The Trump sex story is a sideshow much less serious than him trying to dissolve our democracy…

They say the spectacle of the current trial of ex-president Donald Trump is not about a sexual escapade but a campaign reporting violation.

Kind of like the impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton were not about sex with an intern. But were.

The public is aroused by such stories (pun intended) but I doubt the lurid tale amounts to more than entertainment (not excusing Trump’s disgusting behavior).

Clinton was not convicted, and the overwhelming public opinion seemed to be his private sex life was not of concern beyond its entertainment value.

Trump’s attitude toward women was made public before he was elected. The infamous Access Hollywood tape had him proclaiming that women were so in awe of him that he could just grab them by their private parts at random and they would not object. Of course, he called it locker room talk, whatever (as if that was excusable for a leader, or somehow innocent). The point is it did not harm him politically.

What a waste of time this current trial seems so far (it ain’t over yet, though). Yes, by some stretch and some legal nuance there might have been a campaign reporting violation in paying off Stormy Daniels so she wouldn’t talk or write about her sex with Trump, which he denies, but in the scheme of things it seems trivial. And she told all anyway, true or false (hint, it’s probably true).

We, the simple lay people without law degrees, are supposed to believe that it was not necessarily a violation if his sole purpose was to hide his actions from his wife, but a felony if at the same time he was trying to hide it from voters.

If politicians faced felony convictions for lying there’d be no politicians. They’d all be in jail.

Trump has several legal actions against him pending concerning alleged felonies. But it’s confused by a mix of state and federal jurisdictions.

(Also, the fact that the current case concerns 34 felony counts can be misleading, in that it just represents one action, the payoff. But it was done in installments.)

But while we’re entertained by the current sex story he’s likely to skip out on that thing about trying to dissolve our democracy.

That Trump attempted to cancel the result of the 2020 presidential election was never a  secret.

Certainly when the whole world witnessed the violent assault on Jan. 6, 2021 of the capitol, occurring just after Trump exhorted the crowd to fight to keep congress from certifying the result, and refused to call in troops to quell the destructive rampage in which police were assaulted and congress members and the vice president and other officials were threatened with death, it was apparent it was all part of his plan. It was an attempted coup d’é·tat.

Subsequently we all know from published reports that the rioters were contacted ahead of time by Trump’s people to show up. We also know his people signed up fake electors to throw the election his way, albeit unsuccessfully.

There’s much more. Sure, it all has to be proved in a court of law. But how hard could that be?

The failure of the U.S. Justice Department to file its case against Trump in an expeditious manner has resulted in a situation that it may indeed never come to trial. The delay has allowed Trump’s lawyers to stall court proceedings so many times the case may never get concluded. If Trump wins re-election he’ll obviously drop the government’s case by ordering what would be his Justice Department to do so.

Finding that Trump violated campaign donation reporting law by paying off a porn star is both questionable legally (just going by comments from many legal observers) and way smaller potatoes than destroying our democracy.

Of course the porn star case is in a state jurisdiction not under the U.S. Justice Department control. That in itself seems subject to appeal: a state taking jurisdiction on a federal matter.

Trump also has managed to stall the other cases against him involving attempted election interference and refusing to return classified documents.

I’m thinking the attempted overthrow of the government, including the violent assault of Jan. 6, is or was the most important one.

I will say, fortunately, our democracy was able to withstand the attacks by Trump.

Trump had his chances in court involving his own charges of election fraud. Several courts, including the Supreme Court with his hand-picked majority, saw no credible evidence presented by Trump.

Trump has made it plain, he’s not planning to let democracy rule if he gets another chance. He’ll do his best to surround himself with sycophants.

Blind leaders do crazy things:

Hitler, Mussolini, Putin, ect.

——————————

Considering the ages of the two main presidential candidates both are vulnerable to incapacitation even before the election.

Even barring that, something suggests to me some as yet unknown factor or event is going to shape this election.

A NEWSPAPER LOSES READERSHIP WHEN IT QUITS OFFERING NEWS…

I realize most modern folks have lost the habit of reading a local daily newspaper, but part of the reason is it is not offered. Yes, technically we have one here in Redding, Ca, but no delivery of a print edition. You have to go online. That’s ok. But, where’s the latest news? Low on local and meaningful content. It’s supposedly daily but the same stories run for days. A chain not dedicated to local journalism owns it. I subscribe. But why? There’s always hope, but a false one maybe.

