress.

·       Iran has continued to expand its stockpile of uranium enriched close to weapons-grade levels, according to a confidential report from the U.N. nuclear watchdog. The agency is urging Tehran to reverse course immediately.

·       Donald Trump hasn’t ruled out the possibility of pardoning or commuting former Senator Bob Menendez’s sentence, though sources close to him say such a move remains unlikely.

·       New satellite images reveal that North Korea has deployed what appear to be balloons near a damaged 5,000-ton warship that has remained partially submerged since a failed launch last week. Experts say the balloons might be intended to help stabilize or conceal the vessel, which was meant to showcase North Korea’s naval modernization but was severely damaged after a launch malfunction on May 21.

·       Workers at the U.S. Department of Energy warn that budget cuts and deregulation are weakening the agency’s ability to function and could drive up energy costs for consumers. According to independent analyses, Trump’s proposed policies—including repealing clean energy tax credits—could raise household utility bills by over $230 annually by 2035 and jeopardize future energy innovation. The department is also facing steep staff reductions, with thousands reportedly taking buyouts or being laid off amid a proposed $19.3 billion budget cut.

— Aaron Parnas

Parnas Perspective

 

Prepare yourself for several years of killer heat, top weather forecasters warn

WASHINGTON (AP) — Get ready for several years of even more record-breaking heat that pushes Earth to more deadly, fiery and uncomfortable extremes, two of the world’s top weather agencies forecast.

There’s an 80% chance the world will break another annual temperature record in the next five years, and it’s even more probable that the world will again exceed the international temperature threshold set 10 years ago, according to a five-year forecast released Wednesday by the World Meteorological Organization and the U.K. Meteorological Office.

“Higher global mean temperatures may sound abstract, but it translates in real life to a higher chance of extreme weather: stronger hurricanes, stronger precipitation, droughts,” said Cornell University climate scientist Natalie Mahowald, who wasn’t part of the calculations but said they made sense. “So higher global mean temperatures translate to more lives lost.”

With every tenth of a degree the world warms from human-caused climate change “we will experience higher frequency and more extreme events (particularly heat waves but also droughts, floods, fires and human-reinforced hurricanes/typhoons),” emailed Johan Rockstrom, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. He was not part of the research.

And for the first time there’s a chance — albeit slight — that before the end of the decade, the world’s annual temperature will shoot past the Paris climate accord goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) and hit a more alarming 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) of heating since the mid-1800s, the two agencies said.

There’s an 86% chance that one of the next five years will pass 1.5 degrees and a 70% chance that the five years as a whole will average more than that global milestone, they figured.

The projections come from more than 200 forecasts using computer simulations run by 10 global centers of scientists.

Ten years ago, the same teams figured there was a similar remote chance — about 1% — that one of the upcoming years would exceed that critical 1.5-degree threshold and then it happened last year. This year, a 2-degree Celsius above pre-industrial year enters the equation in a similar manner, something UK Met Office longer term predictions chief Adam Scaife and science scientist Leon Hermanson called “shocking.”

“It’s not something anyone wants to see, but that’s what the science is telling us,” Hermanson said. Two degrees of warming is the secondary threshold, the one considered less likely to break, set by the 2015 Paris agreement.

Technically, even though 2024 was 1.5 degrees Celsius warmer than pre-industrial times, the Paris climate agreement’s threshold is for a 20-year time period, so it has not been exceeded. Factoring in the past 10 years and forecasting the next 10 years, the world is now probably about 1.4 degrees Celsius (2.5 degrees Fahrenheit) hotter since the mid 1800s, World Meteorological Organization climate services director Chris Hewitt estimated.

“With the next five years forecast to be more than 1.5C warmer than preindustrial levels on average, this will put more people than ever at risk of severe heat waves, bringing more deaths and severe health impacts unless people can be better protected from the effects of heat. Also, we can expect more severe wildfires as the hotter atmosphere dries out the landscape,” said Richard Betts, head of climate impacts research at the UK Met Office and a professor at the University of Exeter.

Ice in the Arctic — which will continue to warm 3.5 times faster than the rest of the world — will melt and seas will rise faster, Hewitt said.

What tends to happen is that global temperatures rise like riding on an escalator, with temporary and natural El Nino weather cycles acting like jumps up or down on that escalator, scientists said. But lately, after each jump from an El Nino, which adds warming to the globe, the planet doesn’t go back down much, if at all.

“Record temperatures immediately become the new normal,” said Stanford University climate scientist Rob Jackson.

-PBS

The Morbidly Rich: "The Billionaire Hoarding Plague: How America’s Richest Became Its Biggest Threat"

 

It happens every few generations. It’s what drove the fascist oligarchs of the Confederacy to reach out and try to conquer the entire United States in the 1860s. It caused the Robber Barons to murder union organizers and ultimately crash America into the Republican Great Depression in the early decades of the 20th century. And it’s why wages have been stagnant while billionaires’ wealth has exploded in the years since the Reagan Revolution.

What I’m talking about here is the rise of greedy oligarchs who are driven by an identifiable mental illness, what’s either a subset of obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) or a defect in impulse control called Hoarding Syndrome.

Because most hoarders never invite people into their homes, it’s an almost invisible illness. But, as Drs. Randy Frost and Gail Steketee write in their book Stuff: Compulsive Hoarding and the Meaning of Things:

“Recent studies of hoarding put the prevalence rate at somewhere between 2 and 5 percent of the population. That means that six million to fifteen million Americans suffer from hoarding that causes them distress or interferes with their ability to live.”

