For the last several months, Republicans have been perpetuating the false narrative that non-citizens are illegally voting en-masse on behalf of Democrats this cycle, as Donald Trump and his supporters manufacture voter fraud hysteria that they can point to if they lose next week.
Continue reading “Courts Shut Down Non-Citizen Voter Fear Mongering Efforts Across the Country”A Massive Backlash
NPR reported yesterday afternoon that The Washington Post has lost more than 200,000 subscription in the backlash against owner Jeff Bezos’ last minute intervention ending the Post’s policy of endorsing presidential candidates. That’s a staggering figure, far more than I would have guessed. When I wrote my piece over the weekend, the clearest report was that they’d lost over 2,000 subscriptions. If I understand the numbers right, the Post lost almost 10% of its paying subscribers in a single weekend. Again, a totally stunning and in business terms devastating number — in part because the cancellations appear to continue.
I got some inkling that the damage might be severe when TPM Reader BS emailed me this morning to tell me that after canceling his subscription, he received a special offer to restart his subscription including a link to a new article by Dana Milbank in which Milbank argues that he’s not giving up on the Post and he hopes readers don’t either. If the Post had lost a couple thousand subscribers, that would have been a downer for them and certainly a black eye among news super-consumers and what we might call elite news and politics opinion. (I use “elite” here in a purely descriptive sense.) But it wouldn’t be a huge thing in business terms. And I’d be surprised if the institution itself would address the issue so frontally in the pitches to cancelling members. That’s especially since basically all of the columnists and reporters asking readers not to leave do so while roundly denouncing Bezos’ decision.
Continue reading “A Massive Backlash”Threatening ‘The Enemy Within’ With Force: Military Ethicists Explain The Danger To American Tradition
This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis. It was originally published at The Conversation.
On the campaign trail, former President Donald Trump has declared there are serious threats to the United States. First, he said, there is “the outside enemy, and then we have the enemy from within, and the enemy from within, in my opinion, is more dangerous,” as he told Fox News in an Oct. 13, 2024, interview.
He went on to say that “the bigger problem are the people from within. We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics. And I think. And it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard or, if really necessary, by the military.”
When asked on CNN about Trump’s remarks about using the military on U.S. soil, Mark Esper, one of five people who led the Defense Department during Trump’s presidency, said Americans “should take those words seriously,” most especially because Trump had already tried to do so when he was president.
As professors of military ethics, we worry that Trump’s actions while president, and his comments about his plans for a potential second term, may put the military in a tough position. The July 1, 2024, Supreme Court ruling giving the president immunity for official acts – potentially including as commander in chief of the military – would make that tough position even more difficult.
Response to demonstrations
In the summer of 2020, protests, including some violent ones, arose in cities around the U.S. in the wake of the May 25 murder of George Floyd. Then-President Trump announced he was considering sending the U.S. military into the streets of several American cities. He had already deployed some National Guard members in Washington in an effort to control the demonstrations there.
At the time, the two of us considered the possibility of dissent within the military hierarchy, saying that resistance would be most effective “if it were to come from those at the top.”
Indeed, many of the highest-ranking generals, admirals and Cabinet-level advisers resisted Trump’s requests to send the military to “beat the f— out” of protesters and “crack their skulls” – or even “just shoot them.”
Though Trump reportedly wanted to bring as many as 10,000 soldiers to Washington, fewer troops were deployed in the nation’s capital. No federal military personnel were used against public demonstrations in the U.S. that summer. Some National Guard troops were called up by state governors, not federal orders.
The reasons for civilian control
For his potential second term, Trump says he wants to hire Cabinet and other government officials who will follow his orders without question, rather than people who might try to prevent his worst inclinations from being enacted.
Questions about dissent and disobedience will therefore likely fall on those at more junior levels of military service in a second Trump administration than they did in the first.
The U.S. military has long been dedicated to the principle of civilian control. To minimize the chance of the kind of military occupation they suffered during the Revolutionary War, the country’s founders wrote the Constitution requiring that the president, an elected civilian, would be the commander in chief of the military. In the wake of World War II, Congress went even further, restructuring the military and requiring that the secretary of defense be a civilian as well.
For that reason, in a time of increasing political polarization, military educational institutions are focusing even more explicitly on the oath military members take to the Constitution, rather than to a person or an office.
As the Joint Chiefs of Staff reminded the military after the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, and just before the inauguration of Joe Biden as president, military personnel serve the nation’s interests, not those of a politician or a political party.
