Excellent summary of the entire situation in a nutshell. One wonders how anxious the Republicans would be to investigate Joe Biden after he leaves office if he did all the terrible things that Trump has done. They'd be falling over themselves to investigate. The hypocrisy involved here is sickening, But then the shadow of intellectual dishonesty seems to hover over d so many of them, like the changes in state law meant to enhance their power at the expense of transparency and honesty and fairness that the Democrats as a whole embrace with occasional exceptions... The very fact that they embrace and defend a man like Trump shows serious character flaws and a touch of larceny on their hearts.
We definitely need to consume far less meat, but we also need badly to greatly reduce our own population. Humans plus cattle weigh ~810 million metric tons. (The cattle weigh ~410 million metric tons, the H. sapiens 390 million metric tons.) All wild mammals put together weigh about 6% as much, including whales, and elephants, and the rest of the African megafauna. Only about 28 percent of land habitats are intact, only about 2.9 percent of ecosystems have all the animal species that they did 500 years ago.
We depend on ecosystem services for clean water, clean air, pollination, soil fertility, lumber, food, disease prevention, CO2 sequestration, predictable weather, and much else. Tick-borne diseases emerged in the US because of damage to ecosystem services, and COVID and HIV probably result from the same phenomenon, as will future pandemics.
The US, the major industrialized nation with the greatest per capita greenhouse emissions and resource use especially needs to reduce its population, instead of fueling the current population explosion, which is mostly due to immigration. The average immigrant's greenhouse emissions rise threefold after arrival in the US. The Census Bureau projects the US population will grow by 75 million over the next four decades, nearly four New York State population equivalents, 90% of that growth from immigration.
From what I've been reading, we're (the world) is well on our way to Zero Population Growth. In the meantime, here's an article about an alternative to meat for protein while using less water and extracting nitrogen from the air to enhance the soil its growing in. Gifted article. https://wapo.st/3JWOHWr
The world just hit 8 billion. We're probably going to reach 11 billion, or close to it, before the population begins dropping. That increase is likely to do a huge amount of damage, in terms of extinctions (Africa's human population alone is expected to double to three billion in a generation; look for the megafauna to become effectively extinct), and in terms of degradation of ecosystem services. Among other bad outcomes, pandemics will become more frequent, as a bunch of biologists warned in Nature last year.
I actually don't eat mammals at all anymore, and only rarely eat fowl, but it certainly will be a major boon to the environment if the manufactured meat works out (I have a friend working on that).
Thanks much for the article! (In the future, you can give me the links without gifting, to anything in NYT or Wapo, as I subscribe to both.)
EDIT Just read the article. Fascinating! I eat lentils every other day, generally mixed with multiple grains and red beans. I'm going to investigate getting them directly from the farm in Palouse Washington, instead of from Whole Foods.
I remember when it came out, but I never read it. One of my friends told me to get another book by Toffler and his wife, Creating a New Civilization. I have the book but havne't read it yet.
This is a very strange post. Are you suggesting that immigrant populations create more greenhouse gases than the large oil companies, cattle ranches, auto industries, clothing and construction firms that are mainly owned by wealthy white men? The footprint of immigration families that live in multigenerational family homes, very often without air conditioning, funds to buy meat, and new clothes certainly aren’t the culprits of a vanishing eco system! Get real.
You misread or misinterpreted my original post. I'm saying that when immigrants move from their native mostly third world countries to the US, they consume much more than they did in their native lands, and the CO2 emissions they cause once here, are three times what they were in their native countries.
In other words, people moving in their tens of millions (40 million from 1990-2020, or two NY State equivalents; another 68 million over the next four decades--3 and a half NYS equivalents) from third world countries to the United States substantially boosts planetary green house emissions. That's a lose-lose for the planet.
I'm not blaming them. People are going to cross borders if they think they can get away with it, and get a better life in the process. I AM blaming Congress, for allowing so many people to settle in our country, especially at a time when we need to reduce our country's GH emissions. And I am blaming Congress for failing to pass a national, mandatory E-Verify, which would provide severe punishments to CEOs and others in charge that knowingly hire people who are in this country illegally. (In this case, immigrants would not need to be punished, as they would leave, and cease coming here if they couldn't get jobs.)
