GOP - Wants One-Party Rule, A Warning

1934 Nazi Rally at Nuremberg were orderly by comparison to the Trump campaign
 rallies, but they are both built around a cult of an infallible leaders. (Bundesarchiv)

"Congressional GOP Wants One-Party Rule for a Thousand Years.  They Aren't Fearful of Trump.  They Want Him to Succeed." by Mark Karlin, BuzzFlash 2/17/2020

No, Congressional Republicans (with the exception of Mitt Romney) will not suddenly reveal themselves as principled even if Trump were to resign, which is near impossible to consider.  Democrats who pride themselves on civility and honorable behavior make the mistake of projecting those virtues onto Senate and House Republicans.

Yes, the rumors of some Senate Republicans who only voted to acquit Trump out of fear may have some truth, but then again, it may be nothing more than Bill Barr’s contrived claim that Trump’s tweeting was making his job more difficult.  In the end, Barr has just been engaging in a cover-up, most likely coordinated with the White House, of multiple cover-ups of acts of injustice to get Trump capos not to reveal evidence of Trump’s criminal behavior and to investigate Trump’s “enemies.”  Not to mention Barr’s dishonest summaries of DOJ investigations that concern Trump.

There is no reason to believe that Congressional Republicans want to rein in Trump anymore than to believe Barr is engaged in carrying out impartial justice.

No, Republicans didn’t acquit Trump just our of fear.  To the contrary, they share Trump’s goal of one-party rule — attained through stolen elections and massive disinformation campaigns — that would last, as Hitler declared for his Third Reich, a thousand years.  Lost in Democratic leadership speculation that it was Trump’s vindictiveness and fear that he would support primary challengers to anyone who voted against him on impeachment, lost to that simplistic explanation is that the Republican Party has been engaged in trying to suppress the two-party system for decades.  Not to mention, the Neo-Confederacy brand of the Republican Party since Nixon.

With the advent of an unhinged vengeful despot demagogue in the White House, who is openly soliciting help in stealing the 2020 election, the Congressional Republicans probably have two thoughts: 1) The Trump campaign’s open commitment to use dirty tricks, voter suppression and foreign interference to steal the election for Trump will help those up for re-election down ballot; and 2) The Republicans know that they are now a minority and cannot win a popular vote nationally and that they control the Senate only because of the artifact of (at the time of the Constitution) slave states (now including rural Western and Midwestern Red States) being granted two senators.

Thus a state such as Wyoming has two senators as a population of 580,000, while California has two senators, with the same power, with more than 40 million people.  So the Senate Republicans control the Senate under the pernicious and underhanded Mitch McConnell even though Democratic Senate candidates received 12 million more votes than Republican candidates in 2018.  So don’t rule out that the vast majority of Republicans in the Senate were thinking more about a strong man who would preserve minority Republican rule without the least compunction of fair play.

It is hard for many Democrats who believe in the Constitution and the lore of American democracy being a role model for the world to accept that the Republican white Christian minority are looking to hold on power at all costs even it means they are helping dismantle democracy and emboldening an aspiring dictator.  The reality is that democracy is a threat to their rule, and Trump is their leader in suppressing majority rule and enfranchisement, and a Republican dictatorship preserving minority rule would be just fine with them.

As Barry Craig noted in LA Progressive:  “Trump isn’t driving Republican opinion.  He’s just reflecting it.”

In 1947, while a Congressman John F. Kennedy said in a speech:  “There is nothing in the record of the past two years when both Houses of Congress have been controlled by the Republican Party which can lead any person to believe that those promises will be fulfilled in the future.  They follow the Hitler line – no matter how big the lie; repeat it often enough and the masses will regard it as truth.”

For those Democrats who are squeamish about any comparisons to Hitler and the Third Reich, JFK was right on the money.  Trump is, it goes without saying, the master of the big lie, more than 15,000 and counting.  Like Hitler, he believes in one party rule.  Like Hitler, who damned the democratic Weimar Republic, Trump believes Democratic leaders are “vermin” and “scum” and should be imprisoned.  Like Trump, Hitler used mass audiences to appeal to the basest instincts of his followers, to lure them into the fanciful notion of a pure German bloodline, to promise them that he would make Germany great again (ergo The Third Reich).

Don’t for a minute think that the Republicans in Congress are abandoning principles out of fear alone.  Trump is their leader advancing the minority white Christians into a thousand years of one-party rule.

