As I finally get around to reading Drift, I’m getting a much different picture of Ronald Reagan, among others. It reinforces the notion that voting for a former entertainer doesn’t necessarily get you much in the way of substance. I’ve never understood the hero worship and reverence when it comes to Reagan, who, in some ways, was just an actor who landed the biggest role of his life.

Trump’s lawyers are grasping at straws. They’re parading out the traditional, yet bogus arguments defending all that happened leading up to, and in the midst of the January 6 insurrection, and afterwards– that it was all within the purview of Presidential duties.

So, indifference is within this purview, as is affective instability, as is animosity toward his V.P. and anyone who doesn’t kiss the ring, as are laziness and immaturity and pre-meditation, as is giving aid and comfort to the insurrectionists he “loved,” as is a long record of wildly incendiary invective, i.e. he could stand in the middle of 5^th Avenue and shoot somebody and not lose any voters, as is…

I know, some of the above list is probably not relevant to current arguments in the appellate hearing going on in D.C., but the smarmy reputation of the man precedes him, envelopes and emanates from him like the dirt cloud around Pig-Pen.

The “impending chaos” argument being trotted out by the Trump legal team doesn’t hold water either, since anyone with a semblance of ability to process information knows that such indiscretion and awful behavior as manifested in Trump is the rare exception, not the rule, when it comes to the character of people who have occupied the office of POTUS. If the childish tit-for-tat unfolds, then facts will have to hold the line, win the day, whenever time is wasted in such pursuits.

Trump’s argument has been sniffed out from miles away, anticipated, and hopefully awaits the heave-ho from the panel of judges.

Another case coming for the Supreme Court, though, with an exhausted nation wringing its hands.    

So Trump is under fire for claiming the Civil War could have been negotiated…

He really shouldn’t open his mouth at all. Nothing good ever comes out of it. He either pulls what he claims directly out of his ass, or simply gives voice to the sludge Stephen Miller and others keep feeding him, serving it up to his adoring minions or a waiting press who still hangs on his every word, even if they’re knowingly waiting for the next dumb thing he says.

Trump reminds me of an out-of-control air hose, flailing erratically, kicking up dust and debris and making life difficult for anyone trying to stop it.   

Most people know that whatever quest he’s conjured is way less than honorable, but we seem powerless to stop him. The Supreme Court could do us a favor and find in favor of the Colorado decision, even if that would/might lead to unrest and violence and feelings of disenfranchisement. It’s time to rip the Band-Aid off and stanch the constant flow of sewage, force the Republican Party to do some soul searching, find a sensible, rational voice. Or self-immolate.

Imagine what’s going on behind the scenes right now, in all three branches of government. There should be some interesting reads being published down the line.

The language leaves little room for interpretation, according to Rep. Raskin and other experts on MSNBC. Of course, they interview different experts on Fox and similar networks, people who predictably find different meaning in Article 3 of the 14^th Amendment or just throw spaghetti at the wall.

The Supreme Court is going to be called upon to make a ruling, beginning February 8, so until then and however long it takes for them to reach a decision, we will have to endure the back and forth, the round and round, the hyperbole, the points and counterpoints, along with breathless predictions of how the SCOTUS will actually vote.

It seems to me that the high court will decide in deference to Trump, mindful of the potential for violence and feelings of disenfranchisement among the hair-triggered and frazzled Trump faithful, and it will be left in the hands of voters in November.

Of course, they could also interpret things in a way that calls for removal of Trump from the ballot immediately—for the same reason he would be ineligible if he was 30 years old or born in Germany. He was an officer—the highest officer in the land—from 2017-2021, and decided he didn’t want to step down after he got demolished by 7 million votes in the 2020 election, not to mention a significant margin in the Electoral College.

There was no rigged election, no consideration for the sacrosanct nature of a peaceful transfer of power. Trump simply hates to lose. All the ensuing lawsuits and Mike Johnson’s amicus brief didn’t change a thing, and Trump doggedly clings to the narrative that he thinks best serves his ends.