So instead of starving in their own countries they actually get to eat in the US? I live in a town with 30% population of immigrants. Rather than being a burden , they carry the burdens of others that are far more better fed and housed than they are. And they are grateful and kind. They are the population that restores our land, feed our people, care for our poor and elderly, nurture and care for our children in our homes. They enrich our lives culturally and with their innovation and ingenuity many become business owners, valuable employers and wonderful friends. Your half -empty view to mankind is a slippery slope I don’t care to accept or honor.
This Today's Edition Newsletter lays heavy on the heart. I am near breathless for its unfolding. Thank you, Robert Hubbell, for weaving together this stellar testament to the truth. I wonder at times how you so finely gather the facts, and present them so eloquently and so plainly at once. Even when they pain us deeply. I remain grateful. And dare I say, hopeful.
A real game changer that no one saw coming. An interesting fact about the hydrogen seeps is that they are the result of chemical reactions in the earth's crust, so the hydrogen source renews itself. We don't need to wait for 60 million years for everything to degrade into oil and coal.
The danger is if it's too easy. We need to reduce our numbers, lighten our footprint on the planet, and switch to an economy that's based less on stuff.
Robert. Thank you for your eloquent and forceful assessment of Trumps "innocence". Schmidt can defend our legal structure. But he can't deny what Trump has said and done. On multiple occasions this clown of a former President has admitted his guilt, demonstrated his guilt, lied about his guilt - it's all on tape.
In the meantime history will record that an entire nation is waiting with bated breath - completely focused on the rightful potential indictments of the clown.
And mostly ignored is a Climate Report that calls all of humanity to action. That tells us AGAIN that we are burning down the very house we live in. What do our politicians say? I hear crickets. If there is a definition or display of mass insanity, THIS is it.
Our home called Earth is threatening to retaliate and massacre billions of humans and decimate trillions of other creatures who have existed for millions of years. And our headlines are about a clown.
Thank you, Robert, for stating the obvious! Trump is guilty!!!! Trump is an insult to law and order, civility, decency and he is hell bent in destroying our democracy! It is outrageous that it is taking so much time to make Trump accountable for all the crimes for which he has slithered out of making a mockery of our institutions!!! Enough!!!!
Absolutely! He is guilty! Maybe we are coming to the point where the long, long, wait between his crimes and his conviction is will come to a conclusion.
The entire Republican congressional caucus cannot be an embarrassment to themselves as they know absolutely no shame. Nor do their followers recognize hypocrisy.
They push logic to the point of absurdity in defense of the indefensible.
Thanks again, Robert, for a balanced summary. I want to share Thom Hartman's Substack from yesterday, concisely outlining how Republicans have won the Presidential elections from Nixon forward . It's not that I was unaware, but seeing it put together in chronological order was rather staggering:
Trump and his MAGA GOP rely on the laws of the jungle to defend against the laws of our land. Might over right is their rallying cry. Blasting out Orwellian dysphoric fantasies, peddling groundless fearmongering and perfecting the art of lying have been the core foundations of their platforms. Psychopathic disregard for social cohesion, complete insensitivity to moral compasses and the singular drive for absolute power forces absolute containment by our system of justice.
"Innocent until proven guilty" is shorthand for the allocation of "burden of proof." America could have adopted a judicial system where people accused of a crime have the burden of proving their innocence. Instead, in USA we purport to say in criminal trials, the government has the burden to present sufficient admissible evidence so that the jury can unanimously agree that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Trump is not "innocent." He directed the coup. We all saw it. Despite his oath of office, for over 3 hours Trump proudly watched the televised mayhem at the Capitol, and did nothing to stop it. If Trump is never prosecuted, he is still an insurrectionist, a liar, a tax cheater, an adulterer, and a threat to democracy. If if a jury nevertheless acquits him, their verdict is "not guilty," they do not render a verdict of "innocent."
This is my stance as well. trump is not innocent, and I refuse to self-gaslight what my own eyes saw. A jury will decide if the prosecution presents a case where a jury returns a verdict of guilty or not guilty and a judge renders consequences perhaps being instated a decade after winding through our justice system.