That’s tough enough; people afflicted with hoarding syndrome are often tortured by their obsession and socially embarrassed to the point of removing themselves from all but the most essential social situations. They’re functionally invisible. But, from a societal point of view, they’re generally only harming themselves: hoarding syndrome is considered a psychiatric condition, not a crisis for democracy itself.

With one giant exception: morbidly rich people who are also afflicted with hoarding syndrome but don’t live in or even close to poverty.

When people with hoarding syndrome are born with or come into massive wealth, suddenly what was once a personal, psychiatric issue can become a crisis for all of society.

Like Scrooge McDuck of Disney comics fame, instead of filling their mansions with old newspapers, tin cans, and balls of string they obsessively fill their money bins, overseas bank accounts, and investment portfolios with billions of dollars.

And then, driven to continuously hoard more and more money — that now being the object of their addiction — they reach out to use the power of government itself to redirect more and more cash into their greedy hands.

As historian and political scientist Michael Parenti notes: “Wealth becomes addictive. Fortune whets the appetite for still more fortune. There is no end to the amount of money one might wish to accumulate, driven onward by the auri sacra fames, the cursed hunger for gold.

“So, the money addicts grab more and more for themselves, more than can be spent in a thousand lifetimes of limitless indulgence, driven by what begins to resemble an obsessional pathology, a monomania that blots out every other human consideration.”

It blots out their concern for their fellow humans. It blots out their willingness to take climate science seriously. It blots out their ability to see the damage they’re doing to their own country and its democratic institutions.

Ultimately, they don’t care about the damage they do to society; such considerations are overwhelmed by their obsession. They don’t care how many children must grow up in poverty or even die young to support their massive wealth. They don’t care about destroying everybody else’s future, so long as they can get more, more, more money!

We defeated Confederate oligarchs with this disease back in 1865. We beat money hoarders back again after the Republican Great Depression with FDR’s New Deal and LBJ’s Great Society. We thought we were safe, as the middle class grew from around 10 percent of us to around two-thirds of us (with a single paycheck!) by the late 1970s.

But then, in 1978, in the Bellotti decision written by “Powell Memo” author Lewis Powell himself, five corrupt Republicans on the Supreme Court ruled that money is actually “free speech” and corporations are “persons.” It floated Reagan into office in 1981 on a tsunami of oil and banking industry money. Five other corrupted SCOTUS Republicans doubled down on that bizarre ruling in 2010 with Citizens United, creating an entirely new form of corrupt political bribery via something they created out of thin air that are called SuperPACs.

As a result, today these morbidly rich hoarders shovel small amounts (millions) into the pockets of captured politicians who then provide them with tax breaks, profit-driving deregulation, and government subsidies that return billions to them. And the impact on average Americans over the past 47 years that we’ve been living in the Reagan Revolution has been dramatic.

While every other developed country in the world offers free or nearly-free healthcare to its citizens, free or nearly-free education including college, and almost universal unionization and a high minimum wage, we’re stuck living in the nation these billionaires have forced on us just to satisfy their own avaricious obsession with more, more, more money:

— Almost 30 million Americans lack health insurance altogether, and 43 percent of Americans are so badly under-insured that any illness or accident costing them more than $1000 in co-pays or deductibles would wipe them out.

— Almost 12 percent of Americans, over 37 million of us, live in dire poverty, and 60% of us live in poverty, 201 million Americans. According to OECD numbers, while only 5 percent of Italians and 11 percent of Japanese workers toil in low-wage jobs, as CBS News reports, “For the bottom 60% of U.S. households, a minimal quality of life is out of reach.” (And low-income Japanese and Italians have free healthcare and college.)

— More than one-in-five Americans — 21 percent — are illiterate. By fourth grade, a mere 35 percent of American children are literate at grade level, as our public schools have suffered from a sustained, four-decade-long attack by Republicans at both state and federal levels to pay for tax cuts for billionaires.

— Fully a quarter of Americans (26 percent) suffer from a diagnosable mental illness in any given year: over half of them (54 percent) never receive treatment and, because of cost and a lack of access to mental health care, of the 46 percent who do get help, the average time from onset of symptoms to the first treatment is 11 years.

— Every day in America an average of 316 people are shot and 110 die from their wounds. Gun violence is now the leading cause of death for American children, a situation not suffered by the children of any other country in the world.

And these are just the tip of the iceberg of statistics about how Americans suffer from Reagan’s forty-year-long GOP war on working-class and poor people that has managed to make America the nation with the world’s largest number of the world’s wealthiest billionaires.

— Almost half (44 percent) of American adults carry student debt, a burden virtually unknown in any other developed country in the world (dozens of countries actually pay their young people to go to college).

— Americans spend more than twice as much for healthcare and pharmaceuticals than citizens of any other developed country. We pay $11,912 per person per year for healthcare; it’s $5,463 in Australia, $4,666 in Japan, $5,496 in France, and $7,382 in Germany (the most expensive country outside of us).

And we don’t get better health or a longer lifespan for all the money; instead, it’s just lining the pockets of rich insurance, pharma, and hospital executives and investors, with hundreds of billions in profits every year going to the morbidly rich. “Dollar Bill” McGuire, the former CEO of UnitedHealth, for example, took over a billion dollars in compensation.

