![]()
The Charlotte News
Friday, April 17, 1959
THREE EDITORIALS
![]()
![]()
Site Ed. Note: The front page reports that Vice-President Nixon would visit Moscow in late July, expecting to talk with high Soviet officials to help set the stage for a subsequent summit conference. His designation by the President to make the trip also could promote Mr. Nixon's chances for the Republican presidential nomination in 1960. A White House announcement at Augusta, Ga., the previous day said that Mr. Nixon would make the trip to open an American exhibition in Moscow on July 25, but no other details were provided, though diplomatic officials were certain he would meet with Premier Nikita Khrushchev. The exhibition—which would turn into the famous "kitchen debate" between Mr. Nixon and Mr. Khrushchev—would continue for six weeks in Moscow's Sokolniki Park, designed to show Russian citizens how Americans lived. The Government and U.S. business interests were cooperating. Russia would stage a similar exhibition in New York City. The President said in a statement that the purpose of the exhibition was to develop broader understanding between Americans and Russians, "the kind of mutual understanding upon which our peaceful future depends. It is a hopeful approach and we welcome it wholeheartedly." If Mr. Nixon could demonstrate a capacity to deal effectively with Soviet leaders, it could provide him a boost in his unannounced quest for the presidency the following year. At a minimum, it would focus attention on him in the months leading up to selection of the Republican nominee. Internationally, the trip meant a new round of high-level contacts, following on the January visit in Washington of Soviet Deputy Premier Anastas Mikoyan. Although the latter's visit had technically been unofficial, he had conferred with the President, the Vice-President, Secretary of State Dulles and other officials, as well as with many private businessmen. American officials had credited Mr. Mikoyan with making a generally favorable impression on many people in the country. Presumably, one of Mr. Nixon's purposes, apart from giving the American exhibit a large build-up, would be to demonstrate to the Soviet people a friendly American interest in them. He was expected to emphasize a desire on the part of the U.S. for better relations with Russia. Mr. Nixon now planned to remain in Moscow for three or four days and appeared assured of red-carpet treatment. His time in the country might be extended if the Soviet Government were to come forward with suggestions for meeting with a number of officials and for trips to places outside Moscow.
In Green Pond, S.C., it was reported that Acting Secretary of State Christian Herter had arrived at his plantation this date and promptly had gone into seclusion. He and his wife were met at the train station by his plantation manager. Several newsmen and photographers also were at the scene. As the party stood on the platform, the plantation manager turned to Mr. Herter and said, "You don't want any of these news people out at the plantation, do you?" He responded that he had come down for a rest and did not want to be bothered. The appointment of Mr. Herter to succeed John Foster Dulles, who had resigned as Secretary of State earlier in the week, was expected within a few days. Mr. Herter was to return to Washington on Monday. Several photographers had driven the 12 miles to the plantation and snapped several pictures of the Herter home. As they departed, they were overtaken by the plantation manager in a car and warned not to return.
In Washington, it was reported that a practice nuclear attack this date would test Civil Defense preparedness in hundreds of communities across the nation, in New York City, Chicago, Washington, Kodiak Island, Alaska, Savannah, Ga., and New Orleans, among others. The activity would be the first phase of Operation Alert 1959, the sixth annual nationwide Civil Defense training drill, and would last for two days. Federal Civil Defense officials figured that millions of people in more than 500 communities would take part.
In Frankfort, Ky., Governor A. B. Chandler had ordered two National Guard battalions to assemble at their home bases early this date for possible movement into the strike-troubled eastern Kentucky coal fields. At Whitesburg, Ky., a gunfight between striking coal miners and a nonunion truck driver had left one man dead and another severely wounded on Thursday night. Three members of the United Mine Workers, including the wounded man, had been arrested on murder charges in the second violent death since the UMW had gone on strike in eastern Kentucky on March 9. The truck driver, who also worked as a guard at a nearby nonunion mine, was killed while exchanging shots with men who tried to drag him from his truck. State Police said that the men were charged with murder. The mine in question had a full-time guard and that guard and the nonunion truck driver had worked out a headlight-blinking system for identification. The unidentified guard on duty had seen the lights of an approaching car blink and walked down to investigate, that upon reaching the car, one of the men inside had struck him with a gun and dragged him inside. They told him that he would be killed if he caused any trouble and added that they had come looking for a truck driver. Soon a truck began winding its way up the hill to the mine, and one of the men subsequently charged with murder had walked up to it, opened the door and told the driver to get out, at which point the shooting started which led to the fatality.