Kyle Rittenhouse killed 2 people and injured a third. A jury found him not guilty, but those people are still dead at his hand. It was caught on video. There is no factual dispute over who shot the gun that lead to these deaths. A jury found him not guilty according to the law as they interpreted the information before them, but he killed them. Is he innocent?
If the average human is unable to discern law breaking that we witness in public, let's pack up the country right now and call it a good run. Juries decide if consequences will be rendered based on evidence presented in court, and that is the verdict we the people have to abide. I refuse to give up my common sense, which, by the way, is the instruction given to juries before deliberating their decision because we are expected to keep our common sense. For me, the question is if trump will be held to account by a jury of 12 people based on the case presented by prosecutors. At no time does the word innocent have any meaning for me, but maybe some find that merely semantics.
In the USA Legal System people are deemed innocent until proven guilty. Not what our eyes have seen, not what we have read or heard but proven guilty or not in a Court of Law and judged by a jury of our peers. I like this system.
In the USA Legal System people are deemed innocent until proven guilty. Not what our eyes have seen, not what we have read or heard but proven guilty or not in a Court of Law and judged by a jury of our peers. I like this system.
Robert - Your clarion call for justice cannot be amplified loudly enough, just as you correctly correct Steve Schmitt's attempt to equate trump's legal presumption of innocence with the objective truths of his crimes witnessed by us all on live TV. Your daily work is a gift we can only hope brings this wounded country closer to the truths we must recognize to survive. SLH
I recommend you read Steve Schmidt's entire essay:
From Steve Schmidt
"This moment requires restraint from Donald Trump’s fiercest and most committed antagonists, of which I am certainly one. This moment requires Trump’s most ferocious opponents to be better than his most committed fanatics. This moment requires those of us who despise Trump the most to be the loudest voices for his constitutional rights to due process....The entire world will be watching. The American justice system must rise to the occasion in a way that our broken political system has failed to do over the last eight years. Putting the country first in this matter requires abandoning every preconception about what Trump did or didn’t do. A jury of his peers will decide his guilt or innocence. That’s the way it works."
I did read it, and I do believe he is due equal justice and rights in and by the very legal system he is trying to destroy. I don't believe we can or should ignore his destructive and dishonest and illegal behavior that we all have witnessed repeatedly.
There are currently 5 different on going investigations into alleged crimes committed by Trump,and his organization. I personally believe he is guilty of most of these charges in different degree’s of guilt and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. What I don’t understand is how Republican legislators and voters are so willing to over look and white wash the facts about these crimes especially J6th and are willing not to hold Trump accountable and let him off the hook. The vast number of investigations and possible indictments alone tell you Trump does not respect the law and he will do anything to remain in power and will continue to bend the law every chance he has. He can’t be trusted period
Not too long ago, a man named Gary Hart was on a path to the White House. Someone photographed a young woman sitting on his lap on a party boat. He was shamed enough to leave the race. Trump proclaims his right to "grab pussy" on tape and it barely creates a ripple. His list of offenses is longer than route 95.
And George Santos, a brazen little con man, is still a member of the House of Representatives. I guess we know who inspired him.
Anything goes now. The word shame has lost its meaning.
And an entire political party has lost any shred of integrity. The party of Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt is morally bankrupt. Truth is toast. Holding power at any cost has replaced it.
We are living in a land of doublespeak. Does anyone doubt the new form of McCarthy-ism would enthusiastically support the placement of prosecutors to indict a sitting President for political reasons and to justify declaring them guilty on the basis of false "facts." Remember Flynn and lock her up? A mob can be incited by false rhetoric.
America has empowered a legal system that has been in the hands of the white, rich, and powerful men who are connected to the mid-19th century way of thinking. The corruption of our legal system has been quietly commanded by legal organizations that have gotten their way with us. The McCarthys and the Jim Jordans get their guidance from the likes of the John Eastmans, who run law schools. Huge, wealthy law firms have disregarded the morality of how our system of justice operates. Is it any wonder that doublespeak has a home when the public discourse turns to our legal procedures?
We are in a danger zone. When we argue the meaning of innocent until proven guilty, we are in MAGA-land. Robert is right, of course, but so is Steve Schmidt. Their nuanced discussion of core legal principles will be lost when MAGA speakers take to doublespeak. If the argument becomes whether someone is guilty in the public's mind before prosecution even begins, we're done for.