— The average American life expectancy is 78.8 years: Canada is 82.3, Australia is 82.9, Japan is 84.4, France is 83.0, and Germany is 81.3.

— Our public schools are an underfunded mess, as are our highways and public transportation systems. While every other developed country in the world has high-speed train service, we still suffer under a privatized rail system that prevents Amtrak from running even their most modern trains at anything close to their top speeds.

In the forty-two years since the start of the Reagan Revolution, bought-off politicians have so altered our tax code that fully $51 trillion has moved from the homes and savings of working class Americans into the money bins of the morbidly rich money hoarders.

As a result, America today is the most unequal developed nation in the world and the situation gets worse every day: many of our billionaires are richer than any pharaoh or king in the history of the world, while a family lifestyle that could be comfortably supported by a single income in 1980 takes two people working full-time to maintain today.

In the years since the Court first began down this road in 1976, the GOP has come to be entirely captured by this handful of mentally ill billionaires and the industries that made them rich.

As a result, Republican politicians refuse to do anything about the slaughter of our schoolchildren with weapons of war; ignore or ridicule the damage fossil fuel-caused global warming is doing to our nation and planet; and continue to lower billionaire and corporate taxes every time they get full control of the federal or a state government.

All because our courts and politicians, now well-captured by rightwing billionaires, refuse to do anything about the ravages of hoarding syndrome among the very wealthy.

Solving this problem won’t be easy but also isn’t complicated. Just like we did with the Robber Barons, the first step is to identify and publicize the problem of mentally ill people among the morbidly rich having seized control of our political system.

We did this before.

As President Grover Cleveland — the only Democrat elected during that post-Civil War period — proclaimed in his 1887 State of the Union address: “As we view the achievements of aggregated capital, we discover the existence of trusts, combinations, and monopolies, while the citizen is struggling far in the rear or is trampled to death beneath an iron heel. Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people’s masters.”

And as FDR pointed out when he began to pull America out of the Republican Great Depression: “For out of this modern civilization economic royalists carved new dynasties. New kingdoms were built upon concentration of control over material things. … It was natural and perhaps human that the privileged princes of these new economic dynasties, thirsting for power, reached out for control over Government itself.”

FDR took on those “economic royalists” and defeated them. He explicitly called them out when the Democratic Party renominated him for president in 1936 in Philadelphia: “These economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America,” Roosevelt said. “What they really complain of is that we seek to take away their power.” He paused for a moment, then thundered, “Our allegiance to American institutions requires the overthrow of this kind of power!”

The crowd roared, delighted that he’d turned back the Republican Great Depression and put millions to work while undoing the climate-destroying Dust Bowl by creating, among other three-letter agencies, the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) to plant millions of trees across the country. And he raised the top tax rate on the obscenely wealthy back up to 90 percent, while stopping an effort to kidnap him and turn the government fascist.

“In vain,” Roosevelt said, “they seek to hide behind the Flag and the Constitution. In their blindness they forget what the Flag and the Constitution stand for. Now, as always, they stand for democracy, not tyranny; for freedom, not subjection; and against a dictatorship by mob rule and the over-privileged alike.”

Cleveland’s and Roosevelt’s work now falls to us, as a new generation of obsessively money-hoarding Robber Barons have emerged from Reagan’s tax cuts and these horrible Supreme Court decisions. It’s thus now our job to educate the American people about the mental illness that’s frozen our economy and is dismantling our democracy.

Our task in this time of crisis is to create a societal consensus across America that we’re done indulging these wealthy pampered babies’ every desire, and begin the serious reforms necessary to put an end to this crisis and, like in the 1890s and 1930s, break up monopolies and raise their damn taxes so we can begin to pay down our nation’s debt and rebuild the middle class.

It’ll take a few years, in all probability, but it’s been done before. We can do it again.

Tag, we’re it! Spread the word…

-Thom Hartmann

The Hartmann Report is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

 

From "Losers and Suckers" to "Scum"

 

Trump opened Memorial Day in the most disgusting way possible, not by praising our fallen heroes but by attacking Democrats. He wrote on his Nazi-infested social media site on Monday morning: “Happy Memorial Day to all, including the scum that spent the last four years trying to destroy our country through warped radical left minds…”

When the President of the United States calls members of the oldest political party in the world and a former president “scum,” it’s not just another ugly outburst that embarrasses America before the rest of the world: It’s a warning sign. A bright red flag. It tells us that something far more sinister than partisan posturing is afoot. Something our media has already decided to overlook in their perpetual effort to normalize the abominable.

This kind of rhetoric isn’t new, and it’s not harmless. History has shown us—again and again—that when political leaders use dehumanizing language to vilify their opponents, they’re in actuality laying the groundwork for authoritarianism, repression, and violence.

In a healthy democracy, political disagreements are expected. Even fierce debates over policy and direction are part of the process. But a functioning democracy depends on a shared understanding that both sides, no matter how much they disagree, are legitimate participants in the system.

The moment that idea is tossed aside—when one side starts branding the other not as the loyal opposition but as enemies, traitors, or “scum”—democracy starts to fail. When a president engages in this kind of language, he’s not just lashing out at critics. He’s explicitly trying to erase the legitimacy of any voice but his own.

