Finally Friday Reads: Gone, Gone, the Damage Done

“Oops!” John Buss, @repeat1968

Good Day, Sky Dancers!

It’s been another tough week watching the news and goings on in what used to be a mostly civilized democracy. The Nobel Prizes came out today, and of course, Yam Tit’s Caligula-level chaos and search for the 2025 Peace Prize once again went unrequited. He seems to be unaware of what these represent and the type of people rewarded. Does any of this sound remotely familiar? It seems that holding up the best among us shows the worst guy on the planet what he lacks.

The Nobel Peace Prize for 2025 goes to a brave and committed champion of peace – to a woman who keeps the flame of democracy burning amid a growing darkness.

---

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2025 to Maria Corina Machado.

She is receiving the Nobel Peace Prize for her tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela and for her struggle to achieve a just and peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy.

---

As the leader of the democracy movement in Venezuela, Maria Corina Machado is one of the most extraordinary examples of civilian courage in Latin America in recent times.

Ms Machado has been a key, unifying figure in a political opposition that was once deeply divided – an opposition that found common ground in the demand for free elections and representative government. This is precisely what lies at the heart of democracy: our shared willingness to defend the principles of popular rule, even though we disagree. At a time when democracy is under threat, it is more important than ever to defend this common ground.

Venezuela has evolved from a relatively democratic and prosperous country to a brutal, authoritarian state that is now suffering a humanitarian and economic crisis. Most Venezuelans live in deep poverty, even as the few at the top enrich themselves. The violent machinery of the state is directed against the country’s own citizens. Nearly 8 million people have left the country. The opposition has been systematically suppressed by means of election rigging, legal prosecution and imprisonment.

Venezuela’s authoritarian regime makes political work extremely difficult. As a founder of Súmate, an organisation devoted to democratic development, Ms Machado stood up for free and fair elections more than 20 years ago. As she said: “It was a choice of ballots over bullets.” In political office and in her service to organisations since then, Ms Machado has spoken out for judicial independence, human rights and popular representation. She has spent years working for the freedom of the Venezuelan people.

Ahead of the election of 2024, Ms Machado was the opposition’s presidential candidate, but the regime blocked her candidacy. She then backed the representative of a different party, Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, in the election. Hundreds of thousands of volunteers mobilised across political divides. They were trained as election observers to ensure a transparent and fair election. Despite the risk of harassment, arrest and torture, citizens across the country held watch over the polling stations. They made sure the final tallies were documented before the regime could destroy ballots and lie about the outcome.

The efforts of the collective opposition, both before and during the election, were innovative and brave, peaceful and democratic. The opposition received international support when its leaders publicised the vote counts that had been collected from the country’s election districts, showing that the opposition had won by a clear margin. But the regime refused to accept the election result, and clung to power.

Democracy is a precondition for lasting peace. However, we live in a world where democracy is in retreat, where more and more authoritarian regimes are challenging norms and resorting to violence. The Venezuelan regime’s rigid hold on power and its repression of the population are not unique in the world. We see the same trends globally: rule of law abused by those in control, free media silenced, critics imprisoned, and societies pushed towards authoritarian rule and militarisation. In 2024, more elections were held than ever before, but fewer and fewer are free and fair.

Reading the entire announcement is not only a history lesson but a reminder of what a civilized democracy looks like. I’ve decided to showcase Editorial cartoons from around the globe to put things into perspective. It’s not a fun time when a small group of crazies has basically dropped you into the hands of a crazed Bond Villain. I’m continually reminded that the diverse group of humanity sits on the anti-Trump bench.

Here’s the Bulwark‘s Andre Egger’s Friday thoughts, as many of us take note of who stood up and who folded.  The hero institution of the Nixon Watergate Scandal has gone beyond soft. It’s one of the many obvious places to be filled with the howls of surrender monkeys.

One of the most insidious things about Donald Trump’s decade-long turn atop our politics is the way it has seared our political conscience. For years, it has been a cliché to call his various awful behaviors and decisions “shocking, but not surprising.” These days, however, we seem to be losing some of our inability even to feel the shock.

You could see this in some of the early reactions last night to the news of Letitia James’s indictment on two counts of mortgage fraud. The New York attorney general has been near the top of Trump’s enemies list for a while, and literally nobody—at least that I can dig up—seems to be trying to argue that this indictment isn’t an act of naked political retribution. (To be fair, arguing this would be difficult after Trump removed all doubt last month by accidentally putting a post out in public that he had meant to send as a DM to Attorney General Pam Bondi demanding James’s prosecution.)