20 years ago or more, Republicans responded to Democratic advocacy for electrical vehicles with proposals for hydrogen cell fueled vehicles. At the time, I thought (as did others) that this was a ploy to protect the fossil fuel industry with a plan that could not come to fruition. Let's see what happens. And let's take the very same attitude of let's see what happens to the criminal prosecutions of and lawsuits against Donald Trump. He looks guilty to me. Let's see what happens when he faces a jury.
One of the challenges with hydrogen is storage. By weight, it has the same energy as gasoline. By volume, it requires substantially more space (e.g., a container the size of a cement truck to store 4 kilograms).
Fuel cell cars may not be feasible. Hydrogen electrical plants may be. If we could replace coal burning generation plants with hydrogen, that would be a huge step forward.
If he is innocent why does fight each investigation into his amoral existence! Testify under oath, let a jury decide! As they man-up Donnie boy! But he nit and never will be a man!
Right on Robert! Thanks for so forcefully stating what anyone paying attention knows, DJT is guilty of multiple crimes, many more than those now before the courts.
Excellent summary of the entire situation in a nutshell. One wonders how anxious the Republicans would be to investigate Joe Biden after he leaves office if he did all the terrible things that Trump has done. They'd be falling over themselves to investigate. The hypocrisy involved here is sickening, But then the shadow of intellectual dishonesty seems to hover over d so many of them, like the changes in state law meant to enhance their power at the expense of transparency and honesty and fairness that the Democrats as a whole embrace with occasional exceptions... The very fact that they embrace and defend a man like Trump shows serious character flaws and a touch of larceny on their hearts.
Thank you so much. He must be found guilty because he is and we must, yes must uphold our constitution!
They have MORE than a "touch" of larceny.
I am heartened that you have devoted part of Today's Edition to the climate crisis. Thank you!
Yes indeed. It is real and we owe our children and our earth much more. Keep all safe!
Me too. Heartsick over how mankind has trashed the planet. One thing we all can do is stop/reduce eating meat.
Documentary- "Kiss the Ground"
24 minutes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cki3e7uYJ_I
We definitely need to consume far less meat, but we also need badly to greatly reduce our own population. Humans plus cattle weigh ~810 million metric tons. (The cattle weigh ~410 million metric tons, the H. sapiens 390 million metric tons.) All wild mammals put together weigh about 6% as much, including whales, and elephants, and the rest of the African megafauna. Only about 28 percent of land habitats are intact, only about 2.9 percent of ecosystems have all the animal species that they did 500 years ago.
We depend on ecosystem services for clean water, clean air, pollination, soil fertility, lumber, food, disease prevention, CO2 sequestration, predictable weather, and much else. Tick-borne diseases emerged in the US because of damage to ecosystem services, and COVID and HIV probably result from the same phenomenon, as will future pandemics.
The US, the major industrialized nation with the greatest per capita greenhouse emissions and resource use especially needs to reduce its population, instead of fueling the current population explosion, which is mostly due to immigration. The average immigrant's greenhouse emissions rise threefold after arrival in the US. The Census Bureau projects the US population will grow by 75 million over the next four decades, nearly four New York State population equivalents, 90% of that growth from immigration.
From what I've been reading, we're (the world) is well on our way to Zero Population Growth. In the meantime, here's an article about an alternative to meat for protein while using less water and extracting nitrogen from the air to enhance the soil its growing in. Gifted article. https://wapo.st/3JWOHWr
The world just hit 8 billion. We're probably going to reach 11 billion, or close to it, before the population begins dropping. That increase is likely to do a huge amount of damage, in terms of extinctions (Africa's human population alone is expected to double to three billion in a generation; look for the megafauna to become effectively extinct), and in terms of degradation of ecosystem services. Among other bad outcomes, pandemics will become more frequent, as a bunch of biologists warned in Nature last year.
I actually don't eat mammals at all anymore, and only rarely eat fowl, but it certainly will be a major boon to the environment if the manufactured meat works out (I have a friend working on that).
Thanks much for the article! (In the future, you can give me the links without gifting, to anything in NYT or Wapo, as I subscribe to both.)