This tactic is not original. It’s ripped from the playbooks of authoritarians throughout history.

— Hitler routinely referred to Jews, communists, and democratic socialists as “vermin” and “filth,” conditioning the German public to accept ever-increasing acts of brutality and repression.

— In Rwanda, Hutu leaders called Tutsis “cockroaches” on the radio for months before the genocide began.

— In Serbia, Slobodan Milošević labeled political opponents and ethnic minorities as “parasites” and “traitors” before launching ethnic cleansing campaigns. Language like this isn’t about winning arguments. It’s about destroying opposition.

Donald Trump has flirted with this disgusting sort of rhetoric for years, calling the press “the enemy of the people,” mocking disabled journalists, referring to immigrants as “animals,” and branding his political opponents as “radicals” or “traitors.”

But labeling Democrats—over 45 million American citizens—as “scum” is a different level of escalation. It’s not just name-calling. It’s a signal. A test balloon. A way of seeing how far he can go. And if there’s no consequence, he’ll go further.

What happens when a leader no longer sees himself as the president of all Americans, but only of those who worship him? What happens when one party becomes synonymous with the state, and all others are demonized?

You get systems like Vladimir Putin’s Russia, where opposition leaders are jailed, poisoned, or pushed out of windows. You get Viktor Orbán’s Hungary, where the ruling party rewrites the constitution to lock in power and crush dissent. You get a country where elections still happen, but they no longer mean anything.

Trump’s use of the word “scum” may seem like just another day in MAGA world, but it is, in fact, part of a much larger and more deliberate strategy. It’s designed to radicalize his base, to cast Democrats not as fellow Americans with different ideas but as dangerous enemies who must be defeated at all costs. It’s designed to terrify Trump’s opponents and paralyze the media.

When you convince people that the opposition is not just wrong but evil, the next logical step is to justify extraordinary actions to stop them, whether that’s purging them from government, throwing them in jail, or inciting paramilitary violence against them. We’ve already seen where this leads.

January 6th, for example, wasn’t some spontaneous tantrum. It was the inevitable result of years of delegitimization and demonization of Democrats. The people who stormed the Capitol sincerely believed they were saving America from “scum” who had stolen the presidency. They were acting on the poisonous lie that only one side has the right to rule and that any electoral outcome that contradicts their will is illegitimate. A lie that came straight from Trump and his morbidly rich neofascist enablers.

This is how democracies die; not all at once, but in a slow, deliberate campaign of character assassination against political rivals, institutions, and the rule of law. It happens when a strongman convinces just enough people that he alone is the embodiment of the nation, and that anyone who opposes him is a threat to the country itself.

And once that belief takes root, atrocities become not just possible but justified. And, in most cases, inevitable. We’re already seen this in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia and the Venezuelans who Trump deported to El Salvador and the Asians he deported to Africa, in both cases in defiance of court orders.

From Pinochet throwing small-d democrats he called “subversivos” and “terroristas” out of helicopters over the ocean, to Stalin using the phrase “enemy of the people” (враг народа) to describe democracy advocates, to Mao calling educated people monsters and demons” (牛鬼蛇神) as he killed an estimated 35 million of them, this is an old, old story. It’s the same type of language that the Klan used for centuries here in America as they embarked on campaigns of terror and murder. And that the paramilitary groups that have largely replaced them in the 21st century continue to use.

It’s also important to note that when Trump calls people who didn’t vote for him “scum,” he’s not just talking about elected officials. He’s talking about more than half the country. He’s talking about your neighbors, your coworkers, maybe your family members. He’s talking about teachers, nurses, scientists, union workers, veterans; millions of Americans who simply don’t buy into his brand of neofascist grievance politics. He’s trying to turn Americans against each other so he can seize even more power out of the chaos he creates.

This kind of dehumanization also serves a more practical political purpose: it undermines accountability. If Democrats are “scum,” then their investigations into Trump’s corruption are not legitimate. If the media is “fake news,” then any critical reporting is a hoax. If the courts rule against him, they’re “rigged.” It’s a classic authoritarian tactic: delegitimize all checks on your power and paint yourself as the sole source of truth.

In doing so, Trump is also poisoning the well for any future attempt at national unity or reconciliation. Once you’ve labeled your opponents as subhuman, how do you work with them? How do you compromise to do what’s best for the country? You don’t.

And that’s exactly the point. He doesn’t want compromise. He wants domination. He wants a political system like in Russia or Hungary, where the only choice is himself.

We can’t afford to normalize this. We can’t laugh it off as Trump being Trump. We can’t wait and hope that someone, somewhere, will step in and draw a line. We have to be that line. We have to call this what it is: a deliberate, dangerous assault on the core of American democracy.

Words matter. In every fascist movement of the 20th century, it started with the words. Before the arrests, before the beatings, before the camps, there were the words. And in every case, those words went unchallenged until it was too late.

It’s not too late now. But we are closer than we’ve ever been. We must push back hard against this dehumanizing rhetoric, demand better from our leaders, and defend the democratic principle that every citizen, no matter their party, is entitled to dignity, voice, and full participation in the political process. Because once a president gets away with calling fellow Americans “scum,” it’s only a matter of time before he treats them that way.

