Democracy on the brink . . . .

I challenge anyone who reads this article to stop and reflect on the many ways the current president is undermining and destroying democracy in our country. There is no debate, nor can there be, that supports the myriads of inane executive orders that he has invoked in the country. He has demonstrated no concern for how or whom these orders will impact individuals, organizations, and communities throughout the country. It is my belief that he is incapable of human emotion that gives any thought to the ramifications of his actions. In the information that follows, I will attempt to identify where I see some of his behaviors manifested. My original intent was to author this article at the time of Trump’s 100 days in office, but I was torn with how best to address multiple issues and concerns. Hopefully, what I have concluded will make sense and lead to legitimate challenges to his everyday decisions.

In a recent Commentary, “Dangerous cracks in US democracy pillars,” written for the Brookings Institute by Jonathan Katz and Eric Urby, seven pillars are identified. The commentary is a summary version of a Brookings publication, the 2025 Democracy Playbook. The seven pillars include the following:

1. Protect elections

2. Defend rule of law

3. Fight corruption

4. Reinforce civic and media space

5. Protect pluralistic governance

6. Counter disinformation

7. Make democracy deliver

They limit their discussion to the first three pillars. Further, they conclude that the wide range of executive orders challenge the checks and balances and separation of powers that are imbedded as salient aspects of the country’s constitutional governance.

The first pillar that the authors discuss is protecting elections. Protecting elections is critical in maintaining a democratic form of government that includes representation for its citizens. The country has a long history of maintaining free and fair elections, yet the current administration is hell-bent on continuing the unsupported claims they espouse about the 2020 election. Their actions erode voter access, hinder free and fair elections, and create distrust in the election system. The integrity of future elections is in question. Early executive orders dealt with rescinding the previous administration’s executive orders that protected voting access as well as providing accurate information to the public. Trump’s actions beg the question... to what extent will the federal government protect fundamental voting rights. Failure to protect these laws would undoubtedly lead to an erosion of voter protection.

Defending the rule of law is the anthesis of how Trump has behaved since returning to office. On his first day he pardoned or commuted close to 1500 insurrectionists’ who on January 6, 2021, stormed the capitol, brutalized police officers, defaced the building and created an atmosphere of disbelief amongst law abiding Americans. Trump watch all this unfolding from the White House and took around an hour and a half before he instructed the criminals to leave. He referred to these lawless individuals as hostages and victims of the actions of the Biden administration. If he is going to take such action what faith does the American people have in protections being provided by their federal government. His illegal actions continued with his decision to freeze trillions of dollars that Congress had allocated. The constitution that he swore to uphold means nothing to Trump. Birthright citizenship is protected by the constitution, yet Trump does not accept or recognize this protection. An overly critical issue with Trump and his loyalists is how they will deal with court decisions that do not go their way. Will they choose to ignore the decisions of the court? If this is the action taken it would be catastrophic and would foster an autocratic, undemocratic government.

Katz and Urby move to the third pillar - fight corruption - and it is their position that there is an inordinate amount of conflict of interest that abounds in the administration. The most glaring of these conflicts is Elon Musk. Musk has trillions of dollars of federal contracts, yet he was brought in by Trump to improve government efficiency. While this might be a noble expectation, Musk took it to a level that was blatantly illegal and inhumane. To conduct this assignment he was granted unaccountable, unelectable, and non-transparent power. He and his minions fired thousands of employees and provided others with the opportunity to resign. The problem that was ever so apparent was that decisions were made as to who would go without consideration to expertise or years of service. The entire action was illegal because it did not follow federal personnel provisions. Additionally, the firing of Inspector Generals undermined transparency and accountability in the actions of Trump. The role and purpose of the Inspector Generals was to be overseers of the expenditure of federal dollars. Each Inspector General was assigned to an agency and were independent of any intrusion by government employees, including the president. Trump could not control what they did so his answer was to fire them.

It is ever so apparent that there are obvious cracks in each of the three pillars that were discussed. Will those cracks become more pronounced? Will they become more frequent? Will they become the standard of the prevailing administration? Will there be any attempt by law abiding citizens to address the obvious set of problems inherent in today’s federal government?

Recently, Senator Chris Murphy, a Democratic Senator from Connecticut, made a compelling case for declaring that Trump was destroying America’s democracy. He laid out, in a speech in the senate, his claim by identifying the four areas in a democracy that are attacked as a democracy becomes an autocratic form of government. Those four areas are attacks on journalists, higher education, lawyers, and the business community. He identifies how these areas have been undermined by countries such as Turkey, Hungary, the Philippines, Venezuela, just to name a few. The press is an essential institution in a free and open democracy. In those countries that loathe the press, journalists are constantly harassed and either stop journalism or stop telling the full truth. In Turkey President Erdogan locked up eleven journalists who wrote about protests led by opposition leaders to Erdogan.   Trump has not begun to jail journalists who write in opposition to his positions, but he has taken measures that are alarming. He has denied access to certain journalists to government buildings, including the White House, for not following the approved part line language prepared by the White House. His FCC has begun to deliberately harass media companies that are owned by those opposed to Trump.