EDIT Just read the article. Fascinating! I eat lentils every other day, generally mixed with multiple grains and red beans. I'm going to investigate getting them directly from the farm in Palouse Washington, instead of from Whole Foods.
Alvin Toffler "Future Shock" - written in 1970.
I remember when it came out, but I never read it. One of my friends told me to get another book by Toffler and his wife, Creating a New Civilization. I have the book but havne't read it yet.
Are you volunteering to lead the way in reducing the human population?
This is a very strange post. Are you suggesting that immigrant populations create more greenhouse gases than the large oil companies, cattle ranches, auto industries, clothing and construction firms that are mainly owned by wealthy white men? The footprint of immigration families that live in multigenerational family homes, very often without air conditioning, funds to buy meat, and new clothes certainly aren’t the culprits of a vanishing eco system! Get real.
I'm guessing you were responding to the original post, not my comment. I agree completely with your observation and question.
You misread or misinterpreted my original post. I'm saying that when immigrants move from their native mostly third world countries to the US, they consume much more than they did in their native lands, and the CO2 emissions they cause once here, are three times what they were in their native countries.
In other words, people moving in their tens of millions (40 million from 1990-2020, or two NY State equivalents; another 68 million over the next four decades--3 and a half NYS equivalents) from third world countries to the United States substantially boosts planetary green house emissions. That's a lose-lose for the planet.
I'm not blaming them. People are going to cross borders if they think they can get away with it, and get a better life in the process. I AM blaming Congress, for allowing so many people to settle in our country, especially at a time when we need to reduce our country's GH emissions. And I am blaming Congress for failing to pass a national, mandatory E-Verify, which would provide severe punishments to CEOs and others in charge that knowingly hire people who are in this country illegally. (In this case, immigrants would not need to be punished, as they would leave, and cease coming here if they couldn't get jobs.)
So instead of starving in their own countries they actually get to eat in the US? I live in a town with 30% population of immigrants. Rather than being a burden , they carry the burdens of others that are far more better fed and housed than they are. And they are grateful and kind. They are the population that restores our land, feed our people, care for our poor and elderly, nurture and care for our children in our homes. They enrich our lives culturally and with their innovation and ingenuity many become business owners, valuable employers and wonderful friends. Your half -empty view to mankind is a slippery slope I don’t care to accept or honor.
This Today's Edition Newsletter lays heavy on the heart. I am near breathless for its unfolding. Thank you, Robert Hubbell, for weaving together this stellar testament to the truth. I wonder at times how you so finely gather the facts, and present them so eloquently and so plainly at once. Even when they pain us deeply. I remain grateful. And dare I say, hopeful.
Stay strong, Jean. We are going to make it through this difficult time and come out the better for it.
Totally agree! Thank you.
Today's Today's was superb, just as you say, Jean. Well said!
That article on natural hydrogen is fascinating. that really could be the short-cut to non-carbonized energy.
A real game changer that no one saw coming. An interesting fact about the hydrogen seeps is that they are the result of chemical reactions in the earth's crust, so the hydrogen source renews itself. We don't need to wait for 60 million years for everything to degrade into oil and coal.
The danger is if it's too easy. We need to reduce our numbers, lighten our footprint on the planet, and switch to an economy that's based less on stuff.
Yeah!
Robert. Thank you for your eloquent and forceful assessment of Trumps "innocence". Schmidt can defend our legal structure. But he can't deny what Trump has said and done. On multiple occasions this clown of a former President has admitted his guilt, demonstrated his guilt, lied about his guilt - it's all on tape.
In the meantime history will record that an entire nation is waiting with bated breath - completely focused on the rightful potential indictments of the clown.
And mostly ignored is a Climate Report that calls all of humanity to action. That tells us AGAIN that we are burning down the very house we live in. What do our politicians say? I hear crickets. If there is a definition or display of mass insanity, THIS is it.
Our home called Earth is threatening to retaliate and massacre billions of humans and decimate trillions of other creatures who have existed for millions of years. And our headlines are about a clown.
You are rolling today Bill. That is excellent commentary on an outstanding Newsletter.
