Thursday

Part One: Manufacturing the Carnage

Donald Trump is an autocratic nightmare wrapped in incompetence, made in the USA 

 

An Intercepted audio documentary series offers a comprehensive analytical history of the Trump presidency. Featuring in-depth examination of Trump’s extreme agenda, the roots of US history and the policies of Trump’s predecessors, the series seeks to analyze the question: is Trump the worst president in US history?  


Donald Trump is often portrayed as an aberration of U.S. history, an outsider who seized power and is intent on destroying democracy as we know it. In the premiere episode of “American Mythology,” we examine the ways that Trump has proven to be a particularly dangerous autocrat who doesn’t believe in any semblance of a democratic process. But that story cannot be told without also exploring how various U.S. systems and the policies of Trump’s predecessors carved the way for many of his most dangerous actions. Featuring interviews with lawmakers, journalists, activists and dissidents, world renowned historians, and constitutional scholars and lawyers on the front lines of scores of battles against the Trump administration, this episode offers an overview of how the Republican Party has embraced Trump as a Trojan horse to ram through its most extreme — and long-standing — policy agendas. It also probes the role of Democratic Party leaders in facilitating some of Trump and the GOP’s most dangerous policies and lays out the stakes of the 2020 presidential election, which Trump is already calling illegitimate.

Jeremy Scahill: This is Intercepted. I’m Jeremy Scahill coming to you from New York City and this is part one of an Intercepted special, “American Mythology: The Presidency of Donald Trump.”

JS: Where does the story of the presidency of Donald Trump begin? 

Shepard Smith: Pennsylvania goes to Donald Trump. Donald Trump is the president of the United States.

Bret Baier: In an Electoral College victory that virtually no one saw coming a year ago, a few months ago.

SS: A week ago.

BB: Even yesterday.

Joe Scarborough: A complete earthquake. This was an earthquake unlike any earthquake I’ve really seen since Ronald Reagan in 1980. It just came out of nowhere. Nobody expected — I mean —

JS: Technically, the Trump presidency began on a dreary, cold day, January 20, 2017, when Trump gave his infamous American Carnage speech in front of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C.

Donald Trump: This American Carnage stops right here and stops right now. 

JS: But the story of this presidency doesn’t begin on that day or even with the 2016 campaign.

DJT: You know you could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever.

DJT: He’s a war hero ’cause he was captured. I like people that weren’t captured, OK? I hate to tell you.

DJT: Uh, I don’t know what I said. Uh, I don’t remember!

DJT: Database is OK. And watch list is OK. And surveillance is OK. If you don’t mind, I want to be — I want to surveil — I want surveillance.

JS: The story does not begin with Trump’s offhand threats to run for president over the decades. 

Rona Barrett: If you lost your fortune today, what would you do tomorrow? 

DJT: Maybe I’d run for president. I don’t know.

DJT: Somebody has to help this country. And if they don’t, the country, and the world, are in big trouble.

Oprah Winfrey: This sounds like political, presidential talk to me. And I know people have talked to you about whether or not you want to run. Would you ever?

Larry King: Donald Trump, the multimillionaire real estate developer is sounding more like a politician these days than America’s most grandiose and controversial builder.

DJT: I just want to tell you —

David Letterman: You act like you’re running for something.

DJT: No.

DL: We’ll do a commercial. We’ll let him think some of these over and try and get…

JS: There is value to exploring the specifics of Donald J. Trump’s personal path to unprecedented power. There is no doubt that his journey to the White House, amidst claims of outside interference and aid, was an extraordinary achievement with far reaching implications. 

John Roberts: I, Donald John Trump, do solemnly swear.

DJT: I, Donald John Trump, do solemnly swear.

JR: That I will faithfully execute.

DJT: That I will faithfully execute.

JR: The office of President of the United States.

JS: Beyond his inflammatory rhetoric, his systematic lying and crude nature, Trump is most relevant to this story because of what he facilitated and the incredible opportunities he gave to some of the most radical right wing forces in U.S. politics, as Naomi Klein predicted in the early days of his administration. 

Naomi Klein: I think here’s a worrying message of kind of like, it’s so outrageous. The hypocrisies are so intense that obviously people are going to see this. You know, Trump ran as champion of the working man, and he’s going to stand up to the corruption and billionaires in Washington. And then just fills, you know, his administration with them. And there’s — like some people seem to be expecting that there’s going to be sort of a spontaneous revolt of Trump’s base. And what scares me is that as the economic facade falls away, the racism, the sort of weaponizing of race, and the weaponizing of gender becomes all the more important because that’s all they have to offer. The economic stuff was obviously a sham. But they’re going to feed that to their base to make sure they don’t lose them. What we need to understand is how misogyny and racism are used to advance this agenda.

Protesters: This is what a feminist looks like.

Lead protester: Tell me what a feminist looks like!

Protesters: This is what a feminist looks like.

JS: The policies the administration began fast tracking from the first moments in power had long been high on the wish list of the leaders of the Republican Party, and Trump — more than any of his predecessors — dared to shout the quiet parts out loud, broadcast them on Twitter, and proudly embrace them at virtually every opportunity. Princeton University professor Eddie Glaude Jr.:

Eddie Glaude Jr.: Think of this moment as the decline of the empire, that something is dying while something is trying to be born. Donald Trump represents an exaggerated version of the rot that’s at the heart of the country, that he’s a reflection of something that’s here. In some ways, all of the contradictions of a particular economic order, of the kind of exploitation of white fear, combined with a deepening sense of precarity made Trump possible.

JS: In assessing the Trump presidency, there are two significant tracks we will explore. First: The ways in which Trump is, in fact, a particularly dangerous autocrat who doesn’t believe in any semblance of a democratic process. And second: The ways in which various U.S. systems and the policies of Trump’s predecessors carved the way for many of his most dangerous actions. 

NYU Professor Nikhil Pal Singh argued early on in Trump’s presidency that understanding these dynamics was essential to confronting what was to come.

Nikhil Pal Singh: But the idea that sort of we somehow just kind of flipped a switch and got Trump in this kind of weird way that doesn’t try to think about a longer story that takes us through some of the failure of reckoning of the Obama years, and, of course, the pathway that the Iraq war put the country on. And even before the Iraq war, the pathway that the Clinton-era mass incarceration project put us on, you know, I think makes it really difficult for us to make sense of what’s happening right now and to make sense of the forces that Trump has been able to mobilize.

JS: You cannot separate the past from the present. How Trump is specifically dangerous is, in significant ways, a direct product of the system and nation that produced him. History and context matter. As journalist and writer Chris Hedges pointed out, Trump did not come as a surprise apparition in the night. 

Chris Hedges: We’ve personalized the problem in Trump without realizing that Trump is the product of a failed democracy. Trump is what rises up from the bowels of a decayed and degenerate system. And you can get rid of Trump, but you’re not going to get rid of what the sociologist Émile Durkheim called that “anomie” that propels societies to engage in deeply self-destructive behavior.

JS: Upon taking office, the Trump administration immediately dispensed with any great effort to make serious legal or moral arguments when issuing policy edicts. It was clear that Trump and his team intended to assert sweeping executive powers while at the same time ferociously subverting Congressional oversight. Not just on national security matters, but in virtually every tangible way. Employing this strategy, Trump has proven remarkably effective at ramming through an extremist agenda–one that had been developed for generations by powerful factions within the Republican party. 

Mitch McConnell: What we need is a president who, after getting sworn into the office, sworn in, goes into the Oval Office and starts undoing as many of these executive orders and regulations as he possibly can as rapidly as you can, thereby taking the foot off the break and putting it on the accelerator. That’s what the country needs.

JS: Yet, from the beginning of Trump’s presidential run, many establishment Republicans laughed at him, denounced him, and failed to take his prospects for winning the nomination of their party seriously.

Lindsey Graham: Well, I want to talk to the Trump supporters for a minute. I don’t know who you are, and I don’t know why you like this guy. I think what you like about him, he appears to be strong when the rest of us are weak. He’s a very successful business man and he’s going to make everything great. He’s going to take all the problems of the world and put them in a box and make your life better. That’s what he’s selling. Here’s what you’re buying. He’s a race baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot. He doesn’t represent my party. He’s the ISIL man of the year, by the way.

JS: Trump defeated the establishment elite of the Republican Party, from the dynasty candidate Jeb Bush, to popular Republican governors and senators.

DJT: The RNC told us we have all donors in the audience and the reason they’re not loving me — [audience boos.] The reason they’re not — Excuse me. The reason they’re not loving me is I don’t want their money. I’m going to do the right thing for the American public. I don’t want their money. I don’t need their money. And I’m the only one up here that can say that. Eminent domain, the keystone policy —

Allan Nairn: Trump was constantly denouncing the rigging of the system. His basic message was the system’s rigged. Our system is a killer system and it’s corrupt. All of which is true, except the rigging took place in the opposite direction, which he portrayed. But it’s uncomfortable for the establishment types to hear that, especially coming out of the mouth of their own candidate.