Thom Hartmann

The Hartmann Report is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my daily work waking Americans up to the threat of fascism, please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

 

Trump Has Made More than 100 Threats

 

Donald Trump has been on a tirade, multiple tirades actually, unbefitting the president of the United States. You know that, and there is nothing good to be gained by focusing on the people he has singled out. It’s part of his ongoing pattern of abusing the powers of the presidency to publicly seek retribution or punish people he considers to be his enemies.

Trump doesn’t make us guess about this. He’s said the quiet part out loud on multiple occasions, like these:

• At CPAC March 4, 2023, midway through a rambling campaign speech, Trump explicitly promised “retribution” for his supporters—which, of course, meant for himself. He told the crowd, “In 2016, I declared, ‘I am your voice.’ Today, I add: I am your warrior. I am your justice. And for those who have been wronged and betrayed: I am your retribution.” He concluded, “I will totally obliterate the deep state.”
• In a Truth Social post in September 2024, Trump threatened to jail people who opposed his reelection, posting a warning on Truth Social to those “involved in unscrupulous behavior” this election, which he said would be under intense scrutiny. He posted, “WHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences so that this Depravity of Justice does not happen again.” Trump’s track record suggests a willingness to mischaracterize electoral losses as fraud, even in the absence of any evidence. (Judges determine the length of prison sentences in cases where juries convict. None of that is something a president can—or should—promise or even weigh in on.)
• At Georgia’s Republican Party Convention on April 4, 2023, in a speech following his indictment on charges of mishandling classified documents, Trump told the crowd, “They’re not coming after me, they’re coming after you—and I’m just standing in the way. But that ends soon. We’ll take care of them.” Throughout, Trump talked about vengeance, positioning himself as a martyr for his supporters and vowing retaliation.

All told, during campaign season, Trump made over 100 threats to prosecute or punish people he perceived as enemies. We’ve seen him make good on that in a series of executive orders, some cloaked in the pretense of concern over anti-Semitism or discrimination (which now means failing to protect white Christians), that target individuals or institutions he thinks have done him wrong. His public directions, presumably to Attorney General Bondi, to investigate people or entities are part and parcel of it. As are the social media posts attacking people, often just for doing their jobs.

It’s no way for the president to run the White House. But elections have consequences, and this is among them following 2024, when just enough Americans stayed home, or bought fake concerns about Biden’s economy, or wanted a change. Some people are so inured to Trump’s bad behavior that they shrug their shoulders and pass it off as “just Trump.” When you hear people doing that, stop and remind them that this isn’t normal or innocent. He is literally on a revenge tour and abusing the powers of the presidency.

As for us, we have the opportunity to put a stop to this because we still have the right to vote—we need to prepare to exercise it while we can and take steps to protect free and fair elections ahead of 2026, which will be upon us sooner than you might think.

Our tradition of democracy is what makes us different. It’s instilled in us from a young age through classroom elections and developed in democratically elected city and county governments and with the opportunity to vote for our state and federal officials. Even if we take it for granted, democracy is the structure we build our lives upon, and that’s an advantage in a time like ours. It is much easier to insist upon maintenance of something you are used to having than to demand something you’ve never had…

-Joyce Vance

 

President Ronald Reagan’s Memorial Day remarks at Arlington National Cemetery, delivered on May 26, 1986

 

I was thinking this morning that across the country children and their parents will be going to the town parade and the young ones will sit on the sidewalks and wave their flags as the band goes by. Later, maybe, they’ll have a cookout or a day at the beach. And that’s good, because today is a day to be with the family and to remember. Arlington, this place of so many memories, is a fitting place for some remembering. So many wonderful men and women rest here, men and women who led colorful, vivid, and passionate lives. There are the greats of the military: Bull Halsey and the Admirals Leahy, father and son; Blackjack Pershing; and the GI’s general, Omar Bradley. Great men all, military men. But there are others here known for other things. Here in Arlington rests a sharecropper’s son who became a hero to a lonely people. Joe Louis came from nowhere, but he knew how to fight. And he galvanized a nation in the days after Pearl Harbor when he put on the uniform of his country and said, “I know we’ll win because we’re on God’s side.” Audie Murphy is here, Audie Murphy of the wild, wild courage. For what else would you call it when a man bounds to the top of a disabled tank, stops an enemy advance, saves lives, and rallies his men, and all of it singlehandedly. When he radioed for artillery support and was asked how close the enemy was to his position, he said, “Wait a minute and I’ll let you speak to them.” Michael Smith is here, and Dick Scobee, both of the space shuttle Challenger. Their courage wasn’t wild, but thoughtful, the mature and measured courage of career professionals who took prudent risks for great reward—in their case, to advance the sum total of knowledge in the world. They’re only the latest to rest here; they join other great explorers with names like [Gus] Grissom and [Roger] Chaffee. Oliver Wendell Holmes is here, the great jurist and fighter for the right. A poet searching for an image of true majesty could not rest until he seized on “Holmes dissenting in a sordid age.” Young Holmes served in the Civil War. He might have been thinking of the crosses and stars of Arlington when he wrote: “At the grave of a hero we end, not with sorrow at the inevitable loss, but with the contagion of his courage; and with a kind of desperate joy, we go back to the fight.” All of these men were different, but they shared this in common: They loved America very much. There was nothing they wouldn’t do for her. And they loved with the sureness of the young. It’s hard not to think of the young in a place like this, for it’s the young who do the fighting and dying when a peace fails and a war begins. Not far from here is the statue of the three servicemen—the three fighting boys of Vietnam. It, too, has majesty and more. Perhaps you’ve seen it—three rough boys walking together, looking ahead with a steady gaze. There’s something wounded about them, a kind of resigned toughness. But there’s an unexpected tenderness, too. At first you don’t really notice, but then you see it. The three are touching each other, as if they’re supporting each other, helping each other on. I know that many veterans of Vietnam will gather today, some of them perhaps by the wall. And they’re still helping each other on. They were quite a group, the boys of Vietnam—boys who fought a terrible and vicious war without enough support from home, boys who were dodging bullets while we debated the efficacy of the battle. It was often our poor who fought in that war; it was the unpampered boys of the working class who picked up the rifles and went on the march. They learned not to rely on us; they learned to rely on each other. And they were special in another way: They chose to be faithful. They chose to reject the fashionable skepticism of their time. They chose to believe and answer the call of duty. They had the wild, wild courage of youth. They seized certainty from the heart of an ambivalent age; they stood for something. And we owe them something, those boys. We owe them first a promise: That just as they did not forget their missing comrades, neither, ever, will we. And there are other promises. We must always remember that peace is a fragile thing that needs constant vigilance. We owe them a promise to look at the world with a steady gaze and, perhaps, a resigned toughness, knowing that we have adversaries in the world and challenges and the only way to meet them and maintain the peace is by staying strong. That, of course, is the lesson of this century, a lesson learned in the Sudetenland, in Poland, in Hungary, in Czechoslovakia, in Cambodia. If we really care about peace, we must stay strong. If we really care about peace, we must, through our strength, demonstrate our unwillingness to accept an ending of the peace. We must be strong enough to create peace where it does not exist and strong enough to protect it where it does. That’s the lesson of this century and, I think, of this day. -Morning Dispatch