Thank you, Robert, for stating the obvious! Trump is guilty!!!! Trump is an insult to law and order, civility, decency and he is hell bent in destroying our democracy! It is outrageous that it is taking so much time to make Trump accountable for all the crimes for which he has slithered out of making a mockery of our institutions!!! Enough!!!!
Absolutely! He is guilty! Maybe we are coming to the point where the long, long, wait between his crimes and his conviction is will come to a conclusion.
The entire Republican congressional caucus cannot be an embarrassment to themselves as they know absolutely no shame. Nor do their followers recognize hypocrisy.
They push logic to the point of absurdity in defense of the indefensible.
Thanks again, Robert, for a balanced summary. I want to share Thom Hartman's Substack from yesterday, concisely outlining how Republicans have won the Presidential elections from Nixon forward . It's not that I was unaware, but seeing it put together in chronological order was rather staggering:
https://open.substack.com/pub/thomhartmann/p/america-has-ignored-gop-crimes-to?r=diso1&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Thanks for the link. I will check it out!
Check out his resume on Wiki - the guy is an incredible renaissance man!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thom_Hartmann
Thank you for this link. Words honestly fail me.
Thank you for the link. Eyeopening.
This is fantastic. Thanks for posting.
He lays out quite the case. It is appalling and sickening.
Trump and his MAGA GOP rely on the laws of the jungle to defend against the laws of our land. Might over right is their rallying cry. Blasting out Orwellian dysphoric fantasies, peddling groundless fearmongering and perfecting the art of lying have been the core foundations of their platforms. Psychopathic disregard for social cohesion, complete insensitivity to moral compasses and the singular drive for absolute power forces absolute containment by our system of justice.
"Innocent until proven guilty" is shorthand for the allocation of "burden of proof." America could have adopted a judicial system where people accused of a crime have the burden of proving their innocence. Instead, in USA we purport to say in criminal trials, the government has the burden to present sufficient admissible evidence so that the jury can unanimously agree that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Trump is not "innocent." He directed the coup. We all saw it. Despite his oath of office, for over 3 hours Trump proudly watched the televised mayhem at the Capitol, and did nothing to stop it. If Trump is never prosecuted, he is still an insurrectionist, a liar, a tax cheater, an adulterer, and a threat to democracy. If if a jury nevertheless acquits him, their verdict is "not guilty," they do not render a verdict of "innocent."
Exactly: "their verdict is "not guilty," they do not render a verdict of "innocent."
This is my stance as well. trump is not innocent, and I refuse to self-gaslight what my own eyes saw. A jury will decide if the prosecution presents a case where a jury returns a verdict of guilty or not guilty and a judge renders consequences perhaps being instated a decade after winding through our justice system.
Kyle Rittenhouse killed 2 people and injured a third. A jury found him not guilty, but those people are still dead at his hand. It was caught on video. There is no factual dispute over who shot the gun that lead to these deaths. A jury found him not guilty according to the law as they interpreted the information before them, but he killed them. Is he innocent?
If the average human is unable to discern law breaking that we witness in public, let's pack up the country right now and call it a good run. Juries decide if consequences will be rendered based on evidence presented in court, and that is the verdict we the people have to abide. I refuse to give up my common sense, which, by the way, is the instruction given to juries before deliberating their decision because we are expected to keep our common sense. For me, the question is if trump will be held to account by a jury of 12 people based on the case presented by prosecutors. At no time does the word innocent have any meaning for me, but maybe some find that merely semantics.
In the USA Legal System people are deemed innocent until proven guilty. Not what our eyes have seen, not what we have read or heard but proven guilty or not in a Court of Law and judged by a jury of our peers. I like this system.
In the USA Legal System people are deemed innocent until proven guilty. Not what our eyes have seen, not what we have read or heard but proven guilty or not in a Court of Law and judged by a jury of our peers. I like this system.
Robert - Your clarion call for justice cannot be amplified loudly enough, just as you correctly correct Steve Schmitt's attempt to equate trump's legal presumption of innocence with the objective truths of his crimes witnessed by us all on live TV. Your daily work is a gift we can only hope brings this wounded country closer to the truths we must recognize to survive. SLH
I recommend you read Steve Schmidt's entire essay:
From Steve Schmidt
"This moment requires restraint from Donald Trump’s fiercest and most committed antagonists, of which I am certainly one. This moment requires Trump’s most ferocious opponents to be better than his most committed fanatics. This moment requires those of us who despise Trump the most to be the loudest voices for his constitutional rights to due process....The entire world will be watching. The American justice system must rise to the occasion in a way that our broken political system has failed to do over the last eight years. Putting the country first in this matter requires abandoning every preconception about what Trump did or didn’t do. A jury of his peers will decide his guilt or innocence. That’s the way it works."