So, I penned this paragraph of frustration the other day. Today, Sunday, I opened up the digital front page of my so-called hometown newspaper. There was not one local story.

They say: “no news is good news”.

I guess all is well here.

Biden makes statement on campus demonstrations, good, but I don’t think U.S. is bound to Israel at all costs…

In my last post I wrote that President Biden needed to address the American public over the anti Gaza war demonstrations on college campuses. He did (not because of my post, I realize). And he said what should be said:

Protests are part of our free speech protections. It’s what we’re all about. But, violence has no place in this, and is unlawful.

Asked whether all the protests have changed his mind on his solid support for Israel, his curt answer was “no”.

As we know, Biden has called on Israel to agree to a cease fire and not step up its ongoing invasion into Gaza aimed at destroying the Hamas terrorists group which attacked Israel this past Oct. 7. Too many Palestinian civilians are being killed, a large number of them children, and the whole civilian infrastructure of Gaza is systematically being leveled. Meanwhile, even though Biden objects to the overkill, he continues to send weapons and ammo to Israel.

Let’s be honest. Historically the U.S. has supported Israel so it can have a foothold in the Middle East with a friendly democracy. As the late super diplomat Henry Kissinger noted: the Arabs are sitting on a major world oil source. He also said that the intetests of Israel and the U.S. don’t always match.

The contest in his time was between the U.S. and it’s Western allies and the Soviet Union, both sides vying for influence in the Middle East. Today, Russia (the old U.S.S.R) has somewhat taken over as our rival there for regional influence. Iran (Persians, not Arabs, I note) is also a rival (we helped make it so).

The U.S. helped make the creation of Modern Israel possible in 1948, ostensibly to provide a homeland for the much oppressed world Jewish population, who had just suffered some six million deaths in Hitler’s Holocaust.

To do this, Arab and mostly Muslim Palestinians were uprooted. They were promised their own state but have never got one, fully independent.

Now the history is more complex, perhaps, than what I just abbreviated, and the fact seems that neither Jews nor Palestinian Arabs trust one another.

For my personal feeling: fine, Israel is our ally. But we have no formal mutual defense agreement with it, such as we do with European NATO members. We are not obligated to support Israel’s military policy.

The only solution that seems practical is the two-state one (Israel and an independent Palestine), unless Palestinians come under the control or protection of one or more of their Arab neighbors. But the neighbors have all they can do to accommodate their own present populations.

The U.S. by our foreign policy history, respect for the Jewish population, support of democracy, and need for a foothold in the region that is an important oil source and trade route (the Suez Canal), seems predisposed to support Israel. But, it seems better only in a defensive manner.

It is in Israel’s interest to on its own come to peaceful terms with its own Palestinian population and that of Gaza.

As for the terrorists who make up Hamas, Israel and others may find themselves blackmailed into negotiating with them, but eventually, hopefully sooner than later, they need to be brought to justice.

TAKING DOWN OLD GLORY AND REPLACING IT WITH THE PALESTINIAN FLAG IS A STEP TOO FAR…

I personally condemn the tactics being used by the United States ally Israel in Gaza that is resulting in such major destruction and deaths among civilians, a disproportionate amount of them children, but I would not replace the American flag with that being used by Palestinian terrorists.

In one or more incidents among anti-war demonstrators on college campuses in the U.S., this has been done.

Shades of the traitorous or misguided Jane Fonda during the Vietnam War when she may have been duped into appearing in a propaganda film or films for the enemy as U.S. soldiers were under fire.

Protesting against war is one thing, free speech and understandable, giving aid and comfort to an enemy is a different thing, and not a good thing.

The Palestinian people in general are not our enemy, but the terrorist group Hamas, which hides behind the Palestinian civilian population and uses its banner, is an enemy of civilized, free and democratic government.

There is some indication that the current college campus unrest is led or egged on by outside agitators who don’t have America’s best interests in mind.

Whether the current college campus protests over the war in Gaza, which in some cases include anti-Jewish rhetoric, are more from outside agitation, or more organic to a youth movement, it seems this could be a nail in the coffin for President Joe Biden’s re-election campaign.

He needs to address the public.

But what would he say? What could he say?