Nonpartisanship could become partisan
When faced with a potential order to deploy the U.S. military within the nation’s borders, however, service members may find themselves in a situation where upholding the military’s tradition of staying out of politics could itself appear partisan.
Military members have a duty to obey orders from superior officers. But as military ethicists, we recognize that the content of an order is not the only factor that determines whether it is a moral one.
The political motivation for an order may be equally important. That’s because the military’s obligation to stay out of politics is deeply intertwined with the mutual obligation of civilian officials not to use the military for partisan reasons.
If an elected official were to attempt to use the military for obviously partisan ends, the decisions of military personnel to either follow the order or resist it would open them up to accusations of partisanship – even if their actions were attempts to protect the military’s strict partisan neutrality.
At the nation’s founding, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson worried about a military that would be loyal to a particular leader rather than to a form of government. James Madison was concerned that soldiers might be used by those in power as instruments of oppression against the citizenry.
Trump has said the National Guard or the military could “easily handle” political protesters. He has recommended one “really rough, nasty” hour of police violence to curb criminal activity. He has expressed a desire for military officers to be obedient to him and not the Constitution.
It’s not clear that military members could follow those kinds of orders and remain nonpartisan. By refusing to follow orders about military deployment to U.S. cities for political ends, members of the armed forces could actually be respecting, rather than undermining, the principle of civilian control. After all, the framers always intended it to be the people’s military – not the president’s.
Risks for military members
There is a long line of military heroes who had the moral courage not to follow immoral orders. In fact, it was a junior officer who first exposed the widespread use of torture in the global war on terror.
That particular example may be useful to consider in the weeks and months ahead, given the significant effort at the time to argue that some of those immoral orders could nonetheless be legal.
Recently, some of Trump’s former military advisers have raised concerns about the the potential use of U.S. troops in American cities. But several of his civilian advisers have already recommended being less reticent about finding legal means to deploy the military within the country. And a July 1, 2024, Supreme Court ruling gave the president criminal immunity for official acts – which almost certainly include giving orders to the military.
Regardless of who wins the 2024 presidential election, there will likely be significant protests over policy – perhaps even over the results themselves. If the military is ever called in because of those actions, military members would have to consider whether they could ethically follow the orders to do so. To be ready to answer these important questions, they have to consider them now.
We often ask our students to imagine themselves in numerous different ethical situations, both real and hypothetical. In the present circumstance, we believe one set of ethical questions could quickly become very concrete for those serving:
“Would you obey an order from a president – a particular president giving an order for a particular reason – to deploy to a U.S. city? What might it mean for the nation if you did? And what might it mean for American democracy if, in some circumstances, you were brave enough not to?”
Many Americans claim to venerate military men and women, thanking them for their service and standing to celebrate them at sporting events. They may need much more support than that from the American people, and soon.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The academic views expressed in this article are the views of the authors alone and should not be read as endorsing any candidate for office. They do not reflect the official position of the U.S. Naval Academy, the Naval Postgraduate School, the U.S. Navy, the Department of Defense or any other entity within the U.S. government; the authors are not authorized to provide any official position of these entities. This article contains some material previously published on June 11, 2020.
The Complex Election Threat Matrix Runs Through One Man
A lot of things happened. Here are some of the things. This is TPM’s Morning Memo. Sign up for the email version.
Donald Trump Is To Blame
As we careen toward Election Day in a week, the day’s news is replete with reminders that Donald Trump continues to be a singular threat to free and fair elections. The complexity of the threat matrix – political violence, foreign interference, conspiracy theories, the Big Lie – can obscure that Trump plays a critical role in all of them as instigator, inciter, conspiracist, accelerant, and useful idiot.
For nearly a decade now, Trump has radicalized American politics and personally served as a catalyst for the worst impulses, extremism, and violence that have afflicted the public square. He has created, sustained, and nourished a crazed political atmosphere which pushes lone wolf actors over the edge. He has summoned and rallied a crowd of insurrectionists and turned them loose against the legislative branch in order to remain in power. He has dipped into Nazi rhetoric, dehumanized entire peoples and nationalities, trafficked in the most racist tropes, and treated women like trash. He has taken a sledgehammer to democratic institutions and the principles upon which they are based.
You know this already. None of this is new.
But as you survey today’s news, don’t forget that Trump plays a role in every single item, usually a major, active role. There is nothing subtle about him or the threat he poses, but the sheer volume of threats and the different flavors they come in make it hard to keep a clear and steady focus on how they all emanate from one man.
