Myths about No Kings

As some of you may remember, I, along with a few million of my fellow Americans, attended a No Kings rally last weekend. Since then, I’ve seen a few misconceptions about the rallies floating around the interwebs, so I thought that I would address a few of the erroneous assumptions. Photo by David Thornton Share Trump is still president. Yup. It may come as a surprise, but deposing Donald Trump over the weekend was not a goal of No Kings. These were peaceful rallies, not insurrections. The goal is to hold Trump accountable, not overthrow him. As much as Trump deserves to be impeached or subjected to 25th Amendment removal, it simply isn’t in the cards with Republicans in control of Congress and few, if any, ralliers had any illusions that it was. We don’t have a king. This one is a favorite and has even been trotted out by Trump himself. Yes, we realize that America has no kings; we’re just not sure you realize it. Consider that there are at least three social media posts by the White House since Saturday depicting Donald Trump with a crown. Even if you think this is trolling rather than kidding on the square or hiding his intentions in plain sight, Trump is already ruling by decree without the consent of Congress (including bailing out political cronies with tens of billions of taxpayer dollars), using the military to occupy American cities without the consent of state governments, setting price controls, taking “golden share” interest in private corporations, allowing a masked and secretive police force to abduct people off the street, removing guardrails against corruption and (of course) authoritarianism, unilaterally starting a low-intensity war, and repeatedly stating that he has the “right to do anything I want to do.” That sounds a lot like a king’s behavior, and not a particularly benevolent one. No Kings was about warning the president that we don’t want a king and won’t stand idly by. It was just the usual Democrat protesters. There were some Democrats. There were also many others. I’m not a Democrat and have never been one. I’ve attended demonstrations only rarely and most of those were Tea Party rallies. I haven’t seen polling on the participants of No Kings, but I think you’ll find that these events brought out a lot of fresh faces and non-Democrats. No Kings was funded by the Communist Party. Wait, I thought the No Kings protesters were all Democrats. Democrats and Communists are two completely different parties, despite what MAGA might think. These two claims undercut each other. The sole piece of evidence that I have seen of communist influence is a event notice that was posted to the platform formerly known as Twitter that lists CPUSA as a sponsoring organization. The flip side is that that notice was for one event out of many, and the CPUSA was one sponsor out of many. There are reportedly more than 200 groups that make up the coalition that organized the protests. The CPUSA said that its members “were in the mix,” but made no mention of funding the events. If the Communist Party is indeed a sponsor, I could point to the fact that the United States has officially partnered with communist nations in the struggle against fascism (and I don’t use that term lightly, see Prof. Greg Jackson’s definition) in the past. World War II, anyone? Politics and the struggle against dictatorships often make strange bedfellows. That seems to be the case here. Anyone who thinks that the millions of Americans who took part in the protests are being taken in by communist propaganda (or maybe there are 5 million American communists?) is fooling themselves. All the money in the world can’t make people show up if they don’t believe in the cause. George Soros funded the rallies. There is an indirect connection between George Soros and No Kings. The Economic Times reports that Soros’ Open Society Foundations (OSF) awarded grants to Indivisible, one of the organizing groups of the demonstrations, but the OSF website states, “We do not pay people to protest or directly train or coordinate protestors.” Open Secrets shows that donors to the Indivisible Project in 2024 were almost exclusively individual donors. Again, MAGA is attempting to discredit No Kings by emphasizing the connection to Soros, but the big picture is that Indivisible seems to be largely a grassroots organization of concerned Americans, and Soros is only a small part of the group’s funding. Further, the