JS: Journalist Allan Nairn pointed out that Trump almost had to force the institutional Republican Party to recognize the incredible gift he would be giving them by seizing power.

AN: Trump dragged a rightist revolution into power. It’s the Paul Ryan agenda which could never have gotten elected in its own right because it’s anathema to most Americans. But Trump, with his genius for unleashing the beast in white America, touching these deep chords of racism, succeeded in turning a crucial number of previous white Obama voters into Trump voters, and this is a Republican Party that is one of the most radical mainstream political parties in all of American history, perhaps with the exception of the, you know, pro-secessionist Democrats at the time of the Civil War. 

And they’ve been in there, they’ve been implementing a rightist revolution, doing the massive transfer of wealth in part via the tax bill, but also an important part by systematically, agency by agency, trying to gut the constraints on large corporations and the oligarchs, regarding the environment, their treatment of labor, their ability to discriminate, their ability to commit fraud without fear of being sued by the public, increasing the rights of rich individuals to intervene in politics, decreasing the rights of collectives of working people to intervene in politics, like the Gorsuch-led Supreme Court decision. And, now, as the Republican Party has evolved to the most radical extreme, they happen to have control of Congress and the Supreme Court. 

And they’ve been going around rigging the system so that a diminishing minority can hold power and continue to govern, just as Trump was elected with a minority of the votes, they’re trying to set it up so that through a long list of tactics, including purging of voter rolls, voter suppression shortly before Election Day, gerrymandering, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, smaller and smaller numbers of people can win elections and retain power.

JS: It is probable that none of the GOP’s preferred or even more establishment candidates could have beaten Hillary Clinton in 2016. Clinton won the popular vote by three million ballots and narrowly lost a handful of states tipping the Electoral College in Trump’s favor. So sure were Democrats, media pundits — and even top Clinton campaign operatives — of Clinton’s victory that many laughed at the idea Trump could win, and only a few took the idea seriously.

Keith Ellison: All I want to say is that anybody from the Democratic side of the fence who thinks that — who is terrified of the possibility of President Trump better vote, better get active, better get involved because this man has got some momentum. And we better be ready for the fact that he might be leading the Republican ticket.

George Stephanopoulos: I know you don’t believe that, but I want to go on —

Maggie Haberman: Sorry to laugh.

KE: You know, George, we had Jesse Ventura in Minnesota win the governorship. Nobody thought he was going to win. I’m telling you, stranger things has happened. 

JS: For the Republican power brokers, Trump was a messiah that they chided and scorned when he first appeared.

Ted Cruz: Donald Trump alleges that my dad was involved in assassinating JFK. Now, let’s be clear. This is nuts. This man is a pathological liar. He doesn’t know the difference between truth and lies. He lies practically every word that comes out of his mouth. Everything in Donald’s world is about Donald. But the man is utterly amoral. 

JS: Now most Republicans, including not so few who once laughed at him, prostrate themselves before him every minute of every day.

TC: I like Donald Trump. I think he’s terrific. I think he’s brash. I think he speaks the truth. He has a way of speaking that gets attention and I credit him for focusing on an issue that needs to be focused on. I’m not interested in Republican on Republican —

JS: It didn’t take long for the GOP to pivot to Trump. And from the beginning, he has functioned as a fixer for the most corrupt, extreme, and dangerous forces in U.S. society while personally profiting off of the presidency. Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a scholar on authoritarianism, described this dynamic.

Ruth Ben-Ghiat: One thing I find interesting, which recurs in the past, is Trump this charismatic figure. And they come along every so often. You’ve mentioned some of them. And they seem to coalesce the kind of anxieties and frustrations of a given historical moment, but the conservative elites — in this case, GOP — back them and not other people, because they believe that they can use them as a vehicle to do the things they’ve been wanting to do for a long time — the racists, the voter suppression, all the things that the GOP has been trying to activate and was very frustrated it couldn’t do under Obama, right? This is a kind of mutual using of the authoritarian and his backers, right? And so, many of the repressive, authoritarian-minded things going on, right now, are being introduced by the GOP.

JS: The most devastating dimension of Trump’s time in office, on a policy level, is how the Republican establishment utilized Trump as a Trojan horse for its extreme agenda. Like many of his buildings around the world, Trump did not create the agenda, but his name is emblazoned everywhere. This Trump-branded GOP quickly became a clearing house for realizing the wildest dreams of the right-wing hitmen in Washington. 

Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor: People ask me all the time, “Trump is such an embarrassment. Why do the Republicans put up with this?” 

JS: Princeton University scholar Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor:

KYT: If you look beyond the chaos that is generated from his Twitter account, it’s easy to see why the Republicans put up with this. Whether it’s the historic tax cut, the rapid and utterly frightening transformation of the judiciary, the tinkering with the machinery of the state is creating the kinds of changes that will far exceed the tenure of the Trump Administration. We’re witnessing a virtual coup within the confines of the Supreme Court in the ultimate validation of the strategy of dealing with the chaos, the lack of civility, the inattention to political norms, all of the things that people have said that this administration represents while missing what is actually happening under the hood.

JS: Trump has had his signature moments, often through edicts or executive orders, but much of his agenda has been outsourced to craftier and more sophisticated lobbyists, special interest groups and lawmakers. And the president has often been content to serve as the carnival barker for the masses obsessively checking his ratings and Twitter feed in between golf outings and watching the FOX News morning and evening lineups. While Trump overtly appeared incompetent and boorish, consumer advocate and former independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader warned that it was a mistake to underestimate the combination of Trump’s strengths working in concert with the radical GOP agenda.

Ralph Nader: People who think Trump is stupid may be right in terms of his understanding reality and history and the things that we would like presidents to be alert and smart about, but when it comes to street smarts and timing and the jugular? You can’t find anybody more proficient.

JS: It is difficult to overstate what has been accomplished during this presidency. The consequences of the sweeping re-molding of the federal courts with hundreds of lifetime appointments and the extreme right-wing stacking of the U.S. Supreme Court under Trump will reverberate for generations to come. 

Mitch McConnell: And working together we’re changing the federal courts forever! Nobody’s done more to change the court system in the history of our country than Donald Trump. And Mr. President, we’re going to keep on doing it. My motto is leave no vacancy behind.

JS: It will also place crucial human rights in the crosshairs and potentially play a decisive role in what Trump is virtually declaring will be an attempted theft of a presidential election.

DJT: This scam that the Democrats are pulling — it’s a scam. The scam will be before the United States Supreme Court and I think having a four-four situation is not a good situation if you get that. I don’t know that you get that. I think it should be eight-nothing or nine-nothing. But just in case it would be more political than it should be, I think it’s very important to have a ninth justice.

JS: At this moment, the most lethal aspect of Trump’s presidency has been his colossal mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

DJT: Now the virus that we’re talking about having to do — you know a lot of people think that goes away in April, with the heat. It’s going to disappear. One day, it’s like a miracle, it will disappear. It will go away. You know, you know it is going away. I think that at some point that’s going to sort of just disappear, I hope.

JS: Beyond the mounting COVID death toll, what Trump did in these four years in power will inflict incalculable damage on tens of millions of people across the U.S. Trump’s administration has attacked workers’ rights, women’s rights, immigrant rights, civil liberties and freedom of speech. He has proudly waged war on the climate and often waxed on about how proud he is of increasing the use of the most destructive sources of fuel, production, and energy.

Wade Crowfoot: If we ignore that science and sort of put out head in the sand and think it’s all about vegetation management, we’re not going to succeed together protecting Californians.

DJT: OK. It’ll start getting cooler. You just watch.

WC: I wish science agreed with you.

DJT: Well, I don’t think science knows, actually. Tom, please —

JS: Trump’s financial policies and tax cuts have showered money and profits on powerful corporate interests and the wealthy, while the already abysmal U.S. healthcare system has been further gutted and simultaneously oiled up for record profits, while millions suffer from inadequate or no health coverage and massive health-related debt. In an interview in 2018 on Intercepted, famed dissident and linguist Noam Chomsky highlighted Trump’s ability to simultaneously please radical factions within the GOP and corporations while convincing his voter base that he’s their protector from the elites.

Noam Chomsky: On the domestic scene, Trump is very effectively managing both of his constituencies. There’s an authentic constituency of corporate power and private wealth and they’re being served magnificently by the executive orders, legislative programs that are being pushed through which represent the more savage wing of the traditional Republican policies — catering to private interests, private wealth, and dismissing the rest as irrelevant and easily disposed of.

At the same time, he’s managing to maintain the voting constituency by pretending, very effectively, to be the one person in the world who stands up for them against the hated elites. And this is quite an impressive con job. How long he can carry it off, I don’t know.

JS: Rutgers University professor and journalist Juan Gonzalez said that Trump had kindled a movement that was already developing within the country before his election.

Juan Gonzalez: I look at Trump as one of the biggest small businessmen in America. Because the right-wing populism always comes out of the small business community. It doesn’t come out of the globalized public corporations that understand that they need a world in which trade and goods are flowing freely without barriers.