While claiming to condemn some of Israel’s tactics in Gaza and warning against an invasion of another major city there, Rafah, he stubbornly clings to support of Israel, including munitions that end up killing children, along with older civilians and Hamas fighters.

His re-election opponent, former president Donald Trump, can sit back and condemn without taking a clear stance, other than suggesting Israel hurry up and complete their military mission against Hamas and get out of Gaza, because it makes Israel look bad.

Just to be clear: I realize Israel is reacting to the horrendous Oct. 7 terrorist rampage by Hamas in Israel. But it seems the Israeli Defense Force has been lured into a trap in which it is made in to looking like wanton killers of the innocent and destroyers of homes and infrastructure of Gaza, while the irregular forces of Hamas hide among the population and behind the Palestinian banner.

(Hamas is the official governing entity of Gaza, which is not really a recognized nation, but rather part of what I would call the amorphous territory of Palestine, subjugated by Israel, a nation that rightly constantly fears attacks by a Muslim world that more than once has tried to destroy the modern Jewish state created in 1948.)

And of course all this draws in attacks on Israel by regional Arab and Muslim nationalists, as well as the Persian troublemakers and regional power aspirants and U.S. haters in Iran.

One option for the U.S. might be to call on the non-Israeli players in the region to help the Palestinians form an independent Palestine with something more than lip service. Biden might need to give it straight to Israel: accept a free Palestine or lose U.S. aid.

DOES (did) TRUMP HAVE THE POWER OF THE KING OF COLONIAL TIMES?

IN THE SIMPLISTIC TERMS OF OUR GRADE SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION WE WERE TAUGHT THAT UNLIKE KING GEORGE OF ENGLAND DURING COLONIAL TIMES THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IS NOT ABOVE THE LAW. AND, INDEED, PRESIDENT NIXON WAS TOLD HE WAS NOT ABOVE THE LAW. BUT NOW? THE HIGH COURT IS REVIEWING THE WHOLE MATTER FOR EX-PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP, WHO TO DATE, SEEMS ABOVE THE LAW, AT LEAST THE CRIMINAL PART…WE’LL SEE…

Trump’s tramp trial begins, help for Ukraine, threat of a nuclear Iran…

Some thoughts going into Monday:

— The first trial, of four pending criminal cases, against Donald Trump gets underway: It’s the weakest case against him, but if true, falsifying business records to hide the the alleged paying off a porn star or two to cover up his naughty deeds to hide them from voters (like they didn’t know) shows his sleazy character. The jury is supposedly composed of sophisticated people, including a school teacher who claims she was not aware of the other cases against Trump. Well if our teachers don’t keep up on current events, can we expect our young people to do so?

— An aid bill to help finance more arms to help the Ukranian democracy fight off Russia somehow got through or past the Republican majority of the House and is now headed for passage in the Senate. Helping people who want to be free and fight for their freedom themselves seems worthwhile. It’s too bad Ukraine didn’t get NATO membership before the Russians invaded. And they can’t get it now while a war is in progress, as I understand it. Kind of like buying insurance after the fact.

— I can’t in my brain see the justification of the U.S. continuing to fund what seems like near genocide by Israel in Gaza. And we should know better. In trying to do the right thing this country (America) has been stuck doing the wrong thing a few times over these past six decades.

— Iran continues to be a problem. America inadvertently helped create the problem decades ago, but that’s history. Somehow we need to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power. It may be too late. But that nation’s continuing actions in destabilizing the Middle East gives much pretext to strike it, by Israel or the U.S., or both.

During that golden age of the Cold War, America and the Soviet Union ruled the roost.

Neither had the stomach or bad sense to strike each other. And the Soviets were the only bad actors with nukes we needed to worry about. Well, Communist China with a developing nuclear program to a lesser extent. We now have a developing nuclear threat from North Korea.

It’s so complicated and dangerous now.

Cold War nostalgia.

Do Palestinians realize their true enemy?

I just don’t understand whether the Palestinians in Gaza appreciate that the hell being brought down on their world is the result of this awful and violent power called Hamas.

Israel did not attack without provocation.

Hamas went on a rampage of killing, raping, and kidnapping inside Israel this past Oct. 7.

Then Hamas hides among the civilian populace in Gaza, as much as daring the Israeli defense forces to come and get them, knowing how bad it will look for the Jewish state to kill civilians in the process, which to a considerable extent may be unavoidable. Hamas is so cold and cynical that it seems not to care how many of its purported constituents die in the process.