Fox News expose of Indivisible cites only $3 million given in 2023. According to my math, that was before Trump returned to the White House. George Soros, 95, has long been a bogeyman for Republicans. Having been born in Hungary in 1930 and survived the Nazi occupation of Europe, Soros has good reason to oppose fascism. As I said earlier, fighting authoritarianism takes a broad coalition, and not everyone in the coalition is going to agree across the board. The Soros argument reminds me a lot of liberal critiques of the Koch brothers’ support for the Tea Party, another grassroots movement with organizational and financial support from numerous sources. No Kings is anti-Christian. I saw one online poster claiming that No Kings was anti-Christian and possibly demonic because Jesus is a king. The fact is that the No Kings attendees were concerned about wannabe secular kings rather than spiritual ones. A great many of us who attended are Christian. In fact, for many attendees, following Christ’s admonitions to love your neighbors and your enemies and foreigners is a reason to oppose the Trump Administration’s sadistic behavior. If you look at pictures from the various No Kings rallies, you’ll see no shortage of Bible-inspired messages. It was a Hate-America rally. The government has claimed that No Kings was about hating America. In truth, I have seen no indication of anti-American attitudes either in the rally I attended or in online reporting. There were lots of American flags and the criticism was focused on Trump, RFKJR, ICE, and Mike Johnson. The only way No Kings can be construed as anti-American is if you think Trump is America. That’s an attitude a king might display. The crowds were overstated and not convincing. The decentralized nature of the No Kings demonstrations makes counting difficult, and a final count is not yet available. Organizers claim 7 million attendees, but even if the actual count was half that, it would be significant. At 7 million, the demonstrators would equate to about two percent of the entire US population. That is a politically seismic movement. The III Percent militia group claims that only three percent of colonial Americans fought against the British in the Revolutionary War (although that number is probably low), and political scientist Erica Chenowith has claimed that if 3.5 percent of the population is willing to engage in nonviolent civil resistance, such as mass demonstrations, a dictatorship can be overthrown. The fact that 1-2 percent of the population was willing to come out on a Saturday and march against Trump should frighten the president and his MAGA enablers. That is especially true since opposition to Trump is likely to increase as the economy slows and the president’s abuses of power worsen. You’re just a [insert insult here]. Often by this point (or before), my MAGA conversation partners will start calling me names. Resorting to insults is often an admission of defeat by people who don’t have the facts on their side. To those who can maintain civility, you have my appreciation. Civil discussion is a big part of what’s missing in America. If we can bring it back to small corners of the internet, dinner tables, or political rallies, we will have won a small victory. One small but important aspect of the No Kings rally that I attended was the peaceful coexistence of No Kings demonstrators and pro-Trump counterprotesters. The two groups existed in the same space without yelling, name-calling, or throwing fists (or bullets). These days, that’s something to celebrate. Summary The massive No Kings rallies show a groundswell of opposition to Donald Trump’s reign. Republicans have badly overplayed their hand and face a growing voter backlash. It’s no wonder they want so badly to discredit what is essentially an anti-Trump coalition, but the people who showed up on Saturday are not going away. As Trump continues to abuse his authority in new and frightening ways, their numbers will only grow. Thanks for reading The Racket News ™! This post is public so feel free to share it. Share Over the weekend, I spent some time talking with our friend, Chris Karr. Chris asked me to be a guest on his Initiative podcast. I’m sure that I’m not as interesting as he thinks I am, but we had a great conversation. If you’d like to have it delivered to your inbox, visit https://theinitiative.us to subscribe. It should be released in a few days. from the Racket News