And Trump as a protectionist represents the small business groups within the society, but except that he is a billionaire small businessman really. He was always an outcast among the capitalist class of the United States. In that sense, though, he’s tapped into the tremendous insecurity that exists among the great sectors of the American population over the impact of unfettered globalism on their lives.

So, he has wracked his form of populism and his “America first” policies, and in that sense, he’s been able to use patriotism as a way to further ensnare some sectors of the not only small business people who are obviously benefiting tremendously through his policies, but also the more well-to-do sectors of the American working class. Because there has always been a sector of the American working class that benefits from the existence of the imperial power of the country. So they have rallied to his call.

JS: But on a raw level, it is clear that a significant sector of Trump’s base was inspired by the nativist rhetoric and causes that Trump claimed to be championing, replete with all the greatest hits from locking up Hillary Clinton to the birther conspiracy to old fashioned racism. He offered a prognosis that saw America as a place that the undocumented immigrants, the Muslims, the liberals, the Black people have all ruined. Trump promised them he would end all of that and “Make America Great Again.”

DJT: The number of new illegal immigrant families who have crossed the border so far this year already exceeds the entire total from 2015. They are being released by the tens of thousands into our communities with no regard for the impact on public safety or resources.

Audience: Build the wall! Build the wall!

JS: On the campaign trail, even before becoming president, Trump used his substantial platform to embolden and encourage racists and xenophobes, while encouraging police and military forces to act extrajudicially. 

DJT: In the good old days, this doesn’t happen because they used to treat them very, very rough. And when they protested once, you know, they would not do it again so easily. In the old days, they didn’t come back. I can tell you that. They were gone. They were taken out. They were gone.

DJT: And they — I don’t know, rough up — he should have been, maybe he should have been roughed up. 

DJT: I don’t know if I’ll do the fighting myself or if other people will. 

DJT: We’re not allowed to punch back anymore. I love the old days. You know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this? They’d be carried out on a stretcher, folks.

DJT: Knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. Ok. Just knock the hell — I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees, I promise. I promise.

DJT: I said, “Please don’t be too nice.” Like when you guys put somebody in the car and you’re protecting their head, the way you put their hand over? Like, don’t hit their head, and they’ve just killed somebody. Don’t hit their head. I said you can take the hand away, OK? 

JS: Yale historian and fascism scholar Jason Stanley said Trump’s embrace of the police and “law enforcement” as a class, while also cultivating support among militia-type groups, is a common tactic in authoritarian political movements.

Jason Stanley: The fascist state’s refusal to condemn the extrajudicial violence has a particular linguistic role because the state licenses it by not explicitly condemning it. But at the same time, the state uses its extrajudicial nature to say, “Look, we’re not the extremists. Look, you can see the extremists — they’re out there.”

It’s important to the white nationalist movement to have the people in ties and suits in government. And they need the extrajudicial violence on the street to say, “That’s not us. Look, just look at how we’re dressed versus how they’re dressed.” But you can tell the links between them, not just because of the clear overlap in language — minus a few words. Instead of white nationalist, you just use nationalist.

Instead of adding Jew to globalist, instead of saying, you know, “It’s the Jews that control the press. It’s the Jews that are behind lax immigration laws,” you say it’s the globalists. And then you don’t denounce the extrajudicial violence. You know, you denounce it in certain extreme cases where you just have to, but you leave it crucially ambiguous at times. And then that has this licensing effect.

JS: Trump’s administration has taken a chainsaw to the very concept of rule of law. Under Jeff Sessions, and more so under William Barr, the Justice Department has simultaneously served as Trump’s private law firm and has been wielded as a judicial howitzer whose fire is aimed at weakening and ultimately destroying the notion of checks and balances that are at the core of constitutional democracy. This is how Rep. Barbara Lee described the threats when I spoke to her just days into Trump’s administration:

Barbara Lee: I’m very terrified with regard to what we see taking place. And the signs are there. When you talk about shutting down the media, putting out their alternative facts, banning dissent and opposition, criticizing people who are exercising their First Amendment rights; trying to get people to believe, really, the distortions that they’re putting out there. That, to me, is very scary. It’s very dangerous. And you see also the corporate and military consolidation of the public sector. You see efforts to privatize schools. When you just look at the nominees, you see very few people with experience in the public sector. And so when you have the corporate sector merging with the military sectors, and when you have cabinet officials who have historically said they want to dismantle the cabinets and the agencies that they’re running, that I’m very terrified that we are beginning to see an erosion of our democratic values and an erosion of the public sector.

DJT: I’m going to continue to attack the press. Look, I find the press to be extremely dishonest. I find the political press to be unbelievably dishonest. I will say that. OK, thank you all very much.

JS: Donald Trump’s war against journalism began on the 2016 campaign trail, as he railed against fake news and sought to stir up anger and potentially violence aimed at journalists. 

DJT: A lot of these guys — look at all the cameras back there. A lot of the people back there are totally dishonest people. Probably libelist stories, or certainly close. In the newspapers, and the people know the stories are false. 

DJT: The media, totally, totally, totally dishonest. But they don’t do that because these newspapers and the media are totally dishonest people, folks. Remember that. Totally dishonest.

DJT: They too are part of a rigged system. The media is totally dishonest. They’re a rigged system trying to deny people the positive change that they’re looking for and they deserve.

DJT: Such lies. Such lies. Such fabrication. Such made-up stories. Now the Times is going out of business pretty soon, that’s the good news. But such made-up stories. Such vicious, made-up stories. 

DJT: I would never kill them. But I do hate them. Some of them are such lying, disgusting people. It’s true. It’s true.

JS: Trump’s rhetoric was a dangerous escalation. At the same time, there was a tendency in media coverage of these attacks on the press, to ignore the records of Trump’s predecessors.

James Risen: The Obama administration was by far the most anti-press administration we’ve had since at least Nixon. They — as you know, they conducted more leak investigations and did more leak prosecutions — more than all the previous administrations combined. And they targeted journalists in ways that no other administration ever has.

JS: Pulitzer Prize winning journalist James Risen fought a multi-year battle with the Bush and Obama Justice Departments as they sought to force him to testify against an alleged source. As Risen predicted, Trump would soon do his own weaponizing of the Espionage Act and prosecute leakers and whistleblowers with a vengeance.

JR: What Obama did makes it much easier for Trump to do what he wants on leaks. They have created an environment and have left it for Trump that makes it very easy to subpoena a reporter and then force him to testify. The only alternative right now is for a reporter to go to jail to protect their sources. When the Democrats are in power, they hate leaks; when the Republicans are in power, they hate leaks. I think Trump has just taken that language to new heights.

DJT: It’s so important to the public to get an honest press. The press — the public doesn’t believe you people anymore. Now maybe I had something to do with that, I don’t know.

JS: On questions of war and national security, Trump has often spoken in contradictory directions: On the one hand, he lambasted the Iraq war and the unending nature of the so-called war on terror. 

DJT: The Iraq war was a disaster. It was a mistake. We spent $2 trillion, thousands of lives, thousands of lives, wounded warriors who we love all over the place. What do we have? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Iran is taking over Iraq as sure as you’re sitting there, and that’s the way it is. We get nothing.

JS: On the other, Trump vowed to bring back torture, murder the families of suspected terrorists, steal natural resources and to ignore international law.

DJT: Bomb the oil, take the oil. Bomb the oil, take the oil. Just take it, right?

DJT: We should have kept the oil. Keep the oil. Keep the oil. Keep the oil. Don’t let somebody else get it.

JS: When he took power, Trump had inherited a multi-decade, at times bipartisan, campaign to undermine Congressional oversight of the executive branch while expanding the unilateral powers of the presidency. This was one of the major career missions of people like Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and Henry Kissinger. It is also true for the current attorney general, William Barr. They are extremist disciples of the theory of the unitary executive. 

Charlie Savage: Out of those notions of a presidency that’s beyond the reach of Congress to regulate come things like the torture program, like the warrantless wiretapping program.

JS: Charlie Savage reports on executive power for the New York Times. 

CS: And not just the notion that these steps were necessary as a matter of policy to deal with the threat that became apparent on 9/11, but how they chose to put those policies into place, which is to say in secret without going to Congress to ask them to change the law to make torture legal, to make warrantless wiretapping legal. But to just say the president, as commander-in-chief and head of the unitary executive, is not bound by laws that prohibit things like that and he can just secretly ignore them.

JS: Building on the programs of his predecessors, Trump soon gave the U.S. military and CIA expanded and secretive lethal authorities across the globe, while loosening or removing the minimal restraints that existed over such forces, including in the killing of civilians. And he placed at the helm of the CIA Gina Haspel, a key player in the CIA’s secret black site torture program.

Kamala Harris: Do you believe that the previous interrogation techniques were immoral?

Gina Haspel: Senator, I believe that CIA officers to whom you refer —

KH: It’s a yes or no answer. Do you believe the previous interrogation techniques were immoral? I’m not asking: Do you believe they were legal? I’m asking: Do you believe they were immoral?