"Veterans and their families have remained undaunted in military service and in the face of grotesque betrayal by the MAGA ingrates"

 

Observing the United States from abroad as it begins the Memorial Day weekend, I am struck by how much of the world that we know today would not exist, but for American military and financial sacrifice.

That sounds too pristine. If not for young men and women ready to lay down their lives for others, Europe today would not be free, democratic, and devoted to Western values. In countries that experienced dictatorship (e.g., Spain) firsthand, the potential for the U.S. to slide into authoritarian rule and isolationism is unfathomable.

It’s an appropriate time, as Donald Trump and his MAGA know-nothings throw aside American values (e.g., empathy, selflessness, ingenuity, inclusion), to appreciate the sacrifice of all those who have served. In the midst of debates about Medicaid cuts, debt, and tax cuts for billionaires, we should not lose track of honoring our veterans, whom Trump has nonchalantly kicked to the curb.

“It may be no surprise that Donald Trump, who did not serve in the active-duty military, would rather celebrate victory than veterans,” CNN reports. “In multiple social media posts this month, Trump said he would declare November 11 as Victory Day for World War I. He didn’t mention that it’s already a federal holiday: Veterans Day.”

While he cuts billions from the Veterans Affairs Department and lays off tens of thousands of vets, Trump wants to throw away tens of millions on a cringeworthy military parade on his birthday, which also happens to be the US Army’s 250th birthday and Flag Day. Rather than honor others’ service by keeping our commitments, he preens amid military pomp like every two-bit dictator on the planet. Trump cares not one wit about those who, unlike him, risked their lives. Quite the opposite: he has made life notably challenging for vets. 

Thanks to some masterful Washington Post reporting on the trauma he intentionally inflicted on tens of thousands of government workers, we have learned about the inexcusable toll on veterans in particular, who disproportionately serve in the federal government. Sadly, “Phone operators for the Veterans Crisis Line said they’d seen a rise in calls from federal employees and others worried about cuts to the VA.”

Elon Musk and Trump have treated government workers, including veterans, as disposable slackers. The results may be disastrous: Some advocates are particularly concerned for veterans, who make up 30 percent of the federal workforce.

Almost a third of all veterans already suffer from a service-connected physical or mental disability. Roughly 11 to 20 percent of those who served in Iraq or Afghanistan have experienced post-traumatic stress disorder. Many have training and access to firearms, which increases suicide risk.

Virtually every aspect of the MAGA budget—from federal civilian personnel firings to Medicaid and VA spending cuts—will hit vets who rely on such services especially hard. “From layoffs at the Department of Veterans Affairs to a Pentagon purge of archives that documented diversity in the military, veterans have been acutely affected by Trump’s actions,” PBS reported.

“And with the Republican president determined to continue slashing the federal government, the burden will only grow on veterans, who make up roughly 30% of the federal workforce and often tap government benefits they earned with their military service.”

Earlier this month, ProPublica reported on “Trump administration’s moves to shrink the Department of Veterans Affairs….after a ProPublica investigation revealed widespread disruptions across the agency’s health care system.”

The pain is evident for anyone who cares to look. It also reported on “dozens of emails sent from staff at VA hospitals and clinics across the country to headquarters warning how cuts could, and in some cases are, degrading the agency’s ability to provide for the roughly 9 million veterans who rely on it.”

Hiring freezes and other edicts from the White House have left medical providers scrambling and short-staffed amid an ever-shifting series of policy moves, including the cancellation of contracts with companies that maintain cancer registries, the emails said.

