Monday, May 22, 2017

N.Y. Times Is No Longer Impeachment Keen

I see that the New York Times, after months of igniting anti-Trump hysteria to a fever pitch among its readers, is now marching in lockstep behind the Democratic Party leadership. 

In an abrupt about-face, the newspaper's editorial board is softening, if not abandoning, its campaign to destroy his presidency.

Just because the man is impaired is no reason for him to be impeached. Especially not while he is doing the business of the military-industrial complex overseas and selling weapons and American infrastructure deals to the highest foreign bidders. Whenever Donald Trump adopts the traditions of neoconservatism and neoliberalism, the corporate media declare a truce. They euphemise the hypocrisy by using the hackneyed term "reset."

Whenever Donald Trump bombs a country or holds tempting dollar signs out to his critics, he magically becomes Presidential. Reset early, reset often.

So within days of being castigated for insanely spilling state secrets and calling James Comey a nutcase, Trump is at least temporarily seen as rehabilitating himself in the eyes of the ruling establishment. He's maturely forgoing his Tweets and resetting his agenda to more sober goals. Trump has rid himself of extreme anti-Muslim sentiment by abandoning the odious phrase "radical Islamic extremism" and resetting his rhetoric to a more modest "Islamic extremism." Although his anti-Muslim travel ban elicited universal outrage from the whole free world, his sale of billions of dollars in weaponry to the autocratic Saudis has only elicited a yawn here, a moue of fake concern there.

Trump hasn't quite reached the level of Watergate egregiousness, so let's give the psychopath a chance, moralizes the Times. Be patient, everybody. As long as the market hasn't crashed and rich are still growing richer under his regime, no state of emergency need be declared.

The media-political complex seems to have reached its next stage of Hillary loss grief. It has overcome depression and denial, and is now straddling the fence between bargaining and acceptance. What I've called the "Deep State" interregnum in the form of an official investigation by a trusted member of the plutocracy (Robert Mueller) is having the desired calming effect on The Times.

As its editorialists pontificate:
The national interest and the integrity of the democratic process are undeniably at stake in the investigation. And it may turn out that the president and his associates have engaged in an attempt to obstruct justice; really bad stuff could turn up. But Watergate? We’re not there yet. That’s a word that summons obstruction on a monumental scale, with evidence to prove overt criminal acts — not least the White House conspiracy to burglarize the Democratic Party headquarters. Scores of administration officials were indicted or jailed when President Nixon had to flee from office on the eve of certain impeachment.
It seems to me that the Gray Lady is confusing peaches with pears. The Trumpian graft and corruption being conducted right under our very noses ( awarding ownership and control of American infrastructure to a regime which cuts people's heads off and bombs Yemen into a state of famine and disease) is not quite as bad as Nixon giving cash bribes to burglars and then lying about it. That's because both sides of the Uniparty have long been selling this country out to the highest bidders, both foreign and domestic. If they make too big a deal out of Trump doing it too, it might endanger their own future profits.

They want American voters to get riled up and resistant, but not to get too riled up and too resistant. Their objective is to eventually replace Trump with a more refined, slimy politician - not to blow up the whole de facto oligarchy.

Plus, it is so much more convenient to just blame the Republicans and paint the Democrats as the virtuous, but powerless, opposition party. And look at what happened the last time the House impeached a president. Their hounding of Bill Clinton destroyed the dignity of the whole impeachment process. We can't make the mistake of impeaching over partisan pretenses ever again!

The Times editorial smarmily concludes,
For Democrats, too much indulgence of impeachment notions could prove a distraction from the more workaday and politically achievable challenge at hand. Their main job is to rouse the public to use Mr. Trump’s unimpressive polling numbers as leverage on Republicans, who already are citing the Mueller investigation as reason to slow down congressional inquiries into the Trump and Russia affair. Beyond that, they and other critics should be working hard to win back a majority next year in at least one house of Congress. This would secure them the subpoena power to shed far better light for the nation on Mr. Trump’s and his enablers’ sorry deeds.
It's not about justice and the greater good at all. That would be so self-indulgent. It's definitely not about campaigning on a platform of Medicare for All, student debt forgiveness, affordable housing, a guaranteed job, and a guaranteed income. It's all about the Democratic Party winning back power by fomenting fear and loathing of Trump while still keeping him around long enough to gin up optimum fear and loathing-- and tons of campaign cash.

 One person's "workaday challenge" might entail coming up with next month's rent check or insurance co-pay. What the plutocracy, represented by its Times mouthpiece, views as a workaday challenge is maintaining the status quo of its own unfettered wealth and power. 

As far as the New York Times is concerned, the only thing we need is to see the light. Food, shelter and medical care can wait for another day, another year, another decade. It's Democratic incrementalism you should believe in.

They want us to delay justice for Trump until the Democrats can be the stars of the show. Even if it risks electing him to a second term, it will be so worth it.

 Trump is certainly not the only sociopath for whom winning is everything and for whom the daily struggles of ordinary desperate people are just a pesky afterthought.


Jamie said...

I have another analysis. Trump is a capitalist pig. He is skillfully tearing away portions of the ruling class from the neoliberals. He is courting big oil and the military. He knows his enemies are just pawns of the ruling class and he wants them on his side.

His trip to Saudi Arabia was very skillful in this regard. The Bush and Clinton dynasties were enabled by the Saudis -- just one phone call and the Kingdom can stop their soft coup against Trump.