GH: Senator, I believe that CIA did extraordinary work to prevent another attack on this country given the legal tools that we were authorizing.

KH: Please answer “yes” or “no.” Do you believe in hindsight that those techniques were immoral?

GH: Senator, what I believe sitting here today is that I support the higher moral standard we have decided to hold ourselves to.

KH: Can you please answer the question?

GH: Senator, I think I’ve answered the question.

KH: No, you’ve not. Do you believe the previous techniques, now armed with hindsight, do you believe they were immoral? Yes, or no?

GH: Senator, I believe that we should hold ourselves to the moral standard outlined in the Army Field Manual.

KH: OK. So, I understand that you — you’ve not answered the question, but I’m going to move on.

JS: Donald Trump largely telegraphed the type of autocratic and corrupt administration that he intended to run. No one who watched his endlessly televised campaign speeches could claim to be taken by surprise. 

Amy Goodman: And then you have the media part of this right, where you have the unending Trump TV? Not the new Trump TV but all the networks Trump TV when it came to Donald Trump they showed more footage of his empty podium waiting for him to speak than they ever played of the words —

JS: In assessing Trump’s impact and path to power, it is also important to look at the nature of political opposition to his candidacy and, ultimately, his administration. And for the institutional elite of the Democratic Party, that picture does not look good. 

Nancy Pelosi: One of my prayers is that the Republicans will take back their party. The country needs a strong Republican Party. It’s done so much for our country. And to have it be hijacked as a cult at this time is really a sad thing.

JS: Democrats have voted to give Trump sweeping powers of war and surveillance while simultaneously calling Trump the most dangerous president in history, accusing him of being a Russian asset and claiming he is destroying democracy as we know it. They have repeatedly engaged in performative resistance to Trump on cable news.

Chuck Schumer: What could possibly cause President Trump to put the interests of Russia over those of the United States. Millions of Americans will continue to wonder if the only possible explanation for this dangerous behavior is the possibility that President Putin holds damaging information over President Trump.

JS: For most of Trump’s time in office, Democrats prioritized the Trump-Russia investigation over almost all else. And the New Yorker journalist Masha Gessen consistently warned that this strategy was distracting from other dangers and would likely backfire. 

Masha Gessen: My basic problem with the Russia conspiracy theory remains the same, which is that it’s like the one size fits all theory that tells us how we got Trump, which is that he’s a Russian agent, and that gets us out of the really frightening and complicated task of understanding how Americans voted for Trump, right? And it also creates this idea of how we’re gonna get rid of Trump, which is that magically — again and I keep using the word “magically” quite consciously because there is no straight line from any amount of Russia revelations to an impeachment. Not to mention that there’s no straight line from impeachment to actually getting rid of Trump. But magically, people believe that if the Russia collusion or the Russia conspiracy is proven, then that will somehow get rid of Trump, and the national nightmare will be over.

JS: The Democratic-controlled House of Representatives under Nancy Pelosi ultimately did impeach Donald Trump. But only on a narrow set of charges related to Ukraine. Her tenure as Speaker of the House under Trump ultimately led Shahid Buttar, a progressive constitutional law advocate and attorney, to challenge her for her Congressional seat.

Shahid Buttar: Nancy Pelosi affirmatively took off the table all of the strongest charges against the president. The impeachment absolutely did not address his human rights abuses, or his incitements to violence, or his lies to the public and policy makers; or his documented, unprecedented corruption, and theft from the American people — his self-enrichment at public expense. It is constitutionally prohibited and the reason Nancy Pelosi, I think, did not allow that charge to proceed is that it is a bipartisan offense.

JS: Ralph Nader is widely and often blamed by Democrats for George W. Bush’s victory in 2000. The same happened with Green Party Candidate Jill Stein in 2016. Nader, who has emerged as a tenacious critic of Trump, argues that the Democrats must also be held responsible for Trump’s ascent.

Ralph Nader: And the Democratic Party could not landslide the worst Republican Party in history since 1854? The most ignorant, the most corporate indentured, the most warlike, the most corporate welfare supportive, the most bailout-prone Republican Party, anti-worker, anti-consumer, anti-environment? Why don’t they look in the mirror? The Democratic Party is the main scapegoater in American politics. It’s never their fault. It’s never Hillary’s fault. It’s always a Green Party fault. It’s always an independent candidate fault. They’ve lost two presidential elections since 2000, even though they won the popular vote, because the Electoral College took it away from them. There’s a major national citizen effort to have an interstate compact to neutralize the Electoral College.

The Democratic Party is not supporting of that. The Democratic Party doesn’t want to get rid of the Electoral College. They’ve lost twice to the Republicans. And that meant George W. Bush, and that meant Donald J. Trump.

So this scapegoating is nothing more than a sickness of the Democratic Party that cannot unleash new energy. It’s a sick, decrepit party that cannot defend the United States of America against the worst Republican Party in history.

JS: It is easy, and these days accepted as common sense, to view Trump as an aberration of U.S. history. An uninvited guest who somehow cheated everyone to take power from the real adults. But it’s a mistake to divorce the ascent of Trump and the policies of his administration from the corporate dominated electoral process in the U.S. and the myths of American exceptionalism. Here is Pulitzer Prize winning historian Greg Grandin.

Greg Grandin: Well, in the history of U.S. administrations, he is exceptional. And that’s one of the things that I was also trying to get at: The argument that Donald Trump either revealed a deep racism, a deep settler colonial barbarism, or he represented something completely unique and exceptional to the United States. He is unique in the sense that he is presiding over the end of the frontier, the end of expansion, the end of the invocation of endless growth as a solution for domestic problems. I would say there is no other example that is equitable, that is comparable. A lot of people like to talk about Andrew Jackson —

DJT: Had Andrew Jackson been a little bit later, you wouldn’t have had the Civil War. He was — he was a very tough person, but he had a big heart, and he was really angry that — he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War, he said, there’s no reason for this. People don’t realize, you know, the Civil War. Think about it. Why? People don’t ask that question. But why was there the Civil War? Why could, why could that one not have been worked out?

GG: Trump talks about Jackson as his favorite politician, and certainly Trump represents a settler colonial racism. By that I mean an embrace or trumpeting of the notion of freedom as freedom from restraint. But Trump is presiding over a country turned inward. Andrew Jackson came to power as the United States was moving out into the world, and that moving out into the world took place on the back of Indian removal, the expansion of chattel slavery, war with Spain and Mexico, and an enormous amount of violence. Trump is presiding over, in some ways, the end of the project. 

Trump, in some ways, is the worst of both worlds, right? He represents the racism of settler colonialism in its most extreme form. At the same time, he rejects out of hand because of the political coalition that he represents, any kind of public policy that might lead to a more solidaristic and humane policy options. So we have a really kind of a perfect storm of some of the worst trend lines in U.S. history.

JS: If we are being honest — and we must be — this presidency has its roots in the unvarnished story of the United States empire. It is, in fact, the product of that history.

As election day draws near, Trump has taken his attacks on the democratic process to unprecedented levels. He’s already calling the election results a fraud. He’s waging a voter disenfranchisement campaign and is openly encouraging violence from neo-Nazi and white supremacist paramilitaries and official law enforcement alike. 

DJT: Do you want to call them — what do you want to call them? Give me a name. Give me a name.

Chris Wallace: White supremacist —

Joe Biden: Proud Boys. 

DJT: Proud Boys, stand back and stand by. But I’ll tell you what. I’ll tell you what. Somebody’s got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem.

DJT: Antifa is a domestic terrorist organization. I proudly received the endorsement of the Fraternal Order of Police, the National Association of Police Organizations, the National Troopers Coalition, the International Union of Police Associations, and law enforcement organizations and departments in Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Colorado, Arizona, Nevada —

JS: Donald Trump has openly threatened to remain in office even if he loses the election. He refuses to guarantee a peaceful transition and has suggested he might even serve a third term.

DJT: And we’re going to win four more years in the White House. And then after that we’ll negotiate, right? Cause we’re probably, based on the way we were treated, we’re probably entitled to another four after that.

JS: The dire threats to the democratic process were not invented by Trump or merely the results of Russian interference. As constitutional law expert Shahid Buttar said, the groundwork for this had been laid over many years.

SB: The near-term consequence of a president refusing to leave the White House, he can steer the rest of the events to support that narrative, even if there isn’t a legal basis for him to stay in office. Another way to say this is that the coup undermining the legitimacy of our elections happened a long time ago. You don’t need a computer to hack an election. You don’t need a Russian state intelligence agency to hack an election. You can hack an election when a right-wing Supreme Court invites right-wing state legislatures around the country to start attacking voting rights and that happened years ago. In 2013, the Supreme Court struck down the crucial enforcement provisions of the Voting Rights Act, which were its teeth before. And in the wake of that measure being struck down, it basically opened a floodgate by right-wing state legislatures to restrict voting rights and undermine democracy and the opportunities for their constituents to participate in elections.