Trump’s Big Lie Redux Already Well Underway
- NBC News: “As Election Day approaches, former President Donald Trump has increasingly been warning that if he loses, it will be because of cheating. … [B]y pre-emptively raising doubts about the results, Trump is setting the stage to possibly challenge the outcome and throw the electoral system into chaos again.”
- NYT: How Trump Is Using Truth Social to Concoct and Spread Conspiracy Theories
Ballot Box Fires In PDX Metro Area
A fire in a ballot box in Portland, Oregon, caused minor damage, but a similar fire across the Columbia River in Vancouver, Washington, that police believe is related damaged or destroyed hundreds of ballots. A suspect vehicle has been identified by law enforcement.
Election Threats Watch
- NBC News: “U.S. intelligence agencies have identified domestic extremists with grievances rooted in election-related conspiracy theories, including beliefs in widespread voter fraud and animosity toward perceived political opponents, as the most likely threat of violence in the coming election.”
- TPM’s Hunter Walker: Intelligence expert who aired early intel about Jan. 6 warns of “lone wolf” attacks targeting lower-level candidates and election infrastructure.
- NYT: How Russia, China and Iran Are Interfering in the Presidential Election
Sign Of The Times
Donald Trump, last night in Atlanta: “I’m not a Nazi. I’m the opposite of a Nazi.”
Quote Of The Day
Doug Emhoff, on Donald Trump:
He demeans immigrants with the same hateful slurs hurled at our ancestors: vermin, animals who poison the blood of our country. He scapegoats Jewish voters right to our faces, saying that if he loses, it will be the fault of Jews. He looks at Adolf Hitler’s generals and sees something to admire. Just let that sink in. You do not reward someone like that with a platform or with power, and never again with the presidency.
Steve Bannon Released From Prison
The former Trump adviser and right-wing provocateur was released from federal prison Tuesday after serving a four-month sentence for contempt of Congress for failing to comply with a subpoena from the House Jan. 6 committee.
A Notable Jan. 6 Sentence
Ryan Reilly: “A Hollywood actor who had supporting roles in ‘Anchorman,’ ‘Mr. Show,’ ‘Arrested Development’ and ‘Bob’s Burgers’ was sentenced to 12 months and a day in federal prison on Monday for his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.”
Court Docs Unsealed In Jan. 6 Grand Jury Probe
- Politico: Unsealed court documents show judges have long worried about Trump ‘delay tactics’
- NYT: Secret Files in Election Case Show How Judges Limited Trump’s Privilege
Bezos Backlash Continues
- NPR: More than 200,000 people had cancelled their WaPo digital subscriptions by midday Monday over Jeff Bezos’ decision to block the newspaper’s endorsement of Kamala Harris for president.
- After the media company initially sought to make it seem like the decision wasn’t Bezos’, Bezos himself penned an op-ed in which he took ownership of the decision and conceded that the timing was bad: “I wish we had made the change earlier than we did, in a moment further from the election and the emotions around it. That was inadequate planning, and not some intentional strategy.” Who could have anticipated a presidential election in November 2024?
- Two more opinion writers resigned Monday from the WaPo editorial board.
Oligarchs On The Loose
- With his various business interests and foreign entanglements, Trump II would break Trump I’s record for the most conflicted presidency in U.S. history, the NYT reports.
- Elon Musk’s America PAC is running an ad that slyly calls Kamala Harris a “cunt.”
- Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner sued to block Elon Musk’s $1 million cash giveaways to voters.
- Fiona Hill on oligarchy:
Musk is something that we’ve never really seen before. People refer back to the Rockefellers and Andrew Carnegie and the robber barons of the Gilded Age, or the billionaires that emerged in Russia in the 1990s and 2000s. Musk is beyond that in his wealth and influence. He’s on track to become the world’s first trillionaire. His personal wealth is about the same as a medium-sized country. His bonuses are on the scale of the defense budgets of a whole host of countries.
So not only is Musk trying to bankroll Trump’s reelection, but he’s talking to Putin. He’s talking to people in China and elsewhere. Musk has global business interests. He’s part of a rich and powerful class of people who see themselves as global peers.
‘Put Them In Trauma’
ProPublica and Documented have obtained videos of two private speeches by former Trump OMB Director Russ Vought at events for his pro-Trump think tank Center for Renewing America that build on work TPM has done to reveal the ambitions for a Trump II presidency.