Staffers at VA centers in Pennsylvania warned the cuts were causing “severe and immediate impacts,” including to “life-saving cancer trials.” . . . . Staffers at [a Pennsylvania VA] hospital warned more than 1,000 veterans would lose access to treatment for diseases ranging from metastatic head and neck cancers to kidney disease, to traumatic brain injuries.

Even a temporary disruption in services can have life-threatening consequences. “One clinical trial to treat veterans for opioid addiction was hobbled by temporary layoffs.” Nevertheless, those funds and livelihoods are less important than Trump’s desire to throw himself—of all things—a military parade.

If Republicans cannot be persuaded to drop or deny these draconian cuts, perhaps vets can help persuade voters to drop Republicans. Fortunately, some veterans are taking up the gauntlet that cruel, ignorant, and reckless MAGA politicians have thrown down. Progressive groups that help new candidates run for office have been inundated with requests from fired federal workers, veterans specifically

Run for Something founder Amanda Littman told USA Today that “federal workers make compelling candidates because many are veterans and have ‘a deep understanding of how the system works and a willingness to fight for it in a different way from the inside.’” People abused and mistreated by the likes of Musk and Trump have a “compelling campaign story,” Littman says.

Individual Democrats such as Lt. Colonel (Ret.) Amy McGrath and Eric Mosley, as well as established groups like VoteVets are working to elect veterans dedicated to democracy. Electing pro-democracy veterans angered by the dismal treatment of veterans (both in and outside the federal workforce) would provide some measure of justice for those whose loyalty, dedication, and sacrifice Trump and his cohort refuse to recognize, let alone honor.

Veterans and their families have remained undaunted in military service and in the face of grotesque betrayal by the MAGA ingrates. They deserve better than this president, his cronies, and MAGA flunkies have offered. During their Memorial Day recess, Republican lawmakers who have enabled Trump’s cruelty should take a moment to reflect on what it truly means to put country above self.

We honor the Undaunted veterans who have defined patriotism to our country, and who will be remembered by history for their dignity and service.

-Jennifer Rubin, The Contrarian is reader-supported. To join the fight while enabling our work to continue across multiple pro-democracy spheres, please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

 

Gun Control in Illinois

 

In January 2023, Illinois took a significant step by implementing a ban on assault weapons, a decision that has sparked intense debate and diverse reactions from both sides of the political spectrum. This legislation, aptly named the “Illinois Assault Weapons Ban,” is seen as a move to address the increasing gun violence in the state, a concern that has been growing due to the rise in mass shootings and gun-related incidents. In this article, we delve into the reactions from politicians, advocates, and the public, examining the implications of the ban and the broader context of gun control in America.

Overview of the Assault Weapons Ban

The Illinois Assault Weapons Ban specifically targets the sale, manufacture, and possession of certain semi-automatic firearms and high-capacity magazines. The law identifies assault weapons based on specific features, such as a detachable magazine and a pistol grip. Additionally, the legislation includes a buyback program for current owners, allowing them to surrender their firearms in exchange for financial compensation. This initiative aims to reduce the number of assault weapons in circulation and curb potential threats posed by these firearms.

Key Features of the Ban
– Prohibition of over 170 specific models of firearms.
– A buyback program for current owners.
– Restrictions on high-capacity magazines (over 10 rounds for handguns, 15 for rifles).
– Enhanced penalties for violations of the law.

Support from Gun Control Advocates

Gun control advocates, primarily from the Democratic Party, have hailed the ban as a crucial step towards reducing gun violence and enhancing public safety. They argue that stricter gun laws correlate with lower rates of gun-related deaths. A study by the Giffords Law Center supports this claim, indicating that states with assault weapon bans have experienced a 25% reduction in mass shooting incidents. Advocates underscore the emotional and societal toll of gun violence, sharing poignant stories of victims and families affected by mass shootings, labeling the ban as a moral imperative to prevent future tragedies.

Statistics Supporting Gun Control
– The U.S. witnessed over 600 mass shootings in 2022 alone.
– Gun-related deaths in Illinois increased by 20% from 2019 to 2021.
– Research indicates that assault weapons are disproportionately used in mass shootings.

Conversely, gun rights advocates and many Republicans stand firmly against the ban, viewing it as an infringement on Second Amendment rights. They argue that the legislation will not effectively reduce crime and risks leaving citizens defenseless against criminals who disregard the law. Opponents emphasize the need to address mental health issues and improve law enforcement responses rather than restricting firearm access. They fear the ban could set a dangerous precedent for further restrictions on gun ownership.

Key Arguments Against the Ban
– Claims of Second Amendment violations.
– Concerns over personal safety and self-defense.
– Belief that criminals will not comply with the law.

The Political Landscape

The passage of the assault weapons ban has underscored the deep political divide within the United States regarding gun control. In Illinois, Democrats who control the legislature successfully pushed the bill through, despite significant Republican opposition. This debate mirrors broader national trends, with several states grappling with similar issues. The ban has become a rallying point for both parties in Illinois, with Democrats celebrating it as a victory for public safety and Republicans decrying it as government overreach. The issue is poised to play a pivotal role in upcoming elections, as candidates leverage the ban to energize their respective bases.

Public Opinion on Gun Control

Public opinion on gun control in Illinois is mixed, reflecting a diverse range of perspectives. Polls indicate that a significant portion of the population supports stricter gun laws, with approximately 60% of Illinois residents expressing approval of the assault weapons ban. However, opinions vary significantly by region and demographic factors. Urban areas tend to favor stricter regulations, while rural communities often prioritize gun rights, highlighting the cultural and societal nuances influencing public sentiment.