DJT: In 78 days we’re going to stop the radical left. We’re going to win the state of Wisconsin. And we’re going to win four more years. And then after that we’ll go for another four years because, you know what, they spied on my campaign. We should get a re-do of four years.

DJT: And after we win four more years, we’ll ask for maybe another four or so. You know, whenever I say that, I watch — look at all that news back there. Look at all that fake news. When I say that their heads explode. 

JS: The threats posed by this history and Trump’s presidency cannot be overstated. It is a truly perilous situation that Trump is presiding over. We have produced this series in an effort to examine how we got here and to aid the effort to ensure that it never happens again.

This has been part one of an Intercepted limited documentary series, American Mythology: The Presidency of Donald Trump. Over the next week we will be releasing an episode each weekday focusing on a different aspect of the Trump presidency and digging into the history and context of the actions of this administration. Make sure to tune in tomorrow to part two of this series where we’ll be taking an in-depth look at Donald Trump’s policies on immigration.

Tuesday

Michelle Obama speech at the Democratic Convention | Joe Biden For President 2020


 
Good evening, everyone. It's a hard time, and everyone's feeling it in different ways. And I know a lot of folks are reluctant to tune into a political convention right now or to politics in general. Believe me, I get that. But I am here tonight because I love this country with all my heart, and it pains me to see so many people hurting.
I've met so many of you. I've heard your stories. And through you, I have seen this country's promise. And thanks to so many who came before me, thanks to their toil and sweat and blood, I've been able to live that promise myself.
That's the story of America. All those folks who sacrificed and overcame so much in their own times because they wanted something more, something better for their kids.
There's a lot of beauty in that story. There's a lot of pain in it, too, a lot of struggle and injustice and work left to do. And who we choose as our president in this election will determine whether or not we honor that struggle and chip away at that injustice and keep alive the very possibility of finishing that work.
I am one of a handful of people living today who have seen firsthand the immense weight and awesome power of the presidency. And let me once again tell you this: the job is hard. It requires clear-headed judgment, a mastery of complex and competing issues, a devotion to facts and history, a moral compass, and an ability to listen—and an abiding belief that each of the 330,000,000 lives in this country has meaning and worth.
A president's words have the power to move markets. They can start wars or broker peace. They can summon our better angels or awaken our worst instincts. You simply cannot fake your way through this job.
As I've said before, being president doesn't change who you are; it reveals who you are. Well, a presidential election can reveal who we are, too. And four years ago, too many people chose to believe that their votes didn't matter. Maybe they were fed up. Maybe they thought the outcome wouldn't be close. Maybe the barriers felt too steep. Whatever the reason, in the end, those choices sent someone to the Oval Office who lost the national popular vote by nearly 3,000,000 votes.
In one of the states that determined the outcome, the winning margin averaged out to just two votes per precinct—two votes. And we've all been living with the consequences.
When my husband left office with Joe Biden at his side, we had a record-breaking stretch of job creation. We'd secured the right to health care for 20,000,000 people. We were respected around the world, rallying our allies to confront climate change. And our leaders had worked hand-in-hand with scientists to help prevent an Ebola outbreak from becoming a global pandemic.
Four years later, the state of this nation is very different. More than 150,000 people have died, and our economy is in shambles because of a virus that this president downplayed for too long. It has left millions of people jobless. Too many have lost their health care; too many are struggling to take care of basic necessities like food and rent; too many communities have been left in the lurch to grapple with whether and how to open our schools safely. Internationally, we've turned our back, not just on agreements forged by my husband, but on alliances championed by presidents like Reagan and Eisenhower.
And here at home, as George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and a never-ending list of innocent people of color continue to be murdered, stating the simple fact that a Black life matters is still met with derision from the nation's highest office.
Because whenever we look to this White House for some leadership or consolation or any semblance of steadiness, what we get instead is chaos, division, and a total and utter lack of empathy.
Empathy: that's something I've been thinking a lot about lately. The ability to walk in someone else's shoes; the recognition that someone else's experience has value, too. Most of us practice this without a second thought. If we see someone suffering or struggling, we don't stand in judgment. We reach out because, "There, but for the grace of God, go I." It is not a hard concept to grasp. It's what we teach our children.
And like so many of you, Barack and I have tried our best to instill in our girls a strong moral foundation to carry forward the values that our parents and grandparents poured into us. But right now, kids in this country are seeing what happens when we stop requiring empathy of one another. They're looking around wondering if we've been lying to them this whole time about who we are and what we truly value.
They see people shouting in grocery stores, unwilling to wear a mask to keep us all safe. They see people calling the police on folks minding their own business just because of the color of their skin. They see an entitlement that says only certain people belong here, that greed is good, and winning is everything because as long as you come out on top, it doesn't matter what happens to everyone else. And they see what happens when that lack of empathy is ginned up into outright disdain.
They see our leaders labeling fellow citizens enemies of the state while emboldening torch-bearing white supremacists. They watch in horror as children are torn from their families and thrown into cages, and pepper spray and rubber bullets are used on peaceful protestors for a photo-op.
Sadly, this is the America that is on display for the next generation. A nation that's underperforming not simply on matters of policy but on matters of character. And that's not just disappointing; it's downright infuriating, because I know the goodness and the grace that is out there in households and neighborhoods all across this nation.
And I know that regardless of our race, age, religion, or politics, when we close out the noise and the fear and truly open our hearts, we know that what's going on in this country is just not right. This is not who we want to be.
So what do we do now? What's our strategy? Over the past four years, a lot of people have asked me, "When others are going so low, does going high still really work?" My answer: going high is the only thing that works, because when we go low, when we use those same tactics of degrading and dehumanizing others, we just become part of the ugly noise that's drowning out everything else. We degrade ourselves. We degrade the very causes for which we fight.
But let's be clear: going high does not mean putting on a smile and saying nice things when confronted by viciousness and cruelty. Going high means taking the harder path. It means scraping and clawing our way to that mountain top. Going high means standing fierce against hatred while remembering that we are one nation under God, and if we want to survive, we've got to find a way to live together and work together across our differences.
And going high means unlocking the shackles of lies and mistrust with the only thing that can truly set us free: the cold hard truth.
So let me be as honest and clear as I possibly can. Donald Trump is the wrong president for our country. He has had more than enough time to prove that he can do the job, but he is clearly in over his head. He cannot meet this moment. He simply cannot be who we need him to be for us. It is what it is.
Now, I understand that my message won't be heard by some people. We live in a nation that is deeply divided, and I am a Black woman speaking at the Democratic Convention. But enough of you know me by now. You know that I tell you exactly what I'm feeling. You know I hate politics. But you also know that I care about this nation. You know how much I care about all of our children.
So if you take one thing from my words tonight, it is this: if you think things cannot possibly get worse, trust me, they can; and they will if we don't make a change in this election. If we have any hope of ending this chaos, we have got to vote for Joe Biden like our lives depend on it.
I know Joe. He is a profoundly decent man, guided by faith. He was a terrific vice president. He knows what it takes to rescue an economy, beat back a pandemic, and lead our country. And he listens. He will tell the truth and trust science. He will make smart plans and manage a good team. And he will govern as someone who's lived a life that the rest of us can recognize.
When he was a kid, Joe's father lost his job. When he was a young senator, Joe lost his wife and his baby daughter. And when he was vice president, he lost his beloved son. So Joe knows the anguish of sitting at a table with an empty chair, which is why he gives his time so freely to grieving parents. Joe knows what it's like to struggle, which is why he gives his personal phone number to kids overcoming a stutter of their own.
His life is a testament to getting back up, and he is going to channel that same grit and passion to pick us all up, to help us heal and guide us forward.
Now, Joe is not perfect. And he'd be the first to tell you that. But there is no perfect candidate, no perfect president. And his ability to learn and grow—we find in that the kind of humility and maturity that so many of us yearn for right now. Because Joe Biden has served this nation his entire life without ever losing sight of who he is; but more than that, he has never lost sight of who we are, all of us.
Joe Biden wants all of our kids to go to a good school, see a doctor when they're sick, live on a healthy planet. And he's got plans to make all of that happen. Joe Biden wants all of our kids, no matter what they look like, to be able to walk out the door without worrying about being harassed or arrested or killed. He wants all of our kids to be able to go to a movie or a math class without being afraid of getting shot. He wants all our kids to grow up with leaders who won't just serve themselves and their wealthy peers but will provide a safety net for people facing hard times.
And if we want a chance to pursue any of these goals, any of these most basic requirements for a functioning society, we have to vote for Joe Biden in numbers that cannot be ignored. Because right now, folks who know they cannot win fair and square at the ballot box are doing everything they can to stop us from voting. They're closing down polling places in minority neighborhoods. They're purging voter rolls. They're sending people out to intimidate voters, and they're lying about the security of our ballots. These tactics are not new.
But this is not the time to withhold our votes in protest or play games with candidates who have no chance of winning. We have got to vote like we did in 2008 and 2012. We've got to show up with the same level of passion and hope for Joe Biden. We've got to vote early, in person if we can. We've got to request our mail-in ballots right now, tonight, and send them back immediately and follow-up to make sure they're received. And then, make sure our friends and families do the same.
We have got to grab our comfortable shoes, put on our masks, pack a brown bag dinner and maybe breakfast too, because we've got to be willing to stand in line all night if we have to.
Look, we have already sacrificed so much this year. So many of you are already going that extra mile. Even when you're exhausted, you're mustering up unimaginable courage to put on those scrubs and give our loved ones a fighting chance. Even when you're anxious, you're delivering those packages, stocking those shelves, and doing all that essential work so that all of us can keep moving forward.
Even when it all feels so overwhelming, working parents are somehow piecing it all together without child care. Teachers are getting creative so that our kids can still learn and grow. Our young people are desperately fighting to pursue their dreams.
And when the horrors of systemic racism shook our country and our consciences, millions of Americans of every age, every background rose up to march for each other, crying out for justice and progress.
This is who we still are: compassionate, resilient, decent people whose fortunes are bound up with one another. And it is well past time for our leaders to once again reflect our truth.
So, it is up to us to add our voices and our votes to the course of history, echoing heroes like John Lewis who said, "When you see something that is not right, you must say something. You must do something." That is the truest form of empathy: not just feeling, but doing; not just for ourselves or our kids, but for everyone, for all our kids.
And if we want to keep the possibility of progress alive in our time, if we want to be able to look our children in the eye after this election, we have got to reassert our place in American history. And we have got to do everything we can to elect my friend, Joe Biden, as the next president of the United States.
Thank you all. God bless.