What is Trump's endgame?

 We are not quite three-quarters into the first year of Donald Trump’s second presidential term, and the pace of Trump’s overreach seems to be quickening. Trump is attempting to send troops to Chicago and Portland, launching attacks on Caribbean boats with impunity, and openly threatening the political opposition at home. At the same time, the government is shut down and, with the House in recess, Republicans seem to have no interest in reopening it. The domestic economy is slowing, and Trumpand Republican approval ratings are falling. 

When I look at the Trump-Republican agenda, I see few, if any, signs that the party ever plans to be out of power. They just don’t act like they have anything to lose by going full authoritarian. (Never go full authoritarian.) That isn’t to say that Trump is going to cancel elections. There are other explanations for the attitude. 

Photo credit: Twitter screenshot from https://x.com/billifer1973

Share

One plausible explanation is that Trump and MAGA are so securely protected by their bubbles of confirmation bias that they don’t see the growing tide of discontent and domestic problems. Maybe they actually think that they are doing a good job and that voters are pleased despite the polls. This is plausible because it has happened before as recently as the Biden Administration and the first Trump Administration and the Obama Administration. 

Another possibility is that it’s an exercise in intimidation. Maybe Trump & Co. are trying to frighten potential opponents into standing down. Maybe they think making examples of a few high profile opponents will cow the rest. If that’s the case, they don’t know Americans very well.

There seems to be more to it this time, though. With Trump exercising more and more broad and unchecked power and becoming increasingly aggressive towards his political critics, calling for the arrest of some Democrats, this definitely feels different from previous presidents. 

There are a couple of possibilities. One is that this is all for show, red meat for the MAGA base, and that Trump should, as his defenders have often said, be taken seriously but not literally. Maybe the small-scale deployments to Democratic cities (are there any other kind?) are yet another example of Trump acting to create a momentary headline while everything remains essentially unchanged.

Or maybe we are seeing harbingers of things to come, a boiling frog scenario of acclimating Americans to the sight of soldiers patrolling our cities and breaking down legal and psychological barriers to military occupation and law enforcement. There are at least two reasons that I think this is the likely answer. 

First, the troops are being deployed at a time when there is no appreciable unrest. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that ICE protests in Portland were small and “low energy,” which sounds like a Trump insult, before the news of the deployment. Since then, Portland protesters have rallied in inflatable animal costumes, danced the “Cha Cha Slide,” and even held a reportedly-real wedding (between inflatable Kenny from “South Park” and a unicorn) rather than engaging in violence. Things have beenmore tense in Chicago, but local law enforcement still seems to have matters well in hand, and much of the violence seems to originate with ICE, which is amassing a record of excessive brutality including attacks on journalists and priests.

So why is Trump deploying the National Guard? My theory is that he hopes to provoke a violent response that will allow him to use the Insurrection Act. This law gives the president broad powers to use the military domestically with a low threshold for activation. 

As Sarah Isgur and David French recently discussed on the Advisory Opinions podcast, Trump has two paths to the Insurrection Act. So far, deployments have involved National Guard troops under Title 10, a different part of federal law with a higher bar for use than the Insurrection Act, which can basically be implemented at presidential discretion. Use of the Insurrection Act without an insurrection would come at a high political cost, however. (The fact that the Insurrection Act has not been used already is one of the few considerations of political cost that I have seen from the Trump Administration.) 

But if the National Guard deployments trigger violence and unrest, then Trump has a reason to invoke the Insurrection Act. This also explains the heavy-handed ICE tactics that are angering communities. It would be another classic case of “Trump Uses Emergency Power to Deal With Crisis Created By Trump.”

As Isgur and French further explain, the Insurrection Act bypasses the Posse Comitatus law, which restricts the use of the military for law enforcement. Under the current deployment rules, the National Guard can only be used for things like protecting federal buildings. Under the Insurrection Act, we could see regular army units patrolling cities and arresting people. It would be a hair away from martial law. 

A second reason that this feels different is Trump and Hegspeth’s meeting of general officers. While much of what made the headlines from the meeting was Hegspeth’s changes to grooming and physical fitness standards, there were more sinister aspects that included scaling back whistleblower rules, more lenient rules of engagement, and allowing more hazing. Further, Trump told the generals, “We should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military….”

“If the words I’m speaking today are making your heart sink, then you should do the honorable thing and resign,” Hegseth added.

With Congress under MAGA control and Trump’s appointments starting to fill the judiciary, the military is one of the last bastions of resistance to Trump’s will. It is very possible that Trump and Hegseth want to encourage current military leaders to retire so that they can be replaced with MAGA loyalists in the ranks. 