Trump’s attacks on universities provide ongoing evidence of his intent to destroy democracy in this country. Historically, universities have been bastions of unrest and protest and to gain control they must be brought in line with the policies of the administration. A glaring example of this is what Columbia did so that it would not lose its federal funding. They had to agree to turn over to the Trump administration a specific academic department. The department in questions is Columbia’s Middle East, South Asian and African Studies as well as the Center for Palestine Studies. Trump picked the person who will oversee the department. This is unheard of, the president of the country micromanaging an academic department of major universities. What he has done at Harvard is equally problematic. He has virtually frozen the federal funds that Harvard receives because they have not given in to his demands to rid the curriculum of specific content, primarily the DEI courses. The president of Harvard has refused to buckle to the troubling demands of Trump and has sued the Trump administration. With this Supreme Court it is undoubtedly going to be a decision that favors the president’s ability to take this action. Their decision on presidential immunity would seem to support this position. As reported in The Guardian, over 150 university presidents signed a letter decrying the Trump administration, including Harvard, Princeton, and Brown led the way: however, the signatories of the letter include other Ivy League universities, public institutions of higher education, small colleges, and representatives from scholarly societies.  It is the intrusion of the administration that causes grave concern and, if unchecked, moves the county closer to an authoritarian government. Promoting an environment that controls free speech on university campuses is a hallmark of Trump’s intrusion. He has the pretense of supporting antisemitic but is nothing more than a shadowy attempt at placating a segment of the higher education community. It should not be lost in this discussion that free speech is a guarantee contained in the first amendment of the Bill of Rights of our constitution. It is becoming increasingly evident that this president fails to recognize the inherent provisions and guarantees in the constitution.

Attacking the legal profession was also included in Murphy’s speech. There are several examples in authoritarian countries where lawyers have been harassed into silence. Putin in Russia and Maduro in Venezuela have routinely gone after lawyers who criticize or take opposition positions than what is promulgated by the government. Trump has, likewise, shamelessly gone after law firms that have represented those who have been in opposition to him or his interests. He has been successful in having some of these prestigious law firms buckle into submission to his demands. The threat of cutting off their access to federal buildings, having access to staff, and other restraints has characterized Trump’s attack on the legal profession. The outcome of his attacks will lead to these firms avoiding cases that stir the ire of Trump. The firms have signed agreements with Trump that curtail their participation in such suits. Having control of the press, colleges and universities, and successful law firms does not satisfy the full fulcrum of Trump’s need for influencing, attacking, harassing, and controlling a larger swath of institutions in the country. It is the private sector that comes into view to fulfilling this need.  The use of tariffs to deal with this void that exists and must be filled. Trump has issued a myriad of executive orders placing various percentages of tariffs on specific countries. It is his belief that tariffs can be used to “whip” other countries into submission. There is ample evidence that the United States is the “bell cow” of the world’s economy. As the US goes sogdoes the world. Trump is aware of this and uses tariffs as a mechanism to maintain this level of superiority and control of other economies. While he has not been consistent in the application of the process of the use of tariffs and has rescinded some: further, he has been “willy-nilly” in his argument and subsequent action with the application of specific tariffs. Although there has been a measure of uncertainty and inconsistency, it does appear that with specific countries he is being successful. Japan, South Korea, Italy, and others have come to economically kneel before the emperor in negotiations with him. The institutional control of the private sector is certainly evident through the application of tariffs. It is this control that has completed the reality of moving closer and closer to the authoritarian government that Trump seeks to impose.

In addition to what has been stated above, there are additional specific actions by Trump that have the potential of leading the country to the brink of democratic destruction. His attack on freedom of speech raises profoundly serious concerns. He has invoked the use of campus police at Columbia to enforce his mandate of controlling the use of anti-Semitic language by students and faculty. This action has the feeling of a police state rather than one that promotes freedom and the absence of fear and intimidation. Controlling speech on university campuses and using university police to enforce the use of proper language is simply another example of Trump’s need to control.

The New Republic had a very chilling article entitled, “Trump’s latest executive order lays bare his authoritarian ambitions,” glaring abuse of freedom of speech is evident in two of his recent executive orders. One directs the justice department to investigate Chris Krebs and Miles Taylor. Krebs was the director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency who had the audacity of stating that the 2020 election had the highest level of integrity of any election. This statement debunked the claims of Trump and his baseless lies. Miles Taylor was the chief of staff at the Department of Homeland Security and authored a book about the reckless policies of the Trump administration. Trump had his own level of audacity to refer to Taylor as a Traitor who should be tried for treason. Each of these men did nothing more than to follow the truth and their only crime was that such truth was in opposition to the lies and fraudulent charges of Trump.