In Dear Lodge, Mt., the chaplain at the Montana Prison said this date that an agreement apparently had been reached to end a 16-hour riot. Eighteen hostages were still held by the convicts, who had killed a deputy warden and stabbed a guard. The chaplain said that everything was going to be all right, after leaving a conference of prison officials and spokesmen for the rioting prisoners. The negotiations had begun after the convicts had threatened to burn the 18 hostages with gasoline. That warning had stopped plans for officers to storm the prison in an effort to rescue the hostages. The Catholic chaplain had participated in a two hour and 45 minute meeting at a prison gate between convict spokesmen and prison officials, indicating that a formal announcement of an agreement would be made shortly. The deputy warden, 38, had been shot to death and the guard had been stabbed in the arm during the early hours of the uprising. The warden had been held at knife-point for nearly three hours, escaping unharmed with the aid of a convicted burglar wielding a meat cleaver. He, the commander of the Montana National Guard, and the priest, had been talking through the prison gate with spokesmen for the rioters. Until the prisoners shouted threats to burn the hostages, authorities had planned to send 150 officers into the 90-year old turreted, castle-like prison, where there were 435 inmates. A prisoner, identified by others as a burglar from Butte, shouted to newsmen that the riot had started over poor medical facilities, filthy sanitation and dissatisfaction with Montana Parole Board policies. Convicts had taken control of the prison on Thursday afternoon. Someone had called on the prison's telephone to the warden's office, according to the prison business manager, who said that the warden and he had been present at the time in the office, and the caller had said that there had been a knifing inside. The warden and he had started across the street and they had gone to the main entrance and let themselves in, at which point the prisoners grabbed the warden, whereupon the business manager had run back to the prison office and summoned help.
In Raleigh, it was reported that a public hearing would be held the following Friday on court reform proposals and other proposed revisions of the State Constitution. The hearing before the House and Senate Constitution Committees had been announced this date by a Representative who was chairman of the House Committee. Meanwhile, Victor Bryant of Durham, who had headed the commission which had drafted the proposed revisions to the Constitution, continued at a meeting of the committees this date with his explanation of the proposals.
Bob Slough of The News, in the fifth article of a series on unwed mothers, indicates that the unmarried girl who was to become a mother could be any girl in any family. A nationally prominent physician had written recently that he was far from pessimistic about teenagers, that though he sat in the hard seat of the doctor, forced daily to witness the pathos and tragedy which entered so many young lives, he had seen many teenagers build good lives on the lessons they had learned from early mistakes, though questioning whether it was necessary for them to undergo the pathos and tragedy, wondering whether it was not time that adults put a stop to their contributory negligence in the matter. A Charlotte doctor had discussed the problem with fellow physicians and social agency workers and made some suggestions, that society, and parents in particular, had to cast off the role of passive individuals who declined to set standards of taste in art, literature and behavior. Limits needed to be set, not arbitrarily to show power or authority, but with understanding, sincere thought and concern in protecting young people from situations in which they were uneasy. Parents ought say simply, "I am your parent, you may not do that." They ought offer explanations and love with the limits they would set. Young people ought be taught what sex, love and marriage were about, and especially girls ought be taught that passion alone was relentless and without morals or control. Teenagers ought be told that promiscuity was habit-forming. A doctor suggested for parents that they know their son or daughter, that absentee fathers, who gave no concept of being male to their sons, caused them to marry with little appreciation of the role of a husband, and a girl who had known her father only as a male boarder in the home could never have a properly focused understanding of marriage or choosing of a husband and a sensible pattern on which to make a sound choice. The remainder of the suggestions are on an inside page.
John Kilgo of The News reports that a man who had robbed an elderly Davidson couple at their supper table the previous night had not figured on a fight, but had gotten one from a 63-year old woman in a wheelchair. The couple had been eating supper in their home at around 5:30 when the man, armed with a .22 rifle had walked in. The 79-year old man and 63-year old woman had said good evening to the intruder and asked him what he wanted, whereupon he said that he wanted to hunt for some rabbits. The woman said that the hunting season was over, and about that time, the husband had finished his supper and gotten up and gone around into the front room and sat down. The woman said they did not allow hunting after the season. The intruder then walked up to the husband and stuck the rifle in his back, saying that he wanted his money. He took $170 out of the man's billfold and returned the wallet, keeping the cash. About that time, the wife had come into the room and saw what was happening. Two rifles were hanging on the living room wall. So, the woman, in her wheelchair, charged the robber, telling police that she had been trying to buck him and get hold of one of the guns. When the man then saw that he was in for a fight, he took off running, and police and bloodhounds had not yet been able to find him. A County Police officer said that the money the man had stolen was the couple's grocery money for the month and that they were on a very limited income. The woman could not get out of her wheelchair and the man was hard of hearing, but, according to the police officer, they had put up quite a fight against the intruder.