Israel seems heavy handed and a bit careless in its approach, and yet, save for any possibility civilian deaths are intentional, it’s hard to conceive how else it should respond.

Gaza has a population of approximately 2 million people. Children are suffering injury and death in a disproportionate number compared to usual wars in that they represent nearly half the population.

—–

At least 34,012 Palestinians have been killed and 76,833 wounded in Israeli attacks on Gaza since October 7, its Health Ministry says. The ministry added that 42 people were killed and 63 injured in the latest 24-hour reporting period. (from Al Jazeera, as I write this)

—-

The terrible war in Gaza could stop now if Hamas stopped. Also, if the civilians of Gaza had the will or ability, they might throw Hamas out or at least not support them.

Meanwhile, the U.S. is playing a duplicitous game of objecting to the killing and starvation being inflicted on the Palestinians in Gaza by Israel, and yet aiding and abetting the armed onslaught on Gaza by Israel, with supplies of armaments.

(And, meanwhile, Iran takes advantage by attacking Israel with drones and missiles in the confusion. Israel has struck back. As of this writing it seems a kind of elaborate dance and not all-out war, yet.)

———————

Palestine, broadly speaking, is a nation of sorts, without official status, composed of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, the latter occupied by Israel since the 1967 Arab-Israeli War.

So far, with opposition from The U.S.,  Palestine has been rejected from membership in the United Nations.

In the latest attempt on Thursday:

The U.S. was the only nation in the 15-member U.N. Security Council to vote against the resolution. Twelve—including Russia, China, France, and Japan—voted in favor, while two—the U.K. and Switzerland—abstained. (Time).

I don’t pretend to understand the U.S. official position on Palestine, except the Palestinians never seem to have reputable or cohesive representation, rather competing groups, i.e., Palestinian Liberation Organization, Palestinian Authority, Hamas.

I’m certainly no authority on all this, just a follower of current events. But all I read indicates Hamas is nothing more than a terrorist organization. It’s fair to mention that Zionists employed terrorism in the creation of the current state of Israel prior to 1948. But, whatever, terrorism is not helping the populace of Gaza at this time.

One could say, though, that the current situation has brought Palestinian statehood to the forefront.

There’s got to be a better way for Palestinians.

Middle East: would everyone stop firing now? U.S. should say little but act when necessary…

We are paying a price for not creating an independent Palestine after World War II while facilitating the creation of a modern state of Israel.

The problem is that it seems neither side has been willing to accept the existence of the other. This has resulted in seven decades and more of conflict, alternating between harsh words and terrorism and all-out combat.

Whether it was wise for the U.S. to back the creation of Israel in the first place is a question, but how can it even be questioned that the Palestinians should have been alloted their own land? After all, they were already there, having been under the control in more or less modern times of the Ottoman Empire and then the British for a time. The Jews were mostly newcomers returning to an ancestral homeland after a diaspora and centuries of mistreatment, primarily in Europe, including the Holocaust in Nazi Germany in the 1940s during WWII.

While the United States has continued to support Israel under the auspices of humanitarianism, the support has also been a foreign policy tactic aimed at holding influence in a region of the planet that holds vital oil supplies and serves as a key international trade route.

We continue to supply — read that sell —  arms to Israel. It’s big business. That should speak for itself.

I do not necessarily have a problem with maintaining Israel as an ally, the only democracy in the region. But the devastating attack on Israel by the Hamas terrorists on Oct. 7 that has resulted in a war between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and now a direct attack on Israel by Iran, the first time this meddling nation has made such a direct attack on the Jewish state, preferring previously to use proxies, threatens a wider war in the region.

If the U.S. wants influence, it — we — should influence all parties to cease fire and work out differences diplomatically.

I don’t care for seeing the murderers and rapists of Hamas get a place at the table, but working around that initially is problematic. Palestinians need better representation. Hamas seems to have brought hell fire onto them by instigating the current war in Gaza via its Oct. 7 attack on Israel.

Israel is not without blame with its ill treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank.

From the point of view of the U.S. it would seem best to start all over. We can’t just keep blindly supporting Israel and risk being pulled into a war there.

Iran causes trouble, but we can’t forget we meddled in its affairs when we installed the shah there, who was subsequently ousted by the revolutionary hard-line Islamists.  One can say we started the beef. We had tried to maintain an ally, the shah, against the old Soviet Union in the Cold War.