Trump remembers how Gen. Milley and others stymied his actions during his first term. We know this because Milley and others were mentioned in Hegspeth’s speech. Most of Trump’s appointments in his second term have focused on removing obstacles to Trump’s plans rather putting effective and intelligent people in federal jobs.

Beyond these two points, there are a multitude of other reasons to be concerned. The Administration has rolled out new restrictions on the press and punished outlets that don’t toe the line, even suggesting revoking the licenses of critical media outlets. Likewise, the Administration is threatening to hold federal funds for colleges hostage unless schools agree to a broad list of demands. There is the politically-motivated prosecution of James Comey, which was initiated just under the statute of limitations after Trump fired a federal prosecutor who refused to go to court with the very thin charges against Comey. 

And then there is Dark Lord Stephen Miller’s recent claim that the president has “plenary authority,” i.e., unlimited control, over the military. For those unfamiliar with the US Constitution and its system of checks and balances, the president does not have unlimited power, although Miller’s claim parallels Trump’s longstanding belief that “I have the right to do whatever I want.”

So what does Trump want to do? What is his endgame? I think there are two possibilities. The first is that he wants to foment civil unrest as a way of making Democrats look bad and convincing voters to reject them and preserve Republican control. 

The second possibility is that Trump wants to foment civil unrest to expand his emergency powers. Under this scenario, he may increasingly use lawfare against political opponents and attempt to use the military to control the population. 

The first scenario can be beaten back at the polls, but the second includes the possibility that there might not be free and fair elections. Short of attempting to cancel elections, MAGA could intimidate voters and tamper with results, at least in states and precincts with MAGA election officials.

What happens in that case? Violence, for one thing. People would take to the streets in both violent and peaceful demonstrations. A plethora of lawsuits would be filed, for another. The military would likely be ordered to put down the demonstrations. If we get to this point, a big question will be which the courts and the army come down on. 

I’m placing my hopes on the American people. A great many despots have been brought down by mass demonstrations and national strikes when public opinion turned strongly against them and the people overcome their fear to stand for freedom. In some cases, the dictator sees the writing on the wall and absconds ahead of the mob. In others, the demonstrations are violently repressed. 

My hope is that American security forces would join the pro-democracy, Constitution, and rule of law protesters as we saw in the peaceful revolutions in former Soviet bloc countries, and not start shooting their fellow countrymen the way Chinese solders did at Tiananmen Square. 

I hope and pray that we haven’t gone that far.

Thanks for reading The Racket News ™! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

NOT PRO-LIFE: The Intercept reported that ICE was detaining an unknown number of pregnant women against federal rules. Some of the moms say they are not being provided with prenatal care, basic medical care, or adequate healthy (and edible) food.

265 DAYS since Trump was inaugurated and the Epstein files still have not been released.

TRUMP GUN REGISTRY? AG Pam Bondi’s DOJ just forced several gun groups to reveal their membership lists as part of a lawsuit, raising concerns about a possible government list of gun owners. Trump has historically been squishy on the Second Amendment, and it’s likely than an authoritarian Trump government would eventually target gun owners.

KUDOS TO TRUMP for his role in Middle East ceasefire and release of the hostages. I am frequently critical of Trump, but on the occasion that he does something right, I have no problem with patting him on the back. I’m very happy for the freed hostages and their families. It’s way past time for the Gaza war to end.

From the Racket News

Scenes from a No Kings rally

 I’m not a big fan of crowds. I’m not generally a protester. My son in the military was on leave and Saturday was his last day home. I could think of a lot of excuses to stay home and not go to my local No Kings rally. 

In the end, I woke up early and the rest of of the house was asleep so I decided to put in an appearance, at least for a while. With the October 18 rallies touted as being the largest nationwide demonstration in American history and the fact that I had encouraged others to take part, I knew I’d regret it if I didn’t get out. 