His actions regarding the attack on inherent freedoms has created a “chilling effect.”  In such an environment individuals are fearful of speaking out if it is in opposition to the administration or is questioning a policy. It is the fear of being identified as Miles Taylor has been, as treasonous. The intimidation and fear of vengeance and retribution permeate, and Trump moves the county closer and closer to an autocracy. The sixth amendment in the constitution provides for the right to legal representation. “When the government intimidates law firms into submission, it erodes the adversarial system that is essential for justice.”    The author continues, “The implications are dire. If attorneys fear retribution for taking on cases that oppose the administration, who will hold the government accountable? Who will defend people like Chris Krebs and Miles Taylor?”  Continuing, “This orchestrated campaign of intimidation is designed to create a chilling effect, deterring legal professionals from defending those who dare to speak truth to power.”  The law becomes a “tool of oppression rather than justice.”  Democracy is certainly on the brink and is constantly assaulted by decisions coming from Trump. We must be vigilant in our actions in protecting and sustaining a democratic form of government before it is too late.

Trump’s latest questionable action, calling in the California National Guard and the Marines to quell the rioting in Los Angles is simply another attack on the rule of law and failing to follow the mandates of the federal constitution. That discussion is for another day as is his egotistical decision to have the parade in Washington, alleging it to be in honor of the 250th anniversary of the Army. Do not lose sight of the fact that most despots parade their military wares before the people. Putin, “Rocket Man” from North Korea, China and other totalitarian governments have annual military-oriented parades. I realize that the current article is long, but I am compelled to raise the behavior of the president to the scrutiny of the American people.

One more time...

I was prepared to get this posted a week ago, but unfortunately took a wrong turn right into DCH where I was kept until this past Friday. Was released earlier for displaying good behavior. Here is the latest.

Well, we all have lived through the first few weeks of Trump’s chaos, confusion, brutality, indifference, insensitivity, and just plain ignorance. None of the actions that he has taken come as a surprise, but, I guess, the flurry of his creation of one Executive Order after another as if they were not going to be enacted fast enough. Obviously, what we have experienced is just the beginning of his assault on democracy and the republic’s revered principle of checks and balances which is embedded in the constitution. There was a reason that the Founding Fathers included a mechanism embodied in the constitution that provided for maintaining a government that prevented one person from gaining unabashed control. We’re getting close to that with Trump and all freedom loving Americans need to be aware that the person in the White House is hell bent on being that one person. His authoritarian approach these past weeks is evidence of his inclinations.

The Republicans had a resounding set of outcomes from the recent election. In addition to putting Trump back in the Presidency, they also have a majority in the senate and a slim majority in the House. This has been referred to as a successful trifecta. Indeed, the slim majority of those who voted were significantly dissatisfied with where the country was and where it seemed to be headed. What these individuals may not fully realize is that they have put into motion a dramatic set of changes in how the federal government operates. America, as we have come to know it, will undoubtably no longer exist. With Trump in control there are no parameters or guardrails. He will do whatever he damn well wants to do. Additionally, he will have the support of every component of the federal government. Not just the presidency and legislature, but also the Supreme Court. We have seen how this court has been inclined to be supportive of Trump. This was particularly the case in their decision dealing with presidential immunity. The rationale and line of thinking in this decision was absurd, but it is now the law of the land. The only way there could be changes to rein him in would be through the legislative process and that is not going to happen in the current climate. One glimmer of sanity was evident in the senate’s choice of majority leader. John Thune of North Dakota was chosen over Rick Scott of Florida who was Trump’s choice. Perhaps this provides some modest degree of sanity.

Where the country is headed can be seen in Trump’s early cabinet selections. Selecting Gaetz as Attorney General was the most egregious of those decisions thus far. Here is a person who was under scrutiny by the House Ethics Committee on drug and sex trafficking charges. Who better to be the chief law enforcement officer of the country? What a travesty this would have been, but fortunately Gaetz withdraw his nomination. Another questionable nomination is for the Secretary of the Department of Defense, Pete Hegseth. No one has any idea where this guy came from. He has no background that prepares him to take on this massive job. Appropriate and defensible qualifications are not a factor in Trump’s selection decisions. I can assure you that the craziness is not over and there will be others plucked from obscurity to be included in Trump’s inner circle. Nominating Robert Kennedy, Jr, for Secretary of Health and Human Services is equally indefensible. He has no background in either health or human services. He has been a purveyor of conspiratory theories about vaccines, autism, and fluoride, but has no basis for his positions. He is a recovering addict who has difficulty speaking and explaining his positions. His cousin, Caroling Kennedy, has come out, publicly, sharing her concerns and encouraging senators to turn down his nomination. She referred to him as a predator who has led others into drugs and abusive behavior and provided incorrect information to parents of sick children. There are others, including Tulsi Gabbard, who has been nominated for the intelligence agency and Kash Patel to head the FBI. Each of these individuals have questionable backgrounds that should raise some degree of concern amongst the senators. It was encouraging that Kash Patel parted with Trump on the pardons for those who assaulted police officers during the January 6th insurrection on the capital. Patel did not support this decision. Although Patel parted with Trump on this questionable decision, that does not make him a friend to democracy and individual freedoms. He is a devotee of Steve Bannon’s and that raises its own set of questions and concerns.