Among the most alarming of Vought’s comments was the threat to federal government workers:
“We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected,” he said. “When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. We want their funding to be shut down so that the EPA can’t do all of the rules against our energy industry because they have no bandwidth financially to do so.
“We want to put them in trauma.”
2024 Ephemera
- Kamala Harris is scheduled to give her closing national address from The Ellipse tonight, a powerful callback to Trump’s “Stop The Steal” rally on Jan. 6.
- Harris launched a new ad seizing on Tony Hinchcliffe’s racist joke about Puerto Ricans at Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally. In related news: Hinchcliffe was originally planning to call Harris a “cunt” during his bit but the Trump campaign nixed that line.
- Brian Stelter: How social media video clippers have become some of the most powerful outlets of the 2024 campaign
CNN Blowup
CNN banned conservative panelist Ryan Girdusky from the network after he implied that former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan was a terrorist. In a live panel, Girdusky told Hasan he hoped his beeper did not explode, prompting CNN host Abby Phillip to scold, “Ryan, that is completely out of pocket.”
Girdusky to Hasan: I hope your beeper doesn’t go off pic.twitter.com/YmHhYnkDZ3
— Acyn (@Acyn) October 29, 2024
‘Holy Shit, I Just Remembered The Coup!’
On the 40th anniversary of Lee Greenwood’s paean to American exceptionalism, finally the alternative we’ve always needed:
John Oliver is sick of Lee Greenwood's "God Bless the U.S.A." being played at U.S. naturalization ceremonies, so he created an alternative—with help from Will Ferrell. pic.twitter.com/UnW7hFBVoS
— LateNighter (@latenightercom) October 28, 2024
Do you like Morning Memo? Let us know!
Inside TPM: David Kurtz
Here it is, due to popular demand, the latest episode of Inside TPM with executive editor David Kurtz. How did he come to join TPM? How does he approach the Morning Memo? What does an executive editor do? How does this election differ from others? Who will win the World Series? We go through it all, and more — hope you enjoy.
Latest Person To Give Alito A Gift: German Princess And ’80s Party Scenester-Turned-Catholic Reactionary
In 1985, Vanity Fair described Princess Gloria von Thurn und Taxis, a member of the German aristocracy, as “a wild version of her friend,” Princess Diana. Known in the tabloids as “Princess TNT,” she hosted royalty and celebrities such as Andy Warhol and Mick Jagger and was photographed endlessly sporting towering, technicolored hair and dresses reminiscent of disco balls.
Now, she hangs out with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sam Alito.
Continue reading “Latest Person To Give Alito A Gift: German Princess And ’80s Party Scenester-Turned-Catholic Reactionary”Philadelphia DA Steps In To Fight Musk’s Million-Dollar MAGA Lottery Scheme
As the world’s richest man, Elon Musk, actively campaigns for Donald Trump and pushes a daily, million-dollar giveaway stunt to influence voters in the upcoming presidential election, the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office stepped in on Monday to attempt to shut down Musk’s endeavor.
Continue reading “Philadelphia DA Steps In To Fight Musk’s Million-Dollar MAGA Lottery Scheme”What To Know About The Ballot Drop Box Incidents In Oregon And Washington
The FBI, alongside local and state law enforcement, is investigating two incidents of ballot drop boxes catching fire on Monday in Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington.
Continue reading “What To Know About The Ballot Drop Box Incidents In Oregon And Washington”Election Miscellany #1
I’m seeing more and more data points and testimonials – from both sides of the aisle – that the Democratic ground game in multiple states is superior to the Republican one, in many cases by a substantial degree. Now it’s Republicans who are starting to say it. For Republicans saying this is itself a get out the vote effort, warning of the danger to shake more Republican voters loose and get them to the polls. But looking at it in toto I think they’re saying it because they mean it.
Intelligence Expert Who Aired Early Warnings About Jan 6 Discusses Risks Ahead Of Election
January 6, 2021 is a day that will live in infamy. And nearly four years after the smoke cleared from the attack on the Capitol building, our election system remains under assault with former President Trump’s continuing, false insistence that he won the presidential race in 2020 becoming a core campaign issue for the Republican Party and a sprawling grassroots movement.
Now, Election Day — and, with it, another electoral certification on Jan. 6, 2025 — is approaching alongside the specter of violence.
To understand what to expect, TPM spoke with an intelligence expert who was on Capitol Hill on Jan. 6 and has continued to monitor the far-right.
Continue reading “Intelligence Expert Who Aired Early Warnings About Jan 6 Discusses Risks Ahead Of Election”