Friday

Obama’s Eulogy for John Lewis


James wrote to the believers, “Consider it pure joy, my brothers and sisters, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith produces perseverance. Let perseverance finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, lacking nothing.”

It is a great honor to be back in Ebenezer Baptist Church, in the pulpit of its greatest pastor, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., to pay my respects to perhaps his finest disciple — an American whose faith was tested again and again to produce a man of pure joy and unbreakable perseverance — John Robert Lewis.

To those who have spoken to Presidents Bush and Clinton, Madam Speaker, Reverend Warnock, Reverend King, John’s family, friends, his beloved staff, Mayor Bottoms — I’ve come here today because I, like so many Americans, owe a great debt to John Lewis and his forceful vision of freedom.

Now, this country is a constant work in progress. We were born with instructions: to form a more perfect union. Explicit in those words is the idea that we are imperfect; that what gives each new generation purpose is to take up the unfinished work of the last and carry it further than anyone might have thought possible.

John Lewis — the first of the Freedom Riders, head of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, youngest speaker at the March on Washington, leader of the march from Selma to Montgomery, Member of Congress representing the people of this state and this district for 33 years, mentor to young people, including me at the time, until his final day on this Earth — he not only embraced that responsibility, but he made it his life’s work.


Which isn’t bad for a boy from Troy. John was born into modest means — that means he was poor — in the heart of the Jim Crow South to parents who picked somebody else’s cotton. Apparently, he didn’t take to farm work — on days when he was supposed to help his brothers and sisters with their labor, he’d hide under the porch and make a break for the school bus when it showed up. His mother, Willie Mae Lewis, nurtured that curiosity in this shy, serious child. “Once you learn something,” she told her son, “once you get something inside your head, no one can take it away from you.”

As a boy, John listened through the door after bedtime as his father’s friends complained about the Klan. One Sunday as a teenager, he heard Dr. King preach on the radio. As a college student in Tennessee, he signed up for Jim Lawson’s workshops on the tactic of nonviolent civil disobedience. John Lewis was getting something inside his head, an idea he couldn’t shake that took hold of him — that nonviolent resistance and civil disobedience were the means to change laws, but also change hearts, and change minds, and change nations, and change the world.

So he helped organize the Nashville campaign in 1960. He and other young men and women sat at a segregated lunch counter, well-dressed, straight-backed, refusing to let a milkshake poured on their heads, or a cigarette extinguished on their backs, or a foot aimed at their ribs, refused to let that dent their dignity and their sense of purpose. And after a few months, the Nashville campaign achieved the first successful desegregation of public facilities in any major city in the South.

John got a taste of jail for the first, second, third … well, several times. But he also got a taste of victory. And it consumed him with righteous purpose. And he took the battle deeper into the South.

That same year, just weeks after the Supreme Court ruled that segregation of interstate bus facilities was unconstitutional, John and Bernard Lafayette bought two tickets, climbed aboard a Greyhound, sat up front, and refused to move. This was months before the first official Freedom Rides. He was doing a test. The trip was unsanctioned. Few knew what they were up to. And at every stop, through the night, apparently the angry driver stormed out of the bus and into the bus station. And John and Bernard had no idea what he might come back with or who he might come back with. Nobody was there to protect them. There were no camera crews to record events. You know, sometimes, we read about this and kind of take it for granted. Or at least we act as if it was inevitable. Imagine the courage of two people Malia’s age, younger than my oldest daughter, on their own, to challenge an entire infrastructure of oppression.

John was only twenty years old. But he pushed all twenty of those years to the center of the table, betting everything, all of it, that his example could challenge centuries of convention, and generations of brutal violence, and countless daily indignities suffered by African Americans.

Like John the Baptist preparing the way, like those Old Testament prophets speaking truth to kings, John Lewis did not hesitate — he kept on getting on board buses and sitting at lunch counters, got his mug shot taken again and again, marched again and again on a mission to change America.

Spoke to a quarter million people at the March on Washington when he was just 23.

Helped organize the Freedom Summer in Mississippi when he was just 24.

At the ripe old age of 25, John was asked to lead the march from Selma to Montgomery. He was warned that Governor Wallace had ordered troopers to use violence. But he and Hosea Williams and others led them across that bridge anyway. And we’ve all seen the film and the footage and the photographs, and President Clinton mentioned the trench coat, the knapsack, the book to read, the apple to eat, the toothbrush — apparently jails weren’t big on such creature comforts. And you look at those pictures and John looks so young and he’s small in stature. Looking every bit that shy, serious child that his mother had raised and yet, he is full of purpose. God’s put perseverance in him.

And we know what happened to the marchers that day. Their bones were cracked by billy clubs, their eyes and lungs choked with tear gas. As they knelt to pray, which made their heads even easier targets, and John was struck in the skull. And he thought he was going to die, surrounded by the sight of young Americans gagging, and bleeding, and trampled, victims in their own country of state-sponsored violence.

And the thing is, I imagine initially that day, the troopers thought that they had won the battle. You can imagine the conversations they had afterwards. You can imagine them saying, “Yeah, we showed them.” They figured they’d turned the protesters back over the bridge; that they’d kept, that they’d preserved a system that denied the basic humanity of their fellow citizens. Except this time, there were some cameras there. This time, the world saw what happened, bore witness to Black Americans who were asking for nothing more than to be treated like other Americans. Who were not asking for special treatment, just the equal treatment promised to them a century before, and almost another century before that.

When John woke up, and checked himself out of the hospital, he would make sure the world saw a movement that was, in the words of Scripture, “hard pressed on every side, but not crushed; perplexed but not in despair; persecuted, but not abandoned; struck down, but not destroyed.” They returned to Brown Chapel, a battered prophet, bandages around his head, and he said more marchers will come now. And the people came. And the troopers parted. And the marchers reached Montgomery. And their words reached the White House — and Lyndon Johnson, son of the South, said “We shall overcome,” and the Voting Rights Act was signed into law.

The life of John Lewis was, in so many ways, exceptional. It vindicated the faith in our founding, redeemed that faith; that most American of ideas; that idea that any of us ordinary people without rank or wealth or title or fame can somehow point out the imperfections of this nation, and come together, and challenge the status quo, and decide that it is in our power to remake this country that we love until it more closely aligns with our highest ideals. What a radical ideal. What a revolutionary notion. This idea that any of us, ordinary people, a young kid from Troy can stand up to the powers and principalities and say no this isn’t right, this isn’t true, this isn’t just. We can do better. On the battlefield of justice, Americans like John, Americans like the Reverends Lowery and C.T. Vivian, two other patriots that we lost this year, liberated all of us that many Americans came to take for granted.

America was built by people like them. America was built by John Lewises. He as much as anyone in our history brought this country a little bit closer to our highest ideals. And someday, when we do finish that long journey toward freedom; when we do form a more perfect union — whether it’s years from now, or decades, or even if it takes another two centuries — John Lewis will be a founding father of that fuller, fairer, better America.

And yet, as exceptional as John was, here’s the thing: John never believed that what he did was more than any citizen of this country can do. I mentioned in the statement the day John passed, the thing about John was just how gentle and humble he was. And despite this storied, remarkable career, he treated everyone with kindness and respect because it was innate to him — this idea that any of us can do what he did if we are willing to persevere.