All photos by David Thornton- All rights reserved 

Share

I’m not a liberal or a leftist, although I will confess to being anti-fascist as well as an anti-communist. I’m a conservative whose views on the issues are mostly unchanged changed since I showed up for some of the earliest Tea Party rallies back in 2010. My only other experience at demonstrations was a silent pro-life/anti-abortion vigil sponsored by a church I attended many years ago. 

It occurred to me this morning that the No Kings message is very similar to the Tea Party message. Both movements are about resisting government overreach and authoritarian executives. The difference is that the parties have largely changed positions as the occupant of the Oval Office has changed, as well as the fact that Trump’s abuse of executive power far exceeds anything Obama ever did. 

Many of my former Tea Party associates are now quite happy to have a president bend and shred the Constitution and other laws because they agree with his goals (or what they think his goals are). It’s a classic case of the ends justifying the means in their minds. 

What both sides miss is that the Constitution and our body of law are there to protect us all. They are not obstacles to be dismantled on the way to forcing partisan will on the other side. They are guardrails to preserve our Republic and ensure that no president becomes a king. Many of these guardrails have already been removed. 

So, I went to the No Kings rally in my town, not sure what to expect. The crowd was larger than I expected with several hundred happy, friendly, polite people of all ages and ethnicities. There were a few people who looked stereotypically leftist, but most looked like people from next door, although some wore costumes. There was a unicorn, a knight, and a man in colonial garb, which may be what made me think of the Tea Party. 

If these were radicals, they were disappointingly so. There were no black-garbed Antifa hoodies or people yelling at the few police officers present. Members of the crowd waved as cars went by and honked their support. 

Three Trump supporters, one of whom was open-carrying a pistol, staged a small counterprotest and were almost uniformly ignored by the crowd. This stands in contrast to the large number of Trump supporters that I saw heckling Harris supporters outside a rally headlined by Tim Walz before the election.

Likewise, there was a small (two or three people that I could tell) contingent from the Democratic Socialists of Georgia. They had set up a table, but were likewise being ignored by the crowd. I did think the sign with their logo, which prominently featured a possum, was amusing but I didn’t take a picture.

At this Georgia rally, both the demonstrators and the counter-protesters had signs that referenced Christianity. One of the first things I saw as I approached was a woman leading attendees in singing “This Little Light of Mine,” an old Bible School song. There were also lots of American flags.

I won’t say the rally was exciting. There were a few speakers and people who led the crowd in songs, such as Bob Marley’s “Get Up, Stand Up,” and a variety of chants. My personal favorite was something like “Measles, COVID, and the flu, this is Trump’s health plan for you.” That one passes the fact check. 

For me, the rally wasn’t about being entertained, although I had a good time mingling with the crowd and taking pictures of some of the more notable costumes and clever signs. It was about showing up and exercising my right to tell the country that I do not support what the Trump Administration is doing. I showed up because if we don’t exercise our First Amendment rights now, we may not be able to in another few years. 

In the interest of full disclosure, I did end up leaving the rally early to spend time with my son before he had to fly out. My purpose was not to be there from beginning to end, but to stand up and be counted.

Benjamin Franklin famously said that our government was “a Republic, if you can keep it.” Today, we are perilously close to losing it. 

After years of executive expansion by both sides, Trump and his MAGA supporters have kicked the power grab into overdrive. Even the Wall Street Journal noted that White House staffers “joke that they are ruling Congress with an ‘iron fist,’” while Steve Bannon compares the legislative body to the powerless Russian Duma. Neither is what the Framers intended.

No Kings is about preserving the Republic and our constitutional freedoms for Americans of both or even no parties. At its heart, it’s an American movement that hearkens back to our revolutionary roots. 

Preserving the freedom that patriots have fought and died for since 1776, that, far more than empowering an authoritarian, even if you happen to agree with his ideology, is patriotism.

From the Racket News