Instead, the Republican line—parroted by some who should really know better—is that this is a justified act of retribution, in some sort of street-justice sense. Or if not justified, at least understandable, from Trump’s point of view: They tried to get him, now he’s trying to get them. Most charitably, they say, it is an unfortunate tit-for-tat that can’t go on indefinitely—but also a situation in which Trump is just one bad actor in a cast of many.

An editorial from the new-look, more Trump-forgiving Washington Post editorial board this week cast the current moment along those lines. “Many Democrats still cannot see how their legal aggression against Trump during his four years out of power set the stage for the dangerous revenge tour on which he is now embarked,” it mourned. Those who were trying to hold Trump accountable had “show[n] little restraint” in their investigations—a big part of why he was now “showing still less restraint” while hitting back. It’s unfortunate that he lashed out at you like that—but maybe you shouldn’t have made him so mad.

We should be clear about this. There is no comparison between the acts Letitia James took as attorney general of New York to hit Trump’s companies and the ones he is now taking to hit “back” at her. The difference between them is not the difference between a lesser act of political malice and a greater one. (Although it is worth noting the massive difference of scale here: While James’s civil suit accused Trump’s companies of pocketing hundreds of millions of dollars off a years-long practice of misrepresenting properties, the indictment against James accuses her of filing a misleading loan application andcoming out ahead less than $20,000.) It’s the difference between the application of law and the application of raw power.

When people accuse James of “lawfare,” or of pursuing a “politicized” civil fraud case against Trump, they mean that she pursued that case with a zeal they believe she would not have shown against another target. Could be! But her fundamental case, as the New York Times noted last month, was not unreasonable. It was rooted in sworn testimony Trump’s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen had made before Congress that Trump habitually inflated the value of his properties to get favorable treatment in loans. She won her civil case against Trump at trial. This year, an appeals court vacated the financial penalty the initial judge had handed down, but did not vacate Trump’s civil liability. Trump had his day to argue in court that James’s investigations into him were vindictive and politically motivated—and the courts threw that argument out.

Justin Glawe from Public Notice explains Trump’s autocratic invasion and occupation of Portland, Oregon. “The impossibly dumb reason for Trump’s invasion of Portland. It’d be hilarious if he wasn’t the commander in chief.”

“Well wait a minute, am I watching things on television that are different from what’s happening?”

That was Donald Trump, making an incredible admission to Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek that he was confused about unrest in Portland while watching TV. The call took place on September 26. That same day, Fox News ran two segments in which b-roll of rioting in Portland from 2020 ran in the background as guests spoke to on-air personalities.

A Wall Street Journal report has details:

Trump recounted his conversation with Kotek during a weekend interview with NBC News’ correspondent Yamiche Alcindor. He alluded to their conflicting accounts of Portland.

“I spoke to the governor, she was very nice,” Trump said. “But I said, ‘Well wait a minute, am I watching things on television that are different from what’s happening? My people tell me different.’ They are literally attacking and there are fires all over the place … it looks like terrible.”

In short, it sounds like Trump was watching old riot footage on Fox, thought it was happening in real time, then went on Truth Social the next day and said he was ordering troops to “war ravaged” Portland with “full force, if necessary.”

Trump’s confusion isn’t just darkly comical (and a troubling reminder of the president’s growing senility) — it’s also a stark illustration of the whiplash-inducing disconnect between his rhetoric and the reality on the ground in cities like Portland and Chicago.

Portland is not “on fire” as Trump has claimed. In fact, things are so calm there that Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem took time on Tuesday to stand on the roof of the city’s ICE facility and have a staring contest with a man in a chicken suit. It was filmed, of course.

Between the attacks on L.A., Portland, and Chicago, I’d say those events will go down as days of infamy. The main difference from the usual usage of the term is that the hostile government attacking innocent Americans is our own. Is this really what those stupid Trump voters actually wanted?

We also have our own version of Tokyo Rose, ICE Barbie. This is from CNN. “Video of Kristi Noem blaming Democrats for shutdown rolling out at TSA security checkpoints across the country.” State propaganda, anyone?