As we consider the next four years, there must be concern about what this country will look like. The results of Trump’s brazen, faulty, conspiratorial, indifferent, insensitive, and mean approach to governing and decision making will be fraught with erroneous, misguided, and just plain stupid outcomes. The authoritarian, dictatorial mentality that characterizes Trump will lead to changes that alienate our allies and embrace our enemies. I feel certain that China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran are just sitting back waiting for the craziness in this country to unfold.

Trump has been able to get his way and not be held accountable for his illegal and errant behavior. Even though he was found guilty by a jury on 34 felonies, he received virtually no punishment. I realize that he has a criminal record, but that seems of minimal consequence to him as he continues to flaunt the rule of law. The case dealing with how he handled classified documents as he left the office was dismissed by a judge that he had appointed. In addition, the case that involved his role in the January 6th insurrection was also dismissed. Of all the legal issues that confronted him, he has been able to skirt the law without being held accountable. The supreme court rests solely in his grasp and will continue to do his bidding. Their decision dealing with presidential immunity gives the occupant of that office a carte blanch to do whatever they choose to do. The confusion surrounding the court’s decision on immunity, deals with when specific actions deemed illegal occurred, For example, many of Trump’s actions among the 34 acts, did not occur while he was president so how does immunity come into play?

Trump’s influence with his billionaire buddies was evident at his inauguration where they were given front-row seats leaving his cabinet nominations sitting behind them. How these men of immense wealth can be so controlled by Trump will remain a bit of a mystery. Why are they so beholden to him? Indeed, he is intimidating and blustery in his interactions with others. But he lies, cheats, and has no qualms about what he says or does. What do these men find in him? What can he do to them? A senator or representative has to be concerned about constituents and Trump’s influence on them, but that is not an issue with these individuals. He has virtually no opposition in the republican party. Those in the senate and the house are nothing more than “yes men and women”. The alleged leadership in the two houses seems nonexistent. Will there be any challenges to his flawed leadership. He continues to lie and misrepresent the truth. He loathes those who support him and has referred to them as “basement dwellers”. He has a tendency and is quite adept at taking current events and wrapping them around his pet issues, whether it be immigration, DEI, or something else. An example of this was earlier today at a press conference, he blamed DEI and the Democrats for the tragic plane crash in Washing last night. How perverse can one be? As grieving families gather, he turns the situation into a political statement. Additionally, how can the pardons for those who engaged in illegal, destructive, and lethal behavior on January 6th at his direction be absolved of all that they did? How can those who assaulted law enforcement officers that fateful day be cleared of any wrongdoing, regardless of the 5 deaths among these officers? It is shameful and wrong, but he did it and nothing can be done about it. Trump has the sensitivity of a rock and people will come to realize this more and more as the years come and go.

If there is going to be any challenges to all of this, the Democrats must get their act together. As many stated after the recent election. They need to listen rather than lecture. They need to back away from constantly preaching about various societal ills and listen to what people are saying are their concerns. They need to be looking for those areas where they can come together and join forces to act as a unified party that can effectively and proficiently point to what is wrong with the direction that the country is going. It is my belief that Trump will take some of his actions too far and this will alienate a significant group in the country. If this occurs the Democrats need to be there to take advantage and bring those who are disillusioned into the democratic fold. We’ll see where it goes.

A threat to our societal fabric>>>

White nationalism and white supremacy are terms that have reached into the lives of us all, regardless of our propensity to endorse or not to become involved.  Although these terms are often used interchangeability, they are not one in the same, albeit they are in the same family of words and phrases.  Let me put the difference between the two terms into perspective.  In the August 14, 2017, edition of the Columbia Journalism Review, it is noted that a “supremacist” believes a particular race (or sex, or other genetic or cultural characteristic) is superior to others.”  The article goes on to state that “you must know what the characteristic that is believed to be “supreme”, and an adjective must be attached…” which leads into the addition of “white supremacists”, or Muslim supremacists, or male supremist, etc.