He believed that in all of us, there exists the capacity for great courage, that in all of us there is a longing to do what’s right, that in all of us there is a willingness to love all people, and to extend to them their God-given rights to dignity and respect. So many of us lose that sense. It’s taught out of us. We start feeling as if, in fact, that we can’t afford to extend kindness or decency to other people. That we’re better off if we are above other people and looking down on them, and so often that’s encouraged in our culture. But John always saw the best in us. And he never gave up, and never stopped speaking out because he saw the best in us. He believed in us even when we didn’t believe in ourselves. As a Congressman, he didn’t rest; he kept getting himself arrested. As an old man, he didn’t sit out any fight; he sat in, all night long, on the floor of the United States Capitol. I know his staff was stressed.

But the testing of his faith produced perseverance. He knew that the march is not yet over, that the race is not yet won, that we have not yet reached that blessed destination where we are judged by the content of our character. He knew from his own life that progress is fragile; that we have to be vigilant against the darker currents of this country’s history, of our own history, with their whirlpools of violence and hatred and despair that can always rise again.

Bull Connor may be gone. But today we witness with our own eyes police officers kneeling on the necks of Black Americans. George Wallace may be gone. But we can witness our federal government sending agents to use tear gas and batons against peaceful demonstrators. We may no longer have to guess the number of jelly beans in a jar in order to cast a ballot. But even as we sit here, there are those in power are doing their darnedest to discourage people from voting — by closing polling locations, and targeting minorities and students with restrictive ID laws, and attacking our voting rights with surgical precision, even undermining the Postal Service in the run-up to an election that is going to be dependent on mailed-in ballots so people don’t get sick.

Now, I know this is a celebration of John’s life. There are some who might say we shouldn’t dwell on such things. But that’s why I’m talking about it. John Lewis devoted his time on this Earth fighting the very attacks on democracy and what’s best in America that we are seeing circulate right now.

He knew that every single one of us has a God-given power. And that the fate of this democracy depends on how we use it; that democracy isn’t automatic, it has to be nurtured, it has to be tended to, we have to work at it, it’s hard. And so he knew it depends on whether we summon a measure, just a measure, of John’s moral courage to question what’s right and what’s wrong and call things as they are. He said that as long as he had breath in his body, he would do everything he could to preserve this democracy. That as long as we have breath in our bodies, we have to continue his cause. If we want our children to grow up in a democracy — not just with elections, but a true democracy, a representative democracy, a big-hearted, tolerant, vibrant, inclusive America of perpetual self-creation — then we are going to have to be more like John. We don’t have to do all the things he had to do because he did them for us. But we have got to do something. As the Lord instructed Paul, “Do not be afraid, go on speaking; do not be silent, for I am with you, and no one will attack you to harm you, for I have many in this city who are my people.” Just everybody’s just got to come out and vote. We’ve got all those people in the city but we can’t do nothing.

Like John, we have got to keep getting into that good trouble. He knew that nonviolent protest is patriotic; a way to raise public awareness, put a spotlight on injustice, and make the powers that be uncomfortable.

Like John, we don’t have to choose between protest and politics, it is not an either-or situation, it is a both-and situation. We have to engage in protests where that is effective but we also have to translate our passion and our causes into laws and institutional practices. That’s why John ran for Congress thirty-four years ago.

Like John, we have got to fight even harder for the most powerful tool we have, which is the right to vote. The Voting Rights Act is one of the crowning achievements of our democracy. It’s why John crossed that bridge. It’s why he spilled his blood. And by the way, it was the result of Democratic and Republican efforts. President Bush, who spoke here earlier, and his father, both signed its renewal when they were in office. President Clinton didn’t have to because it was the law when he arrived so instead he made a law that made it easier for people to register to vote.

But once the Supreme Court weakened the Voting Rights Act, some state legislatures unleashed a flood of laws designed specifically to make voting harder, especially, by the way, state legislatures where there is a lot of minority turnout and population growth. That’s not necessarily a mystery or an accident. It was an attack on what John fought for. It was an attack on our democratic freedoms. And we should treat it as such.

If politicians want to honor John, and I’m so grateful for the legacy of work of all the Congressional leaders who are here, but there’s a better way than a statement calling him a hero. You want to honor John? Let’s honor him by revitalizing the law that he was willing to die for. And by the way, naming it the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, that is a fine tribute. But John wouldn’t want us to stop there, trying to get back to where we already were. Once we pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, we should keep marching to make it even better.

By making sure every American is automatically registered to vote, including former inmates who’ve earned their second chance.

By adding polling places, and expanding early voting, and making Election Day a national holiday, so if you are someone who is working in a factory, or you are a single mom who has got to go to her job and doesn’t get time off, you can still cast your ballot.

By guaranteeing that every American citizen has equal representation in our government, including the American citizens who live in Washington, D.C. and in Puerto Rico. They are Americans.

By ending some of the partisan gerrymandering — so that all voters have the power to choose their politicians, not the other way around.

And if all this takes eliminating the filibuster — another Jim Crow relic — in order to secure the God-given rights of every American, then that’s what we should do.

And yet, even if we do all this — even if every bogus voter suppression law was struck off the books today — we have got to be honest with ourselves that too many of us choose not to exercise the franchise; that too many of our citizens believe their vote won’t make a difference, or they buy into the cynicism that, by the way, is the central strategy of voter suppression, to make you discouraged, to stop believing in your own power.

So we are also going to have to remember what John said: “If you don’t do everything you can to change things, then they will remain the same. You only pass this way once. You have to give it all you have.” As long as young people are protesting in the streets, hoping real change takes hold, I’m hopeful but we cannot casually abandon them at the ballot box. Not when few elections have been as urgent, on so many levels, as this one. We cannot treat voting as an errand to run if we have some time. We have to treat it as the most important action we can take on behalf of democracy.

Like John, we have to give it all we have.

I was proud that John Lewis was a friend of mine. I met him when I was in law school. He came to speak and I went up and I said, “Mr. Lewis, you are one of my heroes. What inspired me more than anything as a young man was to see what you and Reverend Lawson and Bob Moses and Diane Nash and others did.” And he got that kind of — aw shucks, thank you very much.

The next time I saw him, I had been elected to the United States Senate. And I told him, “John, I am here because of you.” On Inauguration Day in 2008, 2009, he was one of the first people that I greeted and hugged on that stand. I told him, “This is your day too.”

He was a good and kind and gentle man. And he believed in us — even when we don’t believe in ourselves. It’s fitting that the last time John and I shared a public forum was on Zoom. I am pretty sure that neither he nor I set up the Zoom call because we didn’t know how to work it. It was a virtual town hall with a gathering of young activists who had been helping to lead this summer’s demonstrations in the wake of George Floyd’s death. And afterwards, I spoke to John privately, and he could not have been prouder to see this new generation of activists standing up for freedom and equality; a new generation that was intent on voting and protecting the right to vote; in some cases, a new generation running for political office.

I told him, all those young people, John — of every race and every religion, from every background and gender and sexual orientation — John, those are your children. They learned from your example, even if they didn’t always know it. They had understood, through him, what American citizenship requires, even if they had only heard about his courage through the history books.

“By the thousands, faceless, anonymous, relentless young people, Black and white … have taken our whole nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the founding fathers in the formulation of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.”

Dr. King said that in the 1960s. And it came true again this summer.

We see it outside our windows, in big cities and rural towns, in men and women, young and old, straight Americans and LGBTQ Americans, Blacks who long for equal treatment and whites who can no longer accept freedom for themselves while witnessing the subjugation of their fellow Americans. We see it in everybody doing the hard work of overcoming complacency, of overcoming our own fears and our own prejudices, our own hatreds. You see it in people trying to be better, truer versions of ourselves.

And that’s what John Lewis teaches us. That’s where real courage comes from. Not from turning on each other, but by turning towards one another. Not by sowing hatred and division, but by spreading love and truth. Not by avoiding our responsibilities to create a better America and a better world, but by embracing those responsibilities with joy and perseverance and discovering that in our beloved community, we do not walk alone.

What a gift John Lewis was. We are all so lucky to have had him walk with us for a while, and show us the way.

God bless you all. God bless America. God bless this gentle soul who pulled it closer to its promise.

Noam Chomsky on Trump’s Troop Surge to Democratic Cities & Whether He’ll Leave Office If He Loses



Transcript:

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman.

Barely 100 days before the presidential election in November, this week President Trump announced he’s sending a “surge” of federal officers into large Democrat-run cities, like Chicago. This comes after Trump first sent federal agents to Portland, Oregon, where the camouflage-clad paramilitary agents attacked antiracist protesters, even snatched activists off the streets in unmarked vans. On Wednesday night, when federal forces fired tear gas at protesters in Portland once again, among those hit was Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler, who also serves as Portland’s police commissioner.