Julian Scheer of The News reports that a man had never been in an airplane in his life, but had at least three seconds of flying time, with his only landing having been successful, albeit rough, though happy. The man was a roofing worker and had flown three stories straight down the previous day, with his quick trip being from the top of the new nurses' home at Memorial Hospital to a plot of soft mud at the bottom. It had not been planned, but he had made a pretty good three-point landing, on the right side of his face, right arm, and right shoulder. He got up and walked away. He said he was a little shook up over the whole thing but that the guys who tried to pick him up from the ground were really shook. He said he actually did not need help, that his arm ached and he had a black eye and a slight cut on his right cheek, that they wanted to take him to Memorial Hospital's emergency room, but he had walked instead. He had been atop the building hoisting a big can of roofing material, using a tripod-type block and tackle rig, when one of the legs had broken loose from its mooring and had flown up and hit him. He had seen that he would fall off the building, looked down and saw some cement steps, so pushed himself out from the building as if he were diving, that way clearing the steps and hitting the mud. He had blacked out as soon as he left the roof, and did not remember anything, waking up when he hit, finding that he hurt a little, apparently having hit face first. He felt good this date, with his arm taped and would go right back to roofing work as soon as the doctors allowed. Everyone, including his wife, was more upset than he was. He told a photographer that if he wanted a real good picture, "let's just walk back to the building. I can show you where I landed." The photographer told him to lie still right where he was.
In Long Beach, Calif., it was reported that a gunman had demanded of a bartender, "How much money you carrying in your wallet?" The bartender replied that he had two dollars, and the gunman said, "If you're lying, you've had it." He had just rifled the café till of $200 the previous day. The bartender handed over his wallet and the gunman looked inside and found two dollars, handed the wallet back to him and walked away.
Again, lots of print on the front page, but little substance.
On the editorial page, "One More Triumph of Logic Is Needed" finds that the victory in the State House for the state minimum wage bill had been sweet, but that another stern test waited in the State Senate. Despite predictions that opposition in the latter chamber would be comparatively light, any lessening of effort, it finds, would be unwise. Final ratification would possibly depend on the same type of parliamentary derring-do which had saved the bill from destruction in the House. The majority in that latter chamber had earned the admiration of North Carolinians equipped with 20-20 social vision, that despite several unfortunate exemptions, the 75-cent minimum wage approved on Wednesday might raise the standard of living for as many as 50,000 state residents.
It finds that it had taken courage, perseverance and more than a little common sense to answer the charges of professional calamity-howlers who had attacked the measure as "communistic", "diabolical" and "calamitous". A concerted effort had been made to amend the bill to death and on the last day of debate, 24 separate amendments had been offered with only three important ones finally approved. During one stretch, 16 consecutive amendments had been beaten back by the defenders of the bill.
The final 66 to 39 victory for the bill had been remarkable considering the history of similar legislation. Several times, the Senate had passed a minimum wage bill only to have it bottled up in a House committee, there having been proposals in at least seven prior sessions of the General Assembly. The present version was not perfect, still unreasonably restricted in its application, but reflected a changing attitude and important stirrings of conscience, marking a beginning on the road to reason.
A Federal minimum wage affecting interstate commerce had been in effect since 1938. Governor William B. Umstead had recommended a state minimum wage law as early as 1953. Governor Luther Hodges had consistently supported that idea, and by 1958, at least 30 states had such laws on the books.
It urges eventual passage in the State Senate.
"Consolidation: Cool Off, Gentlemen" indicates that the Chamber of Commerce was correct in supposing that consolidation of the City and County School systems would result in better planning and placement of new school buildings. But the Chamber's good intentions had gone awry when it suggested that a school bond election, already contemplated, be delayed until the consolidation question was settled.
The current classroom needs were urgent, with the proposed 8 million dollar bond issue only a beginning to meet those needs. But it would be a pity to delay even that beginning for an indefinite time. There was logic in the timetable proposed for the bond election, planning and construction, providing sufficient time for completion of the buildings by the fall of 1960. If that timetable were changed significantly, that school year might open with inadequate space for several thousand children.
A prior merger would be preferable, for the present system of "joint planning" was informal and there had been a breakdown in communication on occasion between the two boards on the question of bond issues and building needs. But the bond issue in question was undoubtedly justified and the money was needed quickly. The voting public would have more confidence in the planning of a consolidated system, but the matter could not wait until consolidation.
It finds it regrettable that the County Board of Education had felt it necessary to use seasoned language in its rejection of the Chamber's suggestion and suggests cooling off and learning to work together.
"Don't Let That Fortune Teller Smile" indicates that not long earlier, News reporter John Kilgo had journeyed by car to the "land of spiritualism", finding that his two dollars had bought an incantation "to the gods", promising that he would obtain a job soon and a reminder to come again and bring three dollars for a brighter forecast. The keeper of the occult had not provided anything very mysterious, as there was no seance and nothing had floated about the room, apart from Mr. Kilgo's money.
It finds it disappointing.
Chief Joe Whitley of the Mecklenburg County Police was also disappointed, but for another reason. Checking on territorial faith-healers, he had found a broad state law protecting them, and at last report, they were present to stay. People could take them or leave them to their tea leaves.