I did read it, and I do believe he is due equal justice and rights in and by the very legal system he is trying to destroy. I don't believe we can or should ignore his destructive and dishonest and illegal behavior that we all have witnessed repeatedly.
No one said to ignore anything. This is a critical moment. We must preserve our Rule of Law.
There are currently 5 different on going investigations into alleged crimes committed by Trump,and his organization. I personally believe he is guilty of most of these charges in different degree’s of guilt and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. What I don’t understand is how Republican legislators and voters are so willing to over look and white wash the facts about these crimes especially J6th and are willing not to hold Trump accountable and let him off the hook. The vast number of investigations and possible indictments alone tell you Trump does not respect the law and he will do anything to remain in power and will continue to bend the law every chance he has. He can’t be trusted period
George Santos is our "canary in the coal mine".
Not too long ago, a man named Gary Hart was on a path to the White House. Someone photographed a young woman sitting on his lap on a party boat. He was shamed enough to leave the race. Trump proclaims his right to "grab pussy" on tape and it barely creates a ripple. His list of offenses is longer than route 95.
And George Santos, a brazen little con man, is still a member of the House of Representatives. I guess we know who inspired him.
Anything goes now. The word shame has lost its meaning.
And an entire political party has lost any shred of integrity. The party of Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt is morally bankrupt. Truth is toast. Holding power at any cost has replaced it.
We are living in a land of doublespeak. Does anyone doubt the new form of McCarthy-ism would enthusiastically support the placement of prosecutors to indict a sitting President for political reasons and to justify declaring them guilty on the basis of false "facts." Remember Flynn and lock her up? A mob can be incited by false rhetoric.
America has empowered a legal system that has been in the hands of the white, rich, and powerful men who are connected to the mid-19th century way of thinking. The corruption of our legal system has been quietly commanded by legal organizations that have gotten their way with us. The McCarthys and the Jim Jordans get their guidance from the likes of the John Eastmans, who run law schools. Huge, wealthy law firms have disregarded the morality of how our system of justice operates. Is it any wonder that doublespeak has a home when the public discourse turns to our legal procedures?
We are in a danger zone. When we argue the meaning of innocent until proven guilty, we are in MAGA-land. Robert is right, of course, but so is Steve Schmidt. Their nuanced discussion of core legal principles will be lost when MAGA speakers take to doublespeak. If the argument becomes whether someone is guilty in the public's mind before prosecution even begins, we're done for.
20 years ago or more, Republicans responded to Democratic advocacy for electrical vehicles with proposals for hydrogen cell fueled vehicles. At the time, I thought (as did others) that this was a ploy to protect the fossil fuel industry with a plan that could not come to fruition. Let's see what happens. And let's take the very same attitude of let's see what happens to the criminal prosecutions of and lawsuits against Donald Trump. He looks guilty to me. Let's see what happens when he faces a jury.
One of the challenges with hydrogen is storage. By weight, it has the same energy as gasoline. By volume, it requires substantially more space (e.g., a container the size of a cement truck to store 4 kilograms).
Fuel cell cars may not be feasible. Hydrogen electrical plants may be. If we could replace coal burning generation plants with hydrogen, that would be a huge step forward.
If he is innocent why does fight each investigation into his amoral existence! Testify under oath, let a jury decide! As they man-up Donnie boy! But he nit and never will be a man!
Twenty years ago, electrically-powered vehicles were not economical. Hydrogen fuel celled vehicles probably were not, either (I’m less certain).
Alas I have subscribed. I enjoy reading your posts as they speak truth to me and I feel informed by those truths, so thank you so much!
Please join the conversation frequently!
Right on Robert! Thanks for so forcefully stating what anyone paying attention knows, DJT is guilty of multiple crimes, many more than those now before the courts.