Somewhat separately I do see the danger of allowing — to the extent we have a choice — Iran to continue to develop a nuclear weapons program.

I had thought that somehow by stealth we had sabotaged the Iranian nuclear weapons program, but now read that they may be close to having nuclear weapons.

If Iran continues to attack Israel, that might prompt Israel to go after its nuclear program sites, something I had thought the U.S. might need to do. So maybe that would be good.

But here is some surprising and good news: Israel was able to shoot down almost all of the incoming missiles launched by Iran over the weekend, thanks not only by support of the U.S. but Arab states in the region.

We have to remember there is ancient rivalry between Arabs and the Persians of what we now call Iran. Part of the rivalry deals with a division among sects within Islam.

But, really a cease fire by all is preferable, followed by negotiations.

It would be a good job for the United Nations to prove its worth.

But such may not be within the realm of reality.

President Biden has now advised Israel not to attack Iran in response to the missile and drone attack on Israel over this past weekend. Iran claimed the attack was in response to Israel killing some Iranian military officers. Biden said the U.S. would in no way back such  response.

No we shouldn’t, but it’s never a good idea to tell the enemy what you will or will not do.

Overall, my view is the United States should say little but react when necessary, and come down hard when necessary.

The old speak softly but carry a big stick policy, often attributed to President Theodore Roosevelt.

(Thought I should add, that Iran telegraphed its weekend attack on Israel in advance and once completed suggested Israel should just accept it as revenge for the killing of Iranian military officers. So strange.)

————–

Palestinian means belonging or relating to the area between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea that used to be called Palestine, or to the Arabs who come from this area…. A Palestinian is someone from Palestine. (Collins Dictionary)

ATTACKING OUR DEMOCRACY WAY MORE SERIOUS THAN PAYING OFF GOOD TIME LADIES — TRUMP SHOULD HAVE BEEN HELD TO ANSWER…

It would seem Donald Trump should be now facing a trial for instigating an insurrection against the U.S. government and trying to subvert an election, not to mention careless and illegal handling of classified material about U.S. defense plans.

But, no. He’s due in court Monday (April15) for a state of New York criminal case over paying off a couple of party girls to keep their traps shut. The case appears to be convoluted, a stretch of the law, and rather weak. It could actually work to Trump’s benefit, making it seem he’s a victim.

But of the several cases against him, this came up first.

Trump should be held to answer for trying to circumvent democracy and trying to throw out an election, and urging on the mob that attacked the capitol.

Authorities have waited way too long to move.

Once again, Trump is making a mockery out of our democracy.

STATISTICAL DISCONNECT? ECONOMY GREAT, OR NO? BIDEN SAFE CHOICE FOR NOW…

NOTE: Someone asked me to look into the positive accomplishments of the Biden administration to counter the criticisms or misplaced blame it gets. That’s a work in progress, the following is not that, but for now, more or less off the top of my head, I offer this:

—-

No wonder it can be hard to believe reports of a robust economy.

First, I read this story from a respected news service published in my local newspaper:

REUTERS

Companies in the United States and Canada have kicked off 2024 with thousands of job cuts across sectors, signaling that the spate of layoffs seen in 2023 could persist as they scramble to rein in costs…

Then this from the New York Times:

U.S. Employers Added 303,000 Jobs in 39th Straight Month of Growth

The March data increased confidence among economists and investors that robust hiring and rising wages can continue to coexist while inflation eases.

—-

Also I have read of several lumber mills closing in my neighboring state of Oregon, wiping out major employment sources for many communities. The culprit is fluctuations in the market and a lower availability of timber, partly due to environmental regulations.

In general, I’m an environmentalist in my heart, but I’m sure my attitude would be affected if I lost my job at the local mill.

Biden is pushing EV vehicles. If I lost a job at the auto plant or I couldn’t drive the dependable transportation I’m used to and can afford, that would affect my attitude.

And my attitude on electric vehicles: we’re moving too fast, putting the vehicle before the battery or power source needed to make it practical to replace fossil fuels.

I believe in funding research, but then letting the market decide the demand.

Am I mixing apples and oranges?

Did I not read that thousands are losing their jobs and at the same time thousands of people are being hired?