It indicates that should it ever
meet one, it was going to try to keep the conversation on a serious
plane. For if the fortune teller smiled, it was afraid it would start
punching. "That's just the way it is. Its probable cause is
deep-rooted, but we've always wanted to strike a happy medium
A piece from the Richmond News Leader, titled "Waiting for Oscar", indicates that it seemed that Hollywood could not be bothered with anything less than an extravaganza, that movies, they said, were better than ever, being certainly longer, as was also the most recent televised Motion Picture Academy Awards program. The program the previous week had begun in the Richmond area at 10:30 and wound up going until after midnight. "The parade of suave actors, well-upholstered actresses and paunchy men in evening dress was a long one. It was like a gigantic commencement ceremony, at which every graduate received a prize and felt conscience-bound to say a few words."
It lists some of the technical awards, indicating that they were interspersed with song and dance routines and brief "'comic'" monologues, intended to divert the captive audience from changing the dial to catch the late, late movie. "As each little-known genius and horn-rimmed mogul bounced forward to claim his trophy and murmur his gratitude, the audience applauded gratefully, for they were nearing the BIG awards. And, finally, inevitably, Hollywood's orgy of self-promotion came to a climax. Bleary-eyed, numb and hypnotized, faithful moviegoers found out who got the big ones. It was all very tense, dramatic and exciting, except that the moment of truth came an hour too late."
It indicates that the awards seemed to grow every year as more technical aspects of filmmaking were recognized. The big pitch became lengthier and more devious.
"Some day, it is possible, the 45th master of ceremonies will embark on his five-minute stint as the pale rays of dawn rise over the Hollywood Bowl. Ushers will be passing among the faithful with jugs of black coffee and the orchestra leader will lie sprawled on a cot. With a weary drum roll, the long-awaited moment will come as the emcee croons: 'The Best Actress Award goes … to … Miss … Sylvia Sturdley!' And a voice will rise from the thin tuxedoed ranks of Hollywood's surviving nobility: 'Sylvia ain't here. She went home to bed.'"
Presumably, this piece was written by Jack Kilpatrick, being in his wheelhouse, and not altogether without insightful commentary in this instance. He refers to what might occur at the 1973 ceremony, when there would be no particular controversy surrounding the Best Actress Award, won by Liza Minnelli for "Cabaret", though arising anent the Best Actor Award, won by Marlon Brando for "The Godfather". Mr. Brando would boycott the ceremony because of Hollywood's and the Government's treatment of Native Americans, having the award instead refused on his behalf by Sacheen Littlefeather. Mr. Brando had not fallen asleep, however, as Mr. Kilpatrick sort of predicted. And the awards, by that point, were being held at the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion, not the Hollywood Bowl—the Chandler Pavilion being where we would, in 1976, during a tour thereof, be chastised by the little bitch-witch upstart conducting the tour for momentarily deviating, with another touree unknown to us, unintentionally from the prescribed course while examining a plaque, the two of us told not to do that again or we would be terminated with extreme prejudice, "Hey, you, where were you two just now?"—that which was then circulating unsaid in our mind being too loose for replication in print, leaving a negative image of the Hollywood mindset permanently engraved, at least as to the little upstarts who conduct tours thereof, thinking that, by osmosis, they had suddenly become somebodies when none sensible by other than spectral imagery was evident.
In any event, by sheer coincidence,
that was the night in 1973 when we were deprived of watching the
conclusion of the show by some over-eager pledges of our fraternal
service organization, who decided at around 10:00 to turn tables and
take a couple of the members on a ride into the wilderness, despite
the fact that we, to that point, had never engaged in any such
tomfoolery. It was not, however, without retributive consequences,
and for that and the ensuing couple of springs. We do not like having
our viewing of such programs, limited as it was, interrupted. At
least, no one was bushwhacked by any Injuns or Cowboys, our required viewing
of the 1939 "Stagecoach", much to our consternation, that
semester in a course, notwithstanding—still thinking to this
day that the John Carradine character, a former Confederate officer,
was more likely, in his drunken stupor, to have raped the female
passenger than to have protected her from the marauding savages—being, as we were, somewhat ahead
Drew Pearson indicates that the man responsible for getting Fidel Castro to come to the U.S. so that both the American Society of Newspaper Editors and the American people could get better acquainted with him was George Healy, editor of the New Orleans Times-Picayune. That was in contrast to the New York Times, which had built up Sr. Castro but had reported little about him recently regarding the "hectic gyrations and amazing speeches by the young man who is ruling a country vital, geographically, to the United States." He indicates that the most important thing to know about Sr. Castro was exactly where he stood regarding the Soviet Union. He suggests praise for his honesty-in-government reforms and sympathy for his social reforms, but with Cuba located only a few minutes away by plane from the U.S., across the approaches to the Panama Canal, and the chief source of the U.S. sugar supply, the basic question was where Sr. Castro stood regarding Russia.