The article states that a “Nationalist is at heart merely someone who strongly believes in the interest of one’s own nation…”   It is noted that adding an adjective to specify what their nation is can then become politically polarizing.  For example, a “white nationalist” generally wants a nation of white people only and like “white supremacists” the “white nationalist” believes that white people are inherently superior.

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary explains that “white nationalist is defined as ‘one of a group of militant whites who espouse white supremacy and advocate enforced racial segregation,’ while white supremacist is ‘a person who believes that the white race is inherently superior to other races and that white people should have control over people of other races.’’’

A glaring example of white nationalism was the insurrection that occurred on January 6. There is very little question about the orientation of the majority of those who participated in this egregious act against our government.  The overwhelming number of participants were white. Racial segregation is a hallmark of the white nationalist. Further. it should be recalled that the men who  plotted to kidnap the Governor of Michigan were all white. Within the tenants of white nationalism, there is not a place for an integrated nation and all races must be segregated.  In reflecting on the rise of Nazi Germany, such segregation was ever so apparent.  Although the racial composition was different, Jews as opposed to Blacks, Asians or Muslims, the intent and outcome was consistent with a nationalist mentality

Returning to the historical context of white nationalism it becomes obvious that two men were instrumental in propagating this orientation.  William Shockley and Arthur Jensen are the primary proponents of a white nationalist orientation.  It is interesting that Shockley was a physicist and had won the Nobel Prize in 1956 for the invention of the transistor and was viewed as the single most influencer for ushering in the computer age.  Although a renowned physicist, Shockley was also a eugenicist and argued blacks were inferior.  As a professor of Physics at Standford he had a measure of respectability, but that eroded as he became more and more involved with his views on white nationalism.

The other member of this nationalist duo, Arthur Jessen, is a member of the faculty of another prestigious university.  He is an educational psychologist at The University of California- Berkley.  In this role he provided some measure of academic respectability to theories of black inferiority and public policy that was segregationist by definition.  According to the Southern Poverty Law Center,  “Jensen promoted eugenics as the only practical solution to the problems facing the black community.”  He had the ability “to repackage fringe racial theories in the dry, dispassionate rhetoric of science which made Jensen an instant celebrity in white nationalist circles where he is still revered.”

As white nationalists are viewed more closely, it appears as if they are a fanatical fringe of the larger society.  While this may be true, it should not provide any measure of comfort or lack of concern.  If there is any merit in them being fanatics, these individuals can be the most troublesome.  They are convinced of the “rightness” of their beliefs and are impervious to any attempts to rationale reviews of their position.

Those who are the adherents to white nationalism tend to be easily led to follow others, regardless of the outcome of their involvement.  There is evident an Orwellian Group Think phenomenon that characterizes the white nationalist and those that are involved tend to let others do their thinking for them.  Included in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights are five freedoms that the government cannot undermine.  These five freedoms include the Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press, Freedom of Assembly, and the Freedom to Petition the government to right a grievous wrong.  White nationalists challenge the protections embodied in the First Amendment on a regular basis.  Most often this involves some type of rally, riot or assembly.  In these events the freedom of speech is ever so evident, and a great deal of attention is directed toward the inferiority of the non-white population.  Historically, the courts have protected the rights included in the First Amendment and have provided minimal control over the hate that emanates from white nationalist groups.

A sub-set of white nationalists are those individuals and groups that claim to be Christians.  It is these groups that want to create a Christian nation. Their influence and power in the Republican Party is evident in the role they played in the drafting of the GOP platform.  The 16-page draft shows the influence that Christian nationalism would have if Trump were elected. As stated in a recent  HuffPost article, signs of the ideological influence of Christian nationalism are apparent in the draft platform.  Included in the draft is a plank that addresses immigration and states that immigration laws would be used to keep foreign Christian-hating Communists, Marxists, and Socialism out of America.  Another plank embraces the support for homeschooling, including protecting the infusion of the Bible in the coursework. “The Christian nationalists’ movement has deep roots in anti-communism, antisemitism, white supremacy and isolationism” (HuffPost) During the time Trump was president, the religious right advocated for ending same sex marriage, banning abortion, and denying the existence of trans people.  These ideological beliefs are imbedded in the draft platform of the GOP.  The HuffPost article goes on to state that “The most radical adherents of the movement, which has gained influence on the right, see pluralistic democracy as a roadblock to be dismantled and consider their political standard bearers, such as Trump, to be divinely inspired.” (HuffPost) The draft promises to promote a culture that values the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman.  Also included is the creation of a federal task force, “Anti-Christian Bias” that will be charged to investigate all forms of illegal discrimination, harassment, and persecution against Christians in America.” (HuffPost}

The primary member of the committee that drafted the platform has close ties with Trump.  He has become director of the Center for Renewing America which is a right wing think tank and has an identifiable Christian nationalism focus.  He has also been involved with the creation of Project 2025.  This is a 1000-page agenda that would remake the federal government and remake the country.  Examples of some of the language in this document include abolishing the Departments of Education and Homeland Security.  Further, the Department of Justice would be used to prosecute any individuals who oppose Trump, should he be reelected.  These examples should cause all freedom loving Americans to shutter.