Does one cancel out the other? No, I don’t think it works that way, at least not for those losing their jobs.

But while I may be making a false or misleading comparison, I think most of us just take claims of good or poor economies with a grain of salt. It’s what we are feeling and experiencing, and probably in some cases those feelings are influenced by political beliefs that distort the true picture.

Economic statistics are general, not specific to you or me, and they are somewhat or totally artificial measures.

I will say this: Some time after the Great Recession of 2008, maybe as late as into or just prior to ex-president Donald Trump’s time in office, I began to see help wanted signs. They were ubiquitous. As a baby boomer, I had never seen this. I’m saying I entered into the adult civilian work world after a three-year stint in the Army, in 1971. Jobs were hard to come by, especially for anyone without special training entering into the work force.

Oh, but now, when I should be retired, but am not, I read and hear jobs are plentiful. But what are some of these jobs?

They may be part time or low-wage service sector or ones demanding special skills.

Jobs are important but skills and careers more so.

If you count low-wage jobs and part-time positions, jobs figures are somewhat meaningless.

Part of the reported discontent in the populace in what economists call a robust economy is that the cost of housing, groceries, and transportation is so high. If you get a raise, those basics climb too.

My rough calculations tell me that although I make twice as much money now as I did 20 years ago, the cost of living has surpassed that.

The only way out is to be wise with your money. Don’t let me be preachy here, but if you are living paycheck to paycheck, and on the float, just ahead of overdraft charges, figure out why and STOP IT! That’s my advice. Not everyone can, but most could.

This baby boomer remembers home-cooked meals rather than waiting in the drive-through.

Healthcare costs are outrageous and highly inflated by for-profit hospitals and medical corporations who have taken over from the family doctor, and insurance companies.

Unlike other nations the U.S. clings to the profit motive in healthcare, rather than a system that prioritizes patient care.

The high level of skills required and the ever-expanding technology required in modern healthcare don’t fit into a market economy, especially when you figure in common decency and what the law requires, or should, some equity in care among the income or wealth levels in society.

But at least there is Obamacare, employer-funded health plans, and Medicare, and Medicaid.

By most accounts (except from the political opposition and some unhappy folks) the overall economy in the U.S. is going gangbusters and jobs are just waiting for workers to fill them.

But the supposed great economy is spread unevenly and people don’t and can’t just automatically move from one lost job to an opening. And jobs that can’t sustain individuals or families without taxpayer-funded assistance shouldn’t count.

And what does the average voter think? Here’s a random comment from Facebook:

“Biden shanty towns. People have jobs but are homeless, growing daily. Rents are unaffordable, price fixing and gouging, anti-trust violations.”

Strangely, this sounds more like an historical critique of the President Herbert Hoover administration in the early 1930s. Maybe that person is in a time bubble. But that random comment seems to characterize the inexplicable mindset of the populace, at least that which gets so much media attention.

I somehow don’t see the connection of the homeless today (who I think are different than the displaced of the 1930s, that is to why they are homeless) and Biden. I think the Biden administration is much more likely to go after price fixers and trust violators than Trump or any Republican, who tend to prefer the laissez-faire, hands-off-business approach, the slightly different new right-wing populist approach notwithstanding. The new right-wing populists are said to be just as down on big business as some liberals.

Trump, as far as I can tell, has no core belief, other than what seems good for him. He’s actually quite flexible, but in a bad way.

We tend to focus on our personal economy, but America is a superpower somewhat unsure how to navigate in an increasingly restless world. We need steady and sober leadership in tune with the 21st Century, not the 20th. While we may need a choice beyond the aging but sober-minded and rule-of-law respecting Biden and rule-of-law disrespecting Trump, we are not likely to get one. Biden for now is the safe bet.

As alluded to at top, the foregoing does not present any summary or critique of the Biden administration. I’d like to look back and make sense of it all when I can. I’ll try.

But it should be obvious that the only alternative to old Joe Biden we are being offered for president come November is old Trump, a dangerous narcissist, whose main reason for running now seems to be avoiding jail by being elected and shutting down the legal process.

Jan. 6 proved Trump’s willing and able to order anything to recapture and hold power.

Trump is indeed an existential threat to the rule of law, a foundation of democracy.

———-

There is no indication that a third-party or outside candidate has a chance and in fact could only serve as a spoiler who robs either Biden or Trump of a win, more likely Biden.