There was also a corollary question as to where he stood regarding the Guantánamo Naval Base, the most important base in the Caribbean for the U.S., which already his supporters were claiming ought revert to Cuba. Sixty years earlier in Cuba, the United States had fought the Spanish-American War because of the activities of a foreign power, Spain, in the Gulf of Mexico. He finds that Spain was much less dangerous in 1898 than was Russia in 1959.
Insight into Sr. Castro's position on Russia had first been revealed on March 23 when José "Pepi" Figueres, former President of Costa Rica and a staunch supporter of Sr. Castro, had made a speech at a large labor rally in Havana, hailed in Havana as a hero, having battled for years against the dictators of the Caribbean and having aligned himself with Sr. Castro, rejoicing over his victory. So, he had been invited to Havana as an honored guest, given the keys to the city and, speaking at a labor rally, said: "We have been doing some great things for democracy in Latin America, but it is time we remember that our friend, the United States, faces a grave problem with Soviet Russia and that we aligned ourselves in a solid front in the Western Hemisphere against communism." At that point, a Cuban labor leader had leaped to his feet and seized the microphone, shouting: "This does not represent the real thinking of Latin Americans."
Sr. Figueres was allowed to finish his address, whereupon Sr. Castro sorrowfully rebuked him, saying: "I don't like to differ with my good friend from Costa Rica, but in any competition between the United States and Soviet Russia, we are not taking sides. Should there be war between the United States and Russia, Cuba would be neutral."
Mr. Pearson indicates that the remarks had been buried in the New York Times, and subsequent statements indicating Sr. Castro's leaning toward Russia had received only scant coverage.
On April 3, Premier Castro had delivered a four-hour telecast in which he took off the gloves against his old friend, former President Figueres, who had backed the Cuban leader to the hilt when he was the underdog, but had made the mistake of thinking that his friend could take criticism.
As with all dictators and would-be dictators, they tend to be thin-skinned, being accustomed to fawning praise and thus unable to accept any form of even slight criticism. Wonder who might come to mind in that regard in 2026?
Marquis Childs indicates that if Vice-President Nixon was concerned by the growing speculation that he might lose the Republican presidential nomination in 1960 to Governor Nelson Rockefeller of New York, his close associates had not detected any sign of it, as he gave every impression that he was serenely content to wait for what destiny might bring him.
Mr. Childs finds that there was good reason for that feeling as the Vice-President, as one of the shrewdest practitioners of politics, knew that things within the party were running his way, having reason to believe that from the abysmal low of the previous November at the time of the midterms, the trend now favored a Republican candidate the following year.
Long in advance of his selection, Mr. Nixon and his team of strategists had approved the recent selection of Senator Thruston Morton of Kentucky as chairman of the RNC. They had no illusions about what Senator Morton could do as part-time chairman, but believed he would be a respectable stand-in until the convention in Chicago would choose a nominee. The nominee then would pick his own person to direct the campaign. Senator Morton would make the right speeches and issue the right statements from his Kentucky background, with his Republicanism being charted on a careful course between any and all extremes. Thus, it was a holding operation and all the while Mr. Nixon's own organization would be working intensively in the states to nail down the nomination. His hold on orthodox Republicans was indisputable, having worked with them throughout the country, those who would go to the convention and select the nominee. In repeated nationwide campaigns, Mr. Nixon had found time at each stop to meet the grassroots leaders and provide flattering attention to their views, sending back warm and friendly letters of appreciation.
That which the astute persons around Mr. Nixon understood was that to obtain the nomination, Governor Rockefeller had to have a professional spearhead of able and knowledgeable leaders, such as former Governor Thomas Dewey and former Attorney General Herbert Brownell, who would do the essential groundwork. The latter two in 1951 and the early months of 1952 had prepared the way for General Eisenhower's nomination. Whether they would do the same for Governor Rockefeller was a question, there being some evidence that Mr. Dewey had become disillusioned with the Eisenhower Administration and perhaps with politics, itself, being absorbed in a highly lucrative law practice and thus having little contact with the White House.
In sidetracking Mr. Nixon as they had done to the late Senator Robert Taft in 1952, they would stir even greater hostility among the Republican regulars than had emerged from the 1952 fracas. The orthodox Mr. Nixon had replaced Senator Taft as a kind of "Mr. Republican Jr.", an inheritance he had been careful to cultivate. In his speech on the rule of world law before the Academy of Political Science in New York, he had quoted the late Senator Taft on international organization as "one of the most brilliant political and legal minds in the nation's history." Should he obtain the nomination in that role, the question then would be its worth. The detailed statistical analysis of the previous November's midterm debacle left behind by retiring RNC chairman Meade Alcorn showed that Republicans were a dwindling minority in almost every part of the country.