In an extraordinary effort to inject politics into millions of Americans’ travel experiences, the Trump administration plans to roll out a video at airports across the United States that will blame Democrats for lapses in Transportation Security Administration workers’ pay because of the government shutdown.

People waiting in airport security lines will now be met with a new video of the Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem addressing the shutdown.

“It is TSA’s top priority to make sure that you have the most pleasant and efficient airport experience as possible while we keep you safe,” she says. “However, Democrats in Congress refuse to fund the federal government, and because of this, many of our operations are impacted, and most of our TSA employees are working without pay.”

The video was first obtained by Fox News.

The Department of Homeland Security responded to CNN’s questions about the video in a statement that noted the “public service video is rolling out across the country,” then repeated the language in the video almost verbatim.

“We will continue to do all that we can to avoid delays that will impact your travel, and our hope is that Democrats will soon recognize the importance of opening the government,” the video concludes.

TSA checkpoints often include videos featuring government officials welcoming travelers and explanations of procedures, but they usually do not contain political messages.

MIT becomes the latest university to take arms in the War against Stupidity. This is from the once great Washington Post and  Susan Svrluga. “MIT rejects Trump administration deal for priority federal funding. MIT is one of the nine schools that were asked to agree to adopt conservative priorities and policies in exchange for funding perks.”

MIT’s president turned down the Trump administration’s offer of priority access for federal funding Friday, publicly releasing a letterthat emphasized the eliteuniversity’s values including free expression and “the core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone.”

Last week, the Trump administration offered nine universities a “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” presented as an opportunity to receive competitive advantages from the federal government and from private donors for institutions that sign on. It was the latest attempt by the administration to force colleges into compliance with President Donald Trump’s ideological priorities, after months of federal research funding freezes and investigations into schools’ adherence to civil rights laws.

The administration asked the schools to, among other changes, agree toprohibit consideration of factors such as gender, race or political views in admissions, scholarships or programming; freeze tuition for five years; adopt a strict definition of gender; and maintain neutrality at all levels when representing the institution. In a letter to universities, administration officials asked for feedback to the compact by Oct. 20.

One higher education leader in Texas immediately said it was an honor to be among the first schools asked to participate, and a White House official said other colleges had asked to sign on.

But free speech advocates and some experts in higher educationwarned the sweeping terms of the document would threaten universities’ independence and urged universities to turn it down. They also saidthat rejecting it would bring considerable risk, as the compact appeared to threaten research funding and access to student loans. Visas for international students and scholars could be yanked from universities that sign the compact and do not comply. “Institutions of higher education are free to develop models and values other than those below,” the compact stated, “if the institution elects to [forgo] federal benefits.”

Sally Kornbluth, MIT’s president, wasthe first to publicly turn down the offer. She shared her letter to U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon on Friday with the campus community. In it, she wrote that she appreciated the chance to meet with McMahon earlier this year “to discuss the priorities we share for American higher education.” MIT’s clear values put excellence above all and MIT prides itself on rewarding merit, she wrote.

Notice the number of women doing the hard work of standing up to Fear Leader?

Anyway, I have to go to the clinic and get a check-up before they yank my Medicare or do something else awful to it.  I hope you have a peaceful weekend. Tomorrow is my Dad’s birthday and the anniversary of his death. I miss him dearly, although I am glad he doesn’t have to see all this. Please listen to Neil Young’s song. It’s spot on. I almost transported myself back to Junior High School with my first guitar. I’m warming this song and that guitar up for October 18th.  It even has a Woodstock guitar strap.

What’s on your reading and blogging list today?

No more great again
No more great again
Got big crime in DC at the White House
Don’t need no fascist rules
Don’t want no fascist schools
Don’t want soldiers walking on our streets
Got big crime in DC at the White House
There’s big crime in DC at the White House
Got to get the fascists out
Got to clean the White House out
Don’t want no soldiers on our streets
Got big crime in DC at the White House
Got big crime in DC at the White House
No more great again
No more great again
Got big crime in DC at the White House
No more money to the fascists
The billionaire fascists
Time to blackout the system
(No) no more great again
No more great again
Time to blackout the system
Got big crime in DC at the White House
Got big crime in DC at the White House
No more great again
No more great again
Got big crime in DC at the White House
No more great again
No more great again
Got big crime in DC at the White House
Got big crime in DC at the White House
No more great again
No more great again