As the push for Christian nationalism gains a measure of traction, it needs to be noted what that entails.  As noted above, there are specific behaviors that are not condone by this group such as abortion, same-sex marriage, etc., but there is also a mandate to incorporate the tenants of Christianity into the classroom.  In Louisiana a recent law states that every classroom from kindergarten through high school displays the Ten Commandments.  Additionally, in Oklahoma a recent law requires the Bible be incorporated into course curricula in the public school.  Other states are moving in similar directions.  Further, there is a movement to censure the use of certain materials in the classroom.  Any reference to sexual behavior is included amongst what is unacceptable.

As noted, within the language of the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights is the prohibition of the establishment of a state religion.  There is to be a separation between religion and the state.  Those who espouse an affinity for Christian nationalism disregard this specific directive.’

‘There is, likewise, a push to censure the use of certain books and other means of communication in the public-school classroom.  A list of 100 such books has been published and is to be used as a guide to what is right and what is wrong.  People need to be a bit careful here because the Bible is on that list.  A study of sexually explicit references in the Bible has been compiled and 29 such references have been identified.  Some are extremely salacious such as the story included in the nineteenth chapter of Gensis where both of Lot’s daughters slept with him, had sex with him, and bore a child fathered by him.  This is but one example of an  explicit description of sexual activity in the Bible.  Throughout the Old Testament there are repeated sexual references and an infatuation with the breasts of females.

In a few weeks we will all know the outcome that this movement has had in the country.  If successful, then there will be a new day that will be replete with numerous expectations that many will find difficult to follow.  As we ponder the potential impact on the country and the basic values that characterize our historical underpinnings, there must be a legitimate degree of concern.  Values that are the hallmark of a democratic representative government are threatened.  Freedom and democracy are in the crosshairs of the white nationalist, including those who champion the creation of a Christian nation.  We cannot sit idly by and “let nature take its course” because we may wake up on Wednesday, November 6, 2024, in a nationalist driven society.  For most of us, that would prove to be catastrophic. 

Out of sight out of mind . . .

Out of sight, out of mind, seems to be the mantra that puts into perspective the catastrophic condition of the American Penal System, especially here in Alabama. In recent years the Department of Justice has completed an extensive analysis of the conditions in Alabama prisons, especially the thirteen men’s facilities.  It is within the chain link fences, cell blocks, and dormitories that the horrors of life in the state’s prisons unfolds.  Do note that in the 19th century, a couple of philosophers, one French and one Russian had a fascination with the American Penitentiary System.  The French philosopher, Alexis De Tocqueville, seemed to be primarily interested in drawing a connection between religion and its influence on the penal system.  More to the point, the Russian, Fyodor Dostoevsky, is alleged to have stated that “the degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons”.  There is some debate as to whether he actually was responsible for the quote but suffice it to say that the message does include, at a minimum, a modicum of truth.  Dostoevsky is the author of Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov, thus the credibility of what he has stated or inferred carries a measure of significance in penal reform.  This backdrop is included to provide a context within which to view what is happening here in Alabama.  Such a context is characterized by a barbaric, inhuman, dehumanizing environment which has become the Alabama Correctional System.  To include the term, correctional, is a cruel euphemism that belies what really exists behind the fences and walls.

The thirteen male prisons and one female prison make up the Alabama Department of Corrections.  As will become evident, it is a cruel correlation between the concept of corrections and the Alabama system.  What transpires within these facilities is as far removed from corrections as any human activity can be.  In a recent editorial, the Washington Post referred to the thirteen state male prisons as “grotesque chambers of horrors”.  Alabama has been singled out as one of the deadliest prison systems in the country, behind Louisiana.  The rate of deaths has seen a dramatic increase even though the number of incarcerated individuals has slightly declined.  Homicides committed by inmate on inmate have seen an increase and there have been at least two homicides perpetrated by staff.  Drug and alcohol deaths are on the rise and contraband has become a staple means of bartering within the prisons between inmates and staff.  In one article it was noted that the sale of marijuana or any other drug could lead to a $2000 transaction between an inmate and staff member. 