But the Nixon team pinned its hopes on two factors, one being the growing evidence of a half dozen cracks in the Democratic front, believing that by the time of the 1960 campaign, the Democrats would be hopelessly split, and the second factor being a revival of all-out prosperity, with unemployment falling below three million. A Republican-sponsored tax cut judiciously brought forward the following February or March could spark it, the stuff of the Nixon dream, more substantial than most political dreams.
Unfortunately for Mr. Nixon, as with the Falcon, the dream bird would be a fake.
A letter writer suggests that the newspaper was advocating for a two-party system in Mecklenburg County when the local elections for City Council were nonpartisan, though indicating that there was no such thing as a nonpartisan, that a voter ought be able to find out what political ideas a candidate had before voting for a city office, that Republicans ought call themselves Republicans and Democrats, likewise. He advocates for partisan elections on the local level.
A letter writer indicates that statistical information on unemployment and unemployment compensation justified passage of a standard Federal unemployment compensation law, setting forth facts which would justify it. He says that the proposed legislation would provide, among other benefits, no less than half of an individual's wages for 39 weeks, subject to state-wide maximum benefits of two-thirds of the state's average weekly wage, extension of coverage, better financing and eliminate many of the present law's inequities. He indicates that the total long-run cost of those improved benefits would still be only half of the original and intended cost of unemployment compensation.
A letter writer finds that taxpayers locally would get another stinging in property revaluation, finding that only expense had come from the last revaluation. He wonders when the building in Charlotte would come to an end.
A letter writer from Salisbury indicates that there was much talk about a strong President being one who was an autocrat or one who ruled without consulting others, that to him, all such talk was foolish and paved the way to tyranny and autocracy. "A strong man is a wise man and a wise man is not afraid of others looking over his governing plans. One-man government has rarely been successful because it is the nature of human beings to be selfish. There are few Jeffersons, Lincolns and others who could be trusted with great power. Great power is dangerous when given to a Jefferson or a Lincoln unless there are safeguards. King David, who is described as a man after God's own heart, did terrible deeds while exercising absolute power. Even this good king lost out as his sins got worse. Great power is dangerous so we should be very careful whom we elevate to the presidency."
We quote at length from that letter writer because he speaks great words of wisdom to today's nuts on the far right of the political spectrum, all of whom live in Magaville, U.S.A., in an echo chamber of their own contrivance, quite apart from the reality being experienced by most Americans these days, which is reflected in the abysmal polling numbers which the current occupant of the White House has, quite predictably to anyone who ever studied with any discernment and depth political history in this country. He ran as an autocrat, after trying and failing to rule as an autocrat in his first term, and then, as with any autocrat and dictator, tried to overturn a legitimate election in 2020, still adhering to that ridiculous fantasy even now, as evidenced most recently by his 1.8 billion dollar "settlement" of his own lawsuit based on the disclosure of his tax returns during his first term, under his own IRS, with the self-determined unilateral settlement devoted to his compulsive notion of the "weaponization" of the Justice Department during his interregnum. The leaker, incidentally, was prosecuted during the Biden Administration by the Justice Department and eventually pleaded guilty in 2023.
First, there was no weaponization. Trump was convicted on 34 counts of fraud in Manhattan, a case brought by the District Attorney of Manhattan, not the Justice Department. He was indicted in Georgia by the Fulton County District Attorney, quite properly so for attempting to intermeddle in the 2020 election in that state and seeking a reversal of its legitimate results, and, but for a lot of internal Georgia politics involving the status of that District Attorney, plainly racist in its origins, the stuff of the old Lester Maddox form of governance, resulting in delay in the prosecution, he would have been in jail undoubtedly in Georgia by the time of the 2024 election. He was also quite properly indicted in the District of Columbia for his encouragement of the riot at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, in an unprecedented showing of hatred for the Government and our democracy by a sitting person in the White House, refusing for the first time in U.S. history to show up for the successor's inaugural and also refusing for the first time in U.S. history to concede the election, which he and his little minions still defy, eschewing its reality and refusing to acknowledge it. Even then, however, he was not indicted, per se, by the Justice Department, but rather by special counsel Jack Smith, who also put forth the proper Federal indictments in Florida for Trump's flouting of the law requiring him to turn over to the National Archives all records which were classified upon his leaving the White House, not just some accident, but willful evasion of repeated attempts by the Archives to mediate the situation, until his and his henchmen's repeated false statements in withholding those records made it impossible not to seize forcefully the papers in question through a search warrant, properly administered under normal procedures.