The argument for letting the voters decide may sound good on the surface, but is really immaterial here, weak and distasteful, because Article 3 states a qualification, or disqualification, that’s clear enough for most any strict constructionist to see. Trump still would get to vote, but would be unable to run for office. Sounds like a win to me, regardless of what ends up happening with the four indictments and 91 felony counts– litigation that could linger in the court system for years, if Trump can keep getting away with his delay tactics.

Computers baffle me. I use one every day, but I have next to no understanding of why and how it does what it does. So when the Word screen all of a sudden goes white in the middle of a writing project, I react as if it’s the worst possible thing that could ever happen.

It’s an over-the-top and unwarranted reaction, but it happens because I am at a total loss for why the freaking laptop is behaving this way all of a sudden. It happens without warning, and it is rage-inducing. I have no idea how to fix it. I wait for the circle to stop spinning. I hit Control-Alt-Delete, I hit the on-off button until it executes a forced shut-down. I call 911 (no, I don’t), I reboot, I sit and stew and curse.

It’s the not knowing that frustrates me beyond words, except four-letter words.

There’s a wall that exists, though. So much of what we have at our disposal is stuff we take for granted without having a concept of the often complex inner workings. We consume things, we buy things only to use them, trusting that we’ll never have to troubleshoot. I want my laptop to work every time, to handle the tasks I demand of it, without worrying about breakdowns and glitches and sudden white screens and error messages and warnings that make no sense.

It’s the sudden onset and randomness that does me in. Did I hit the wrong key somehow? Did I inadvertently give it a command to stop functioning normally and go into hair-pulling mode? I guess I need to step back and learn to go into my own evaluation and assessment mode—to treat this as my own riddle to solve, as a “fun” challenge, as a journey of discovery…

Computers are logical, after all, so there must be a straightforward explanation. But in the moment, that’s not necessarily what I’m thinking.

“War itself is, of course, a form of madness. It’s hardly a civilized pursuit. It’s amazing how we spend so much time inventing devices to kill each other and so little time working on how to achieve peace.”   – Walter Cronkite

Yes, Mr. Cronkite, we do seem to spend an inordinate amount of time in pursuits that lead to the desired upper hand on a battle field or in the skies, or whatever front needs attention. Our priorities are severely skewed, a reflection of our mistrust and fears and blind ambition, and love of money.

It’s entirely maddening, isn’t it?

The list of descriptors is long, when it comes to giving voice to our anger over such misguided pursuits and principles. We see a better world seemingly within our grasp. We talk about it a lot, but we can’t reach it.

We are haunted by the past, hardly learning from it, it seems, unable to turn a corner and emerge from the long shadow of the vile, unspeakably evil misdeeds of people, mostly men, who behave as if their views of politics and world order should be embraced by all, spread around the world, whether or not the rest of the world shares their zeal and vision.

The supply of these types– deluded and damaged, paranoid, angry, lured by the siren song of power and riches, and suffering from a debilitating deficit of affect– seems to be endless. There is no evolution of thought and action. More time needs to pass, apparently, before future generations– if we still exist as a species– may see a softening, an emerging wisdom that looks like patience and compassion and a deference for difference, for living and letting live. For having had enough of the violence and death and heartbreak and assault on the more prevalent desire to live in peace.

Co-existence may be a cliched bumper sticker, but it deserves a more prominent place in our thinking and acting. We are not all the same. Human beings are not all the same! We’re largely averse to being herded, though it may not always look that way. Why is that so difficult for some world “leaders” to understand? Certain leaders aren’t leading. They’re merely reaping the benefits of their position, motivated by power and the need to hold onto it, immune to feeling anything approaching genuine love for the people they govern. They live in a world where everything is transactional, and reduced to wins and losses.

China promises to “reunify” Taiwan, Ukraine is fighting an increasingly mobilized Goliath, Israel is behaving like a cornered rat, though justifiably so, and the Middle East in general appears to be heading toward some sort of violent reckoning that will draw the rest of the world into yet one more conflict turned world-wide conflagration.