Going to Israel is also brilliant. Here Trump hopes to court more of the Jewish ruling class, which has great influence over the media. I am sure powerful players in that world have called their media stooges and made the appropriate corrections.

Mark Thomason said...

"now marching in lockstep behind the Democratic Party leadership"

It may be more accurate to say they are part of the Democratic Party leadership. They are not separate. They were entirely on one side for the election, with constant commmunications to reflect the Democratic approach at any given time. Thus, this is just more of the same.

It is not that the media approves of neocons and neolibs, it is that the Hillary part of the Democratic Party is hawkish interventionist indistinguishable from neocons, and their economic program long ago triangulated all the way to neoliberalism. The media now mourns the loss of the gold plated trade deal that Hillary briefly abandoned because voters hated it -- and Hillary's abandonment of it was never credible.

As FOX News is part of the Republican Party, so other major media is now part of the Democratic Party. And the two parties are much the same on the big questions, differing only on who gets to profit from being in the driver's seat at any given moment.

Zee said...

I am doubtless playing with fire by responding to Jamie’s comment, but there are some things that MUST be said even at the risk of once again being asked to vacate this blog , post haste.

While I would miss being here, worse things have happened to me, I suppose. (Like not being able to see out of my right eye, which is my current situation.)

Jamie, when I hear the phrase “Jewish ruling class” in just about any context, the very top of my head wants to blow off.

Yes, we have in this country some very wealthy and powerful Jews whose names—and the [defense and media?] industries that they control— have been pointed out to me/us by Karen and Pearl Vokhlov, among others. Exact names and the associated industries elude me at the moment, but I acknowledge that basic truth.

But we also have any number of non-Jewish personages/families who control vast sectors of the American economy as well.

Not to mention work-a-day Jews at all levels of American life, ranging from poverty to the upper-middle-class, and from Republican to Democrat, alike. To trot out an old cliché: some of these people also happen to be my friends.

So when I hear the phrase “Jewish ruling class” casually trotted out in relationship to some vague global conspiracy—especially from someone who describes him/herself as a “Marxist,”—as I said, the top of my head wants to explode.

Wherein lies this vast “Jewish conspiracy?” Wasn’t Trotsky—for example—of Jewish heritage? Weren’t many Jews also Bolshevists?

Do I need to dig out an antiquated copy of the [long-discredited] “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” in order to understand your full meaning of the “Jewish ruling class,” in order to really understand the depth of my secret subjugation to the Jews?

Or maybe I should simply ask my Hispanic wife—who is Jewish on her mother’s side—if she has been secretly subverting my political opinions all these 43 years of our marriage?

I am, after all, a staunch supporter of Israel. Is this all the result of my wife’s Jewish “subversion” of my thought?

Sorry, Jamie, but when I hear claptrap about some sort of global Jewish conspiracy—especially from a self-proclaimed “Marxist,” I sort of tune things out.

And rightly so, I think.

Jay–Ottawa said...

It's so easy to lose track of what is important. We live in a society of entertainment that surpasses the distractions of ancient Rome. Our colosseum is open around the clock; our ticket is a subscription to the net. The smaller your connection device, the more time you are likely to be spending in the American colosseum. We are hooked. Giving up the internet is about as difficult as shaking off an addiction to cigarettes or drugs.

As has been pointed out before, Trump is not the problem. He is the symptom. The underlying problem is a coast-to-coast system deeply corrupted over the course of decades. Getting rid of Trump now would change nothing.

Bill Clinton lied in his first campaign. It's not the economy, stupid. It's the system, top to bottom. Cells of reason, compassion and beauty are getting harder to find and protect. How many people do you know personally who might be classified as serious resisters?

The current system was brought about by the diligence of a selfish minority and the dalliance of the majority, either through laziness or civic ignorance. The new system firmly in place allows elected officials to devote all of their time expanding the disparities between the 99% and the 1%.

Those bumper sticker numbers may be a bit off. After taking into account the many collaborators with the corrupt system, the percentages should probably be recast as the 80% who are sliding into serfdom and the 20% who actively cater to the elites in charge.

Less than 5% within the 80% voted Third Party against the Duopoly in the last election. According to one professor who expressed a dominant view, a Third Party vote was useless.

“This [was] not the year to cast a useless protest vote,” said Elizabeth Sherman, government professor at American University’s School of Public Affairs. “There’s a lot at stake this election, it’s a very close election, and the message is out, every vote counts. People remember Ralph Nader.”

See any falsehoods in her statement? Would you enroll in her course?

Also useless was staying home or allowing millions of voters to be disqualified from voting for no valid reason. But what was supremely useless was casting a vote for either candidate from the Duopoly.

If every vote, no matter which way cast, was useless, could the good professor, upon reflection, assert we live in a democracy? If the US is no longer a democracy, what is it?

stranger in a strange land said...

The ruling class in Israel, perhaps is what Jamie intended. That has a lot of influence over American media.

Is it a 'global conspiracy' that Israel has disproportionate influence on American policy?

Anyway, this post was about how Trump is useful tool of The Ruling Class - a designation free from ethnicity or nationality. And humanity - I heard they're some sort of reptile aliens.

Zee said...

@stranger in a strange land--

Your interpretation of Jamie's remark is probably correct.


I apologize for my misguided over-reaction.

Jamie said...


Trump hopes to court the pro-Israeli fractions of the ruling class.

Zee said...

Is it just me, or does Hillary resemble some type of evil Spanish inquisitor, dressed as she is in her pitch-black, medieval academic raiment?