All of that, of course, Trump now—having engaged in such a fanciful illusion for the past 5 1/2 years since the 2020 election which he substantially lost by 7 million popular votes and the same margin in the electoral college by which he had "won", though without the popular vote, in 2016, and by the same margin of the electoral college by which he won in 2024, though with only a marginal popular vote plurality even then—, thinks was the product of a "weaponized" Justice Department and mandates that his underlings voice the same kind of nonsense whenever testifying before Congress or making statements on Fox Propaganda and similar propaganda nutworks, or else they get it right in the neck, out the door in a flash. Thus, his present "acting attorney general", more properly his personal attorney, who represented him unsuccessfully in the Manhattan case involving criminal fraud, now simply glides over the idea that there was "weaponization" during the term of President Biden, despite that Justice Department having followed through on an indictment of President Biden's son through a special counsel originally appointed by Trump's Justice Department, and continued under President Biden, when he could have directed, a la Trump, the firing of that special counsel by Attorney General Merrick Garland, and had installed someone new and more favorable, in which case, General Garland, a man of great integrity, would likely have resigned. The latter only appointed Jack Smith in November, 2022, after the Justice Department had thoroughly studied both the insurrection case and the Florida classified document-retention case, and deemed a special counsel necessary to remove the Justice Department from any possible taint of political influence. Mr. Smith is, by all accounts, a Republican, and had been a lead prosecutor in the case against former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, that case having wound up in acquittals on some counts and a hung jury on others, with no conviction, a case bearing marked similarity with that of the Manhattan case, with the critical exception that tape recordings in the Trump case verified the missing element in the Federal case in North Carolina, that of knowing falsification of the records to hide a campaign payoff for silence on an affair, a campaign finance violation, elevating the Manhattan false business records case to felonies.
In short, there was never any "weaponization" in the Biden Justice Department, probably the most independent Justice Department in the history of the country. Trumpers like Blanche and his predecessor very well know that fact, as they are not that stupid, even if blinded by blind loyalty to the point of being the equivalent of good little Nazis when it comes to ordering out storm troopers supposedly to enforce in the cities of the country, far removed from the Mexican border, supposed "border security", all supposedly justified by "the national interest", when in fact these were simply murderous policies implemented with murder in mind, and which ought result in charges of conspiracy to commit murder in the state of Minnesota, filed against everyone who was involved in the chain of command of these storm trooper agents, deployed without proper training and with instructions essentially to go get 'em and round 'em up at all costs to fulfill the King's will for daily quotas—just as Nazi Storm Troopers were deployed in the Third Reich to attack and displace Jewish merchants and others deemed inimical to the "national interest".
Now, Blanche has the audacity not only to assume, without proof of any kind, that there was "weaponization" in the Biden Justice Department, quite apart from the reality, but also that there is some kind of justification therefore, a house of cards built on no foundation, for first settling Trump's lawsuit filed against the Government for a whopping figure of 1.8 billion dollars, despite the fact that the lawsuit has never been tested in court and would, undoubtedly, fail, perhaps even being kicked out as totally frivolous—suing the Government for an illegal, ultra vires act not within the scope of the employee's prescribed duties or knowingly allowed activities and thus not subject to respondeat superior principles in the law, subjecting therefore only the individual employee to the suit, not the employer, as well as the suit being from the start barred by the existing two-year statute of limitations, the date of discovery of the breach having been no later than the date of the leaker's plea of guilty in October, 2023—, and even having been questioned by a Federal District Court judge as being unconstitutional as non-adversarial, essentially D. J. Trump v. D. J. Trump, since his own Justice Department, not a special counsel, not an independent arbiter of any type, recommended the settlement and set the figure and the terms for disbursement from that fund, an utterly ludicrous, unjust and plainly fraudulent scheme, for which all involved ought ultimately be prosecuted for fraud, or if unsuccessful, attempted fraud, against United States taxpayers.
Article III, Section 2, clause 1 of the Constitution allows jurisdiction of the Federal courts only over actual cases or controversies, of which a suit by a sitting president against the U.S. Government involving an executive branch agency is, quite obviously, not, as the two sides are identical, the head of the executive branch against an agency of the executive branch, and then with a department of the executive branch having sole authority over determination and administration of the "settlement", obviously frustrating the Constitution's separation of powers to ensure against just such grabs by the executive of moneys entrusted to the Treasury for the benefit of the taxpayers, all of the taxpayers, not just specially chosen cronies of a sitting president. (There is also an unenforceable provision of this "settlement" which would bar any and all future investigations into Trump's taxes, void as against public policy and in violation of the separation of powers, as no settlement of a lawsuit, essentially a private contract, can act as a law unto itself to bar such investigations. Only Congress can make laws, not Sharpie fiats stroked in the middle of the night, acting as whimsical dictator above the courts and above Congress and all of the states. This provision is merely Trump's version of a self-pardon, designed to enable him to operate above and beyond the reach of the law for the rest of his days.)