The response to Trump’s outrageous and likely unconstitutional deployment of federal agents has been resoundingly critical. Oregon Governor Kate Brown denounced the, quote, “secret police abducting people,” and the Oregon attorney general has now sued several of the federal agencies involved. In the streets, a contingent of women has grown nightly, protecting protesters by forming a “wall of moms.” Oregon Senator Ron Wyden described the federal agents as “essentially fascist,” and warned, quote, “If the line is not drawn in the sand right now, America may be staring down the barrel of martial law in the middle of a presidential election.”

Well, for more on this and much more, we spend the rest of the hour with Noam Chomsky, the world-renowned political dissident, linguist and author, laureate professor in the Department of Linguistics at the University of Arizona and professor emeritus at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he taught for more than 50 years.

He spoke with Democracy Now!'s Nermeen Shaikh and I on Thursday. We reached him at his home in Tucson, Arizona, where he's sheltering in place with his wife, Valeria. I began by asking Professor Chomsky to respond to the surge of federal agents Trump is promising to unleash on the country.

NOAM CHOMSKY: President Trump is desperate. His entire attention is this one issue on his mind: That’s the election. He has to cover up for the fact that he’s personally responsible for killing tens of thousands of Americans. It’s impossible to conceal that much longer. Just compare the United States with Europe or even Canada. It’s becoming a pariah state, to the point where Americans aren’t even permitted to travel to Europe. Europe won’t accept them.

His chances of victory depend on his doing something dramatic. He was trying very hard to set up military confrontations. You mentioned martial law. It’s moving towards martial law. He might even be able to try to cancel the elections. There’s no telling what he would do. He’s completely desperate. This is like the actions of some tin-pot dictator in a neo-colony somewhere, small country that has a military coup every couple of years. There’s no historical precedent for anything like this in a functioning democratic society. If he could send Blackshirts out in the streets, he’d be happy to do that.

Exactly how this will eventuate is very hard to say. The courts are unlikely to do anything. We may even get to a point where the military command has to decide which side they’re on. The man is desperate. He’s psychotic. He is in extreme danger of losing his position in the White House. He’ll do anything he can to prevent it.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, Professor Chomsky, I mean, you’ve just said — echoed the concerns of Senator Ron Wyden that we may be headed — the U.S. may be headed towards the imposition of martial law. You’ve just called Trump a psychotic, previously having referred to him as a sociopath, and pointed to the differences between — the massive differences between Biden and Trump, when we had you on earlier this year, saying about Biden that he’s pretty empty, you can push him one way or another. And you’ve also said that this is the most crucial election in human history, literally. Now, in a Fox News interview just on Sunday, Trump refused to commit to accepting the outcome of the 2020 election.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I’m not a good loser. I don’t like to lose. I don’t lose too often. I don’t like to lose.

CHRIS WALLACE: But are you gracious?

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: You don’t know until you see. It depends. I think mail-in voting is going to rig the election. I really do.

CHRIS WALLACE: Are you suggesting that you might not accept the results of the election?

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I have to see. Look, Hillary Clinton asked me the same thing.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Could you comment on that and what your concerns are, in the event — I mean, you’ve just said that, in fact, the elections somehow could be canceled. Could you talk about under what conditions Trump might be able to do that? And in the event that they’re not canceled, what are your concerns, depending on the outcome of the vote, what Trump might do?

NOAM CHOMSKY: Well, there are various maneuvers that theoretically they might undertake. One might be to try to throw the election to the — to refuse to accept the vote, to make sure that the Republican governors don’t authorize their own electors. This is routine and automatic, but technically they could refuse. Could throw it into the House, where there’s enough Republicans in the House to essentially turn the election into the kind of farce that you find, as I said, in some tin-pot dictatorship. That’s one possibility. Another possibility is he might just try to call out the military to impose martial law.

And the point is, he cannot lose. First of all, he’s psychologically incapable of losing. Secondly, if he loses, if he leaves the White House, he may be facing serious legal problems. Now he has immunity, but there’s a whole swamp around him. He’s tried to keep it from being investigated. He fired all the inspectors general when they were beginning to investigate it. The federal attorney for the Southern District of New York — that’s Wall Street and so on, the most important — started looking into it. Fired him, replaced him with a flack from the private equity industry. There’s nothing he would not do to try to maintain office, virtually nothing you can think of.

This is a major crisis. There’s been one or other form of parliamentary democracy for 350 years in England, and 250 years here, and nothing like this has happened before. We’re dealing with a figure who’s out of the political spectrum for functioning democracies. And he has a political party behind him which by now has just turned into cowardly sycophants. They’re terrified to cross His Imperial Majesty. He’s got a popular base of heavily armed, angry white supremacist militias. There’s no telling what he would do. I think the country, by November, may be a different country — and a different world, given U.S. power.

But that’s kind of the immediate issue. The reason why this is the most important election in history has nothing to do with this. Four more years of Trump’s climate policies and nuclear policies might simply doom the human species, literally. We don’t have a lot of time to deal with the environmental crisis. It’s very serious. Every prediction that’s been made by scientists has been too conservative. Each time it comes out worse.

I won’t run through the details, but it’s a major catastrophe looming. We have some time to deal with it. Four more years of Trump might well take us to irreversible tipping points. At the very least, it will make it much harder to confront this growing crisis. There’s no stopping the polar ice caps from — ice sheets from melting, the Amazon forest from being destroyed. Large parts of the world might become simply unlivable. We’re talking about potential sea rises of maybe one or two feet by the end of the century, much more later. This is all totally catastrophic. You can’t conceive of how human society can survive in an organized way.

At the same time, Trump is dedicated to destroying the arms control regime. Last August, he terminated the Reagan-Gorbachev INF Treaty, which helped control the potential for nuclear war growing from a European conflict. Now he’s dismantled the Open Skies Treaty, goes back to Eisenhower. That’s gone. He’s imposed frivolous demands to try to delay negotiations on the New START treaty, which the Russians have been pleading for for a long time. This is due for renewal in a few months. May already be too late to renegotiate it, the last of the arms control treaties. He’s now threatening to carry out nuclear weapons tests, tests that would undermine the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, almost 30 years. The United States never ratified it, but it’s lived up to it.

All of this opens the door wider for other countries to react the same way. The arms industry is, of course, euphoric. They’re getting huge new contracts to develop major weapons to destroy all of us. This encourages others to do the same. So there are new contracts down the road for hopeless means to try to defend ourselves against the monstrosities that we’re helping to construct. This is Trump, racing towards this, apparently enjoying it. You can’t describe it in normal — the term you used, “sociopath,” is perfectly accurate. Whether this can be contained within the constitutional structures of the United States, we don’t know.

I mean, something similar to this happened in the United Kingdom a couple of months ago. Boris Johnson, the prime minister, prorogated the Parliament, closed the Parliament, so that he could ram through his version of Brexit. This was regarded by British legal experts as the worst crisis in 350 years. Well, in Britain, the Supreme Court nullified it. That’s unlikely to happen here.

I might say that there’s another country that’s trying to mimic the United States, Brazil, with another ridiculous dictator, Jair Bolsonaro, who’s trying to be a clone of Trump. He was being investigated by — he and his family, involved in all kind of sordid criminal activities, came under investigation. He fired the investigators. But that was blocked by the courts in Brazil. Not here. When Trump fired them all, purged the executive, nothing from the courts, nothing from the Republicans in Congress. Brazil at least has a thin barrier to another military dictatorship. The United States is in worse shape. This is pretty serious. There’s been nothing like it. There’s no precedents that have any real relevance.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, Professor Chomsky, you’ve mentioned again now the lack of safeguards there are in the U.S. to the possible imposition of martial law. But even in other countries around the world where martial law has been declared, it requires minimally the compliance of those who are in charge of the military. Do you see those in the U.S. going along with Trump in the event that he chooses to attempt to declare martial law?

NOAM CHOMSKY: As I say, there’s no precedent for this in any minimally functioning democracy. There are countries, many of them, where the military has taken over, often with U.S. support or even initiative, because we wanted to overthrow the civilian government. Nothing like this has happened since — aside from the fascist regimes, interwar regimes, totally different conditions, there’s just no precedent.

There was, as you may recall, a couple of weeks ago, press reports with headlines about how Trump is expanding his purge of the executive, which has almost been cleansed of any controls or dissident voices. He’s extending this to trying to purge the military. Well, there were speculations at the time that the purge of the military might be preparation for a plan to try to bring the military in to carry out something which would amount to a military coup.

The military so far has been refusing, pulled out the 82nd Airborne from Washington after Trump wanted it in there. They’ve been rejecting the proposals from the White House for more force and violence. That’s why he’s resorting to forces outside the official military in his current campaign to set up violent confrontations in Democratic-run cities, the plan right now. What the military would do, we don’t know.

If you look for precedents in Third World dictatorships, it would depend on how those at the colonel level react, people close in contract with troops. But we have no precedent for anything like this. There’s nothing like it. This is a unique situation in modern history, in the modern history of the democratic — more or less democratic societies.

AMY GOODMAN: MIT professor emeritus Noam Chomsky, linguist, author, activist. When we come back, I ask him about President Trump bragging about acing a cognitive test for dementia. All that and more, in a minute.