In the horrendous environment characterizing the prisons, the previously mentioned Department of Justice extensive investigation produced their report back in 2017.  The report focused primarily on the absence of any attention being given to the mental health needs of inmates.  The rise in suicides was directly related to the absence of any services that addressed this growing problem in the prisons.  It is now 2024, almost seven years after the report was released, and the need for such services are still not available.  The problem of the prison system is one of staffing, accountability, and overall inhumane indifference.  As I noted at the outset of this article, out of sight out of mind.  Prisons are not high on anyone’s list of priorities, but do not lose sight of the fact that the overwhelming number of inmates will be released once their sentences are served.  They will return to the communities throughout the state and what will they bring back to those communities?  Will they have garnered some sense of independence and productivity from their incarceration?  Will they be able to provide for a family through gainful employment?  Will they have a marketable skill or trade that can translate back into the community?  Will they be better from their experience, or will they be mired in resentment, bitterness and hatred and project that onto the community to which they return?

This is not a new problem here in Alabama.  Years ago, back in the 1970s, I along with a couple of colleagues conducted an analysis of some of the cases in the Federal Court in the Middle District of Alabama where Judge Frank M. Johnson was a District Judge.  Two of the cases, Pugh v. Locke and James v. Wallace were specifically addressing the conditions in Alabama’s prisons.  The two cases were merged, and specific remedies were set forth.  The conditions in the prisons at that time were deemed to be in violation of the eight-amendment prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment, yet little if anything changed.  In fact, it seems as if the deterioration has been accelerated and become much more blatant and observable.  Recently, a reference to the beatings and inhumane conditions in the prisons was highlighted in a report on television and the viewer witnessed an inmate being beaten, kicked and maimed by other inmates while correctional staff stood by watching.  The inmate later died from his injuries. Such events are not isolated occurrences but have become a way of life within the prison environment. 

Alabama has also been singled out for its use of nitrogen gas for a recent execution.  According to those who witnessed the execution, the process was fraught with obvious, inhumane and unnecessary problems and it has been a source of controversy within the correctional community.  This action along with the removal of body parts upon the death of an inmate make for ghoulish and indefensible set of environmental and systemic behaviors.  A recent case highlighted the fact that the family of an inmate who died in prison was returned minus the person’s heart.  Upon further revelation, it became apparent that this was not an isolated incident, but something that occurs without any familial concurrence or involvement.  Is this just one more blight on a system in freefall.

The conditions that are so pervasive in Alabama’s prisons are well known, yet very little proactive movement has been forthcoming.  Alabama’s answer is to build more and larger facilitis housing several thousand inmates.  The adage, “build it and they’ll come” will certainly be a self-fulfilling prophecy with this simplistic and unproductive response to the problem.  What is needed is not larger and more facilities, what is needed is to address the inherent problems that plague the state’s system.  There needs to be a better system of classification and inmates need to be separated based on the severity of their offenses and their individual profiles.  Putting a 19 year old drug addict into the same environment as a convicted child molester makes no sense and subjects the more frail and younger person to rape, sexual abuse and physical assaults.  Improving program offerings within the prison can address the preparation of individuals for their release and give them something to work toward.  Revamping the concept of parole and the productive use of it along with the initiation of second chances.  This latter approach gives an individual with a sentence that does not allow for parole the opportunity to petition to have his/her case reviewed and potentially modified to allow for parole.  Finally, repealing the habitual offender statute will have the effect of reducing the number of individuals sentenced to prison.  In my judgment, this ill-conceived statute has created its own inertia and been a drain on an already strained and ineffective system.   

Why has the Department of Justice continued to give opportunity after opportunity to the state to respond to its directives?  Why have there been deadline after deadline come and go with no action by the state?  Why has there not been a Master or Overseer appointed to bring the state into compliance with the provisions of the eight-amendment?  The state’s Attorney General has been very adamant about fighting the Federal Government if it moves to take over the prison system yet has done virtually nothing to address the obvious and well-known problems of the system.  It is time for the Department of Justice to take the initiative and begin the process of changing one of the worst prison systems in the country.

What comes after day one . . .

It has been quite some time since I last wrote a blog and, I like most of the country, have been in a drought.  The drought affecting me was not caused by the weather but was due to setting up a new office.  The office that I had been in for several years was in an old building that was sold.  We had to vacate the building within two months, so I began looking and was fortunate to locate space in a building directly across the street.  Getting ready to move, moving, and setting up a new office has taken more time than anticipated and has diverted me from doing much else. hence, I have been dilatory with my writing.  Now I am back in the groove and share with you my thoughts about the current political chaos created by former president Trump. 