This seems to be what we do best– set our sights low and just give up on light. It seems we prefer perpetual darkness.

What’s happening to church? Have people just stopped believing? Has church somehow outlived its usefulness?

Everyone went to church a couple generations ago, or at least a high percentage of them did. Were we all sold a bill of goods? Were we like lemmings? Or is it just about scheduling and calendars anymore?

Did congregations in the same denomination spring up across the street from each other simply because a small group of leader types didn’t agree with how “that other church” was interpreting scripture? Or they thought they could do it better(!)? Or that they were better, or at least had a more enlightened understanding of God’s word?

What the hell was up with two or more (pick a denomination) congregations literally in the same block or on opposite corners of the street, building cavernous structures that said more about penis envy than any amount of reverence or “if you build it…” faith?

It was a model destined for collapse, as it turns out, because untrained “experts” who just wanted to show off decided their understanding of what the Bible does and doesn’t say was superior to what “those other people” were peddling.

Scripture is dynamite, deadly dangerous in the hands of those who think lazy, convenient interpretation will do. Think Mike Johnson, or legislators in Texas who apparently would love to keep women in their place. Congress is full of these types, and it looks like their star is rising.

The best news on the Google newsfeed this morning is that Leo the Golden Retriever was rescued from a 300-foot cliff somewhere in Oregon.

The rest of the headlines were more of the same old head-scratching, gloom and doom—China is now patrolling the South China Sea, and RFK, Jr. has gathered enough signatures to be on the primary ballot in Utah as an Independent candidate for POTUS.

RFK and RFK, Jr.—one of these is not like the other. I don’t know who this benefits more in November, but I can’t imagine the Biden camp is any too happy.

I watched Jamie Raskin explain the validity of Article 3 of the 14^th Amendment last night. For most Democrats, and anyone who wants to see Donald Trump get what’s coming to him, what he said made perfect sense and was nice to hear.

For most Republicans, and those who STILL think Trump walks on water, it was as if all that Raskin said was pulled directly from his ass and was offered up only in service of spreading lies and misinformation and a liberal bias.

There is no winning of arguments here. One can listen to a Constitutional scholar explain things in plain terms, and you will either hear something rational and sensible, or something horribly misinterpreted and offered only in the service of glorifying the “weaponized” justice system and adding fuel to the fire that Trump indeed is the victim of a years-long “witch hunt.”

Positions are hardened. It’s difficult to know exactly what happens by early November, but the gut is telling many that it’s gonna be a patch of rough road, to put it mildly. In no small part because millions continue to be deceived by a fallen “star,” just another “celebrity” whose qualifications aren’t even skin deep.

Sorry for all the quotes. They feel justified, though.

Removing Trump from ballots isn’t going to solve anything, because not every state is going to follow the lead of Maine and Colorado. Such efforts may only end up amounting to a form of public protest that doesn’t really change anything. Just more evidence of the partisan divide.

This potential electoral mess must be on a lot of peoples’ minds already. Without unanimity, or even with it, nothing will be solved, and the anger index might be ratcheted all the way up to Civil War.

I understand the premise, the why of such a removal attempt—because there is a Constitutional provision for removing bad actors, even if it originates post-1865—but we’re in too deep for any such righteous move to actually mean anything. One can envision red states ignoring a SCOTUS ruling that doesn’t go in their favor, and maybe even removing Democrats from ballots, just because.

So, as much as it sounds like the right thing to do, and as much as we’re way past tired of his ugly mug, it’s not going to solve the problem that is Donald Trump. Our only hope is a pre-election guilty verdict in one of the indictments (dream on…), or denying him in November.

Saying that last part out loud is beyond depressing, because there is no reason for his inclusion in any conversation about electability or fitness for the job. He’s horrible, and a lot of people on both sides of the aisle know he’s horrible. But that has never mattered.

This is feeling like one of those times when we describe the slow-motion inevitability of a car crash—we could see it coming but were helpless to change the outcome.

It can’t unfold that way.

(But it did.)