Poll Findings
– 60% of Illinois residents support the assault weapons ban.
– Urban residents are more likely to favor gun control measures than rural residents.
– The issue of gun control is a top priority for many voters in upcoming elections.

Legal Challenges Ahead

In the wake of the assault weapons ban’s enactment, legal challenges are anticipated from gun rights organizations who argue that the law is unconstitutional and infringes upon individual liberties. Similar bans in other states have faced legal scrutiny, with courts often divided on the issue. Legal experts suggest that the outcome of these challenges could set significant precedents for gun control laws across the country. Both sides are preparing for a potentially lengthy legal battle that could ultimately ascend to the Supreme Court.

Concerns Over Enforcement

One of the primary concerns surrounding the assault weapons ban is its enforcement. Critics argue that effectively implementing the ban will be challenging, as it requires cooperation from both law enforcement and the public. Ensuring compliance with the buyback program and monitoring illegal possession of banned firearms present significant hurdles. Law enforcement agencies will need to develop robust strategies to enforce the ban without overstepping civil liberties, a delicate balance that will require careful consideration and planning.

Impact on Gun Manufacturers and Retailers

The ban is also expected to have a substantial impact on gun manufacturers and retailers within Illinois. Companies that produce or sell the now-prohibited firearms will need to adapt their business models to comply with the new regulations. This could involve shifting focus to other types of firearms or expanding into different markets. Retailers may face challenges in managing inventory and ensuring that all transactions adhere to the new legal standards. The economic implications of the ban on the gun industry in Illinois will be closely monitored in the coming months.

Community Reactions and Initiatives

Community reactions to the assault weapons ban have been varied, with some neighborhoods organizing initiatives to support the legislation and others voicing strong opposition. In areas that have experienced high levels of gun violence, residents and community leaders have expressed hope that the ban will contribute to a safer environment. Conversely, in regions where gun ownership is deeply embedded in the local culture, the ban has been met with resistance and skepticism. Community-led discussions and forums are emerging as platforms for residents to express their views and engage in dialogue about the future of gun control in their areas.

Future of Gun Control Legislation

The Illinois assault weapons ban is part of a broader national conversation about gun control and public safety. As other states observe the outcomes and challenges of Illinois’ legislation, it may influence future policy decisions across the country. Lawmakers and advocates will be closely watching the legal battles and public responses to gauge the effectiveness and feasibility of similar measures elsewhere. The future of gun control legislation in America remains uncertain, but the Illinois ban has undoubtedly intensified the debate and underscored the complexities of balancing individual rights with public safety.

-Jan Otte, Newsbreak

Commentary:

It is said that laws and their restrictions will never apply to deranged criminals. Moreover, the fact that there are an estimated 400 million firearms already in circulation make it impossible for most gun control laws to have any effect on reducing violent crimes. Because most gun control laws also prohibit people’s self-reliance and self-defense, they can also cost the lives of more innocent victims. 

Nevertheless, I support universal background checks for anyone purchasing a weapon and imposing a waiting period; I support increasing age limits for those purchasing a gun; I support banning high-capacity magazines and modifications on semi-automatic weapons; I support banning semi-automatic and fully automatic assault rifles; I support holding firearms manufacturers of assault rifles legally liable for gun violence; I support holding firearms manufacturers accountable for their perpetuation of fear through marketing specifically aimed at young male adults; I support red flag laws: legislation that will mandate prohibitions on concealed weapons and possession of firearms by people convicted of violent crimes and people who are considered a public threat; I support interventions where violence is imminent and the removal of all protective legal barriers for any person who has threatened violence; I support banning anyone from owning a weapon on no-fly or watch lists and for anyone taking prescriptions for psychotic and antisocial personality disorders and other psychological illnesses; I also support gun safety at home and keeping weapons away from children and teenagers.

Instead of sweeping gun control laws that will affect law-abiding responsible citizens who own reasonable self-defense weapons for protection and may conceal and carry those weapons; instead of more political party accusations and useless prayers for the victims, legislators should focus upon and address the causes of violent crimes: domestic white nationalism, racism, bigotry (power, hatred, revenge, anger, notoriety), religious fundamentalism, economic injustice, poverty, unemployment, gang activity, drug trafficking, inefficient law enforcement in high-crime areas, suicide, mental illness and the internet and social media's proliferation of vitriolic commentary, fear, demagoguery and xenophobia.

Let’s pursue a policy goal that shifts “the distribution of gun possession as far as possible in the direction of likely aggressors being disarmed [e.g., those people who are on social media espousing hatred and terrorist ideologies], with as few prospective victims as possible being disarmed [of their handguns]. To disarm non-criminals [through indiscriminate gun control laws] in the hope that this might indirectly help reduce access to guns among criminals is a very high-stakes gamble, and the risks will not be reduced by pretending that crime victims rarely use guns for self-defense” (Gary Kleck, Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control). 

Let’s also pursue a policy goal that eliminates so-called “corporate personhood” (Citizens United): this corrupt, unlimited campaign spending from moneymaking, mendacious powers like the NRA and the Koch Brothers, et. al. that funds and coerces Republican legislators to ingratiate them. 

-Glen Brown