We have become familiar with Trump’s declaration that he would be a “Dictator” only on “Day One”.  The question posed is what happens after “Day One”?  Does “Day One: get extended time-and-time again?  Does Trump renege on his claim to only perform as a “Dictator” on that one day?  Does “Day One” become “Day Two”, “Day Three” and so forth?  Each and everyone of us, whether it is admitted or not, understands Donald Trump has a serious problem with the truth.  We are all ever so cognizant of the multitude of lies, misrepresentations, falsehoods, fabrications, etc. that were so pervasive during his presidency.  He lied when he did not have to do so.  He lied to embellish his own interpretation of the “alternative facts”.  He seemed to bask in the response of his minions when he spewed forth lie after lie after lie.  The Washington Post reported that during the four years of his presidency he had 30,573 false or misleading claims.  The Toronto Star reported 5,275 false claims from January 2017 to June 2019.  Consider the fact that as the years went by his false or misleading claims increased.  In year one of his presidency, he averaged 6.1 such claims, year two, the number increased to 16, in the third year there were 22, and in his final year the number increased to an average of 39 per day.  I have included this detailed information to, hopefully, make the point that what Trump says may or may not be true, and further that you cannot accept what he says he will do to be followed.

He continues to pass on his false or misleading claims.  To make the point, let me mention a recent Fox News Town Hall exchange between Sean Hannity and Trump.  This took place in Iowa on December 5th.  In that clip included in the Washington Post, Trump made 24 of these claims in a five-minute period.  One of his claims which he repeats over and over is that he is responsible for the largest tax cut amongst any of the previous presidents.  This is not true.  His is the eighth largest tax cut and was smaller than two of the tax cuts during the Obama administration.  When he boasted this claim, the audience erupted in applause, but they fail to realize nor accept that his tax cut benefitted the wealthy and corporations more than it did for those clapping in adoration.    

At this point in time, it is known that Trump has 91 criminal charges that have been brought against him and it certainly appears that there is a substantial amount of proof to support most of them.  In Georgia alone, the world listened to his phone call to the Secretary of State demanding that he find additional votes in an amount that would exceed the legal number garnered by Biden.  There is no mystery in this phone call.  It was Trump calling the Secretary and it was the Secretary telling Trump that the vote was accurate and would not be changed.  How blatant could anything be?  As these cases in New York, Washington, and Georgia make their way through the legal system, the 2024 presidential campaign is underway and it is blatantly unfathomable that as Trump’s legal problems unfold, his political support rises.  People seem to be blind to the reality of their actions.  They need to keep in mind that dictatorship in day one will not begin and end at the end of day one with Trump in the equation. People who are so enamored with him need to step back and realize that if he should get elected in 2024 there will be a different America, and not one that is better.

Why can reasonable people not see the fallacy in Trump’s rhetoric and promises?  Why is it so difficult to look at his history that is fraught with illegal, criminal, unethical, immoral and inhumane behavior on his part?  Why can these people not realize that he gave every indication that he believed he was above the law and could do whatever he chose to do, regardless of its legality?  Why can people not come to understand that the very fabric of this democracy that has been so critical to our success as a nation, will be in serious jeopardy if he should have a second term?  He has stated that he would go after the Department of Justice and, basically, make it subservient to him in a second term suggesting that the Department would become his personal attorney.  He has given overt indications that he is and has been an admirer of dictators and authoritarian leaders such as Putin.  He has invoked the language of fascist leaders such as Hitler and Mussolini by referring o his opposition as “vermin”.  This is phrase that has been attributed by historians to these individuals.  He seeks retribution and revenge toward anyone who has challenged him or does not agree with him.  He has and continues to demean anyone who is disabled or challenged, mentally or physically.  He has blatantly made generalized statements stating that migrants are criminals and are known rapist, murders and gang members.  He has categorically labeled the Muslim community as an enemy even though many within this community have fought and supported this country.  The list goes on and on, yet people refuse to make any attempt to look at what the reality is of a second term for Trump.  They need to keep in mind that if he is elected there is no turning back and realizing the error of their ways or undoing their decision.  If he becomes president in 2024 we will have a country ruled by an authoritarian person who flaunts democracy and refuses to follow the constitution that undergirds our democratic approach to governing. 

It is interesting that many of those who were aligned with him during his presidency are now stating that he should never be president again.  A recent article in the Washington Post captured the concerns of these individuals and the article goes on to state: “No president has ever attracted more public detractors who were formerly in his inner circle.  They are closely watching his rise … with alarm.  Among them are his former vice president, top military advisers, lawyers, some members of his Cabinet, economic advisors, press officials and campaign aides…”   The reasons for their opposition include the 91 criminal charges against him, the attempt to overturn the 2020 election, the false claims of election fraud, his incendiary rhetoric when he was in office, the desire to weaponize the Justice Department , his chaotic management style, personnel choices in a second term, and his affinity for dictators.  Every president has his detractors who were at one time close to him.  What makes Trump different is the large number of those who were aligned with him that have come out against a second presidency.

Having laid out my concerns, I would only hope that enough sane, reasonable, and well-meaning citizens would consider their decision thoughtfully and completely considering who Trump really is and what he would do.  Are there enough of these folks?   Let’s hope so!