Were this travesty allowed to proceed, any corrupt future president could actually pay some person in his executive branch to violate the law by releasing illegally documents which ostensibly damage the reputation of the sitting president, then, per the plan, sue the Government and then compromise that suit via a settlement, approved by the Justice Department of the president, constructed for the sole benefit of the sitting president, either directly by payments to that president of an amount determined by the president in consultation with his equally corrupt attorney general or indirectly by benefiting his political benefactors. Do you see, Magawump?
But, of course, this lawsuit and its "settlement" are part and parcel of the regular routine of fraud practiced by Trump throughout his entire career with all of his business dealings, evident long before ever being allowed to enter the White House. The man is as corrupt as hell, as corrupt as the devil, himself, every bit as corrupt as Adolf Hitler. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a neo-Nazi or simply stupid beyond belief. There is no other way to look on it at this point.
Think about it, if you are a dedicated Trumper, for just half a minute. Here you have a 1.8 billion dollar fund established for corrupt purposes, to be distributed at the will of a five-person commission, appointed by the attorney general, not supervised by any court or judge, with the majority will of that commission being the final arbiter of who gets paid out of that fund, based entirely on the fanciful Trump notion of a "weaponized Justice Department" under the Biden Administration, with the fund to distribute that 1.8 billion dollars of taxpayer money to applicants deemed worthy by that five-person commission, without any oversight from Congress, without any oversight from any court, all established by the current Justice Department on an unproven and unprovable premise, something practically acknowledged by the very facts surrounding the creation of that fund, all at the expense of the taxpayer. If there were any basis for it, they would not hesitate to have an independent, bipartisan evaluation of its premise. It is not some privately capitalized fund. It comes from U.S. taxpayer dollars. It is Trump's version of ending "waste, fraud, and abuse", while committing a King's ransom of waste, fraud and abuse. Again, if you think that is all right, you are either stupid as a fencepost or as corrupt as a Nazi, or, possibly, both at one time.
But are there any Republicans left in Congress who are willing to speak out against this obvious fraud? The only ones have just been defeated in Republican state primaries, because of dumb voters who only listen to Trump and Fox Propaganda, which is merely a revolving door for the White House and the Justice Department these days, an echo chamber reverberating constantly the name of Trump—a Department now more properly called the Injustice Department. The only weaponization being done is by Trump. If that is not obvious, you are not looking or are simply too dumb to understand what is taking place and the ultimate consequences to every citizen from the establishment of a Trump dictatorship, a Trump-controlled party indefinitely into the future—a thousand-year Reich in fulfillment of the prophecy.
Speaking of "The Godfather", we fear that the purely fictional story, continued in its two sequels, as well as the resulting fascination through time in the society with organized crime and organized crime figures, comparing their obvious sleaziness in reality to the film and finding in the comparison a clear choice for the more glamorous portrayals on screen, blinking the while the evil in reality, the violence, the glorification of vengeance and vigilanteism, the systematic elimination of self-designated "enemies", extending into the prescious Fourth Estate, designed through time in a free society, acting pursuant to the spirit and letter of the First Amendment, as the ultimate balancer to power, has, through the decades, so permeated the collective imagination of a certain subset of American society, those who become, while in adolescence and then later, unconsciously, continuing in a superannuated adolescent way into adulthood, wedded to the personalities of the characters portrayed in the story, who vicariously identify with the obviously morally corrupt characters, especially those portrayed with panache, the smart-aleck, the quickly sardonic wit, the adolescent class clown, though in the frame of an adult masking a corrupt, amoral mind, not understanding of film or fiction in general, how films are constructed, how stories are constructed to keep the pace going, eliminating through editing the boredom, the gaffes and stumbles in recitation of the script, and come to idolize the evil portrayed by the slick cinematic product, the vengeance and hatred, the elimination of enemies, such that they eventually, perhaps unwittingly, become those evil characters, rationalizing the while the evil on the excuse that the movie character was a popular myth with their subset peers, eventually supplanting their societally constructed conscience with that of a cinematically constructed conscience, one increasingly devoid of any checks on behavior, the more inured to the role the person and the person's subset becomes, and so... And so you have Trump in the White House, the aim of Michael Corleone, with Blanche and Bondi and other obvious disgraces to the law, those who have forsaken legal ethics and knowledge gleaned through time of the Constitution and laws anent which they have sworn what ought be a solemn oath to uphold, for cultish loyalty to a personality popular in the culture, a superannuated adolescent class clown, one who treats the oath cynically as merely another line in the movie ongoing in his head, with him always as the leading man, in love and lore, always with the coign of vantage, as with any anti-hero in the movies, constructed from a series of movie roles rather than knowledge and achievement, those disgraces to the law acting as his consiglieres—the same construct which, in an earlier era, finally produced, from a conglomeration of early cinematic and literary characters, Hitler and Nazi Germany, Mussolini and Fascist Italy, Nixon and all the President's men, each replete with their unnatural, jerky moves, reminiscent of early cinematic presentations of the Teens and Twenties.
![]()
![]()
![]()