TRUMP'S WMD - Weapon of Mass Distraction

"Did Trump Assassinate Soleimani and Risk WWW III to Divert Attention From Damning New Evidence Corroborating the Ukrainian Extortion Scheme?" by Steve Jonas, MD, MPH - BuzzFlash 01052020

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President ....... is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.  Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or anyone else.  But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about anyone else."

Theodore Roosevelt, Editorial in The Kansas City Star May 7, 1918

In brief, after an analysis of the all the information publicly available at the present time (that is, 1-3-20), and a review of all the indications that it was (to say the least) apparently done with no planning, no foresight, and no consideration of all the possible negative outcomes, given by a wide variety of authorities through the media to date (other than his "Trump-can-do-no-wrong" allies), it seems that the assassination of Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Commander of the Iranian Quds Force, was ordered by President Trump for just one reason.  A word that begins with the letter "U." To which we shall come at the end of this missive.

"Assassination" is a word believed to be derived from Arabic that means "political murder."  Now Trump may think that the Iranians speak Arabic.  For after all, in an interview with Hugh Hewitt (no lefty he) in 2015, after he had declared for the Presidency, Trump did not know the difference between "Quds" (as in the Iranian Quds Force) and "Kurds."  Then when Hewitt pressed him a bit, Trump went on the attack against Hewitt for trying to "run a quiz show."  (Hewitt has since become a strong Trump supporter.)

Trump may also not know that Iran is not an Arab country; that they have a language of their own, Farsi; that they have a history of civilized settlements going back over 8000 years; that they had a revolution in 1952 that among other things nationalized what is now British Petroleum.  As a result, the democratically-elected government was overthrown by the CIA in a coup organized by Kermit Roosevelt, Jr. (a grandson of Teddy's)  Fast forward, when the US first invaded Afghanistan following the 9/11 terrorist attack, Iran offered to help control the Taliban in Western Afghanistan but was officially turned down by President G.W. Bush (although there may have been informal assistance..)

Trump likely has very little Iran-specific historical knowledge, and very likely has a very poor grasp of what is actually going on the Middle East since, to fulfill one of his many random, not-thought-through, anti-Obama-policy political promises, he walked out of the Iran nuclear deal, without thinking through the potential consequences.  Thus, he likely gave little thought to what might, and very likely will, happen were Soleimani to be assassinated.  After all, this is an action contemplated under several US administrations but was never carried out because of the potential for dire consequences arising from it.

So why did Trump order the killing?  (We are leaving aside here all the Constitutional implications of essentially declaring war not only without consulting Congress, not even the pro forma consultation with the “Gang of Eight," although he told Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and a couple of other Republicans in Congress).  He offered no cover story beyond "I think that it is the right thing to do."  Which of course fits right into Trump's dictatorial approach to Presidential power: "I can do anything I want to."

There has been much speculation in the media and among his political supporters: Soleimani is a very bad man who needed to be dealt with, finally; Soleimani has killed many Americans; Soleimani ordered the recent attack on the US Embassy in Baghdad; Soleimani is indispensable to the Iranian military and government (BTW, a successor was appointed within about 12 hrs.; presumably the Iranian leadership, including Soleimani himself, given that he was targeted by the US and Israel, has likely been preparing for this possibility for quite some time).

Really?  Well, if it were for any of these reasons, particularly when the likely outcomes are taken into account, there would have been some long-range (or at least short-range) planning done at the Pentagon and the State Department to begin with to deal with the predictable fall-out.  But such planning was apparently scant, and apparently many senior officials were taken entirely by surprise.  Of course, this reflects the fact that there is no long-term strategy for dealing with Iran other than John Bolton's "regime change" by trying to grind it into the economic dirt through sanctions, which seems further away now than it ever was.

Furthermore, this assassination has, by all accounts thoroughly unified an Iranian politically that was beginning to show some cracks, especially under that US sanctions which have been decimating the Iranian economy and standard of living.  It is also apparently already unifying the US Western allies --- against the Trump US action.  The Russians and the Chinese are not going to take this very lightly, either.  (Putin must also be wondering if his control over Trump is starting to fail.  The attack came just after Iran, Russia and China ran a joint military exercise in the Gulf of Oman and the Indian Ocean.  Given the adoration for Trump by his followers, it is possible that none of the ton of stuff Putin must have on him would carry much weight with them.  And anyway, Hannity would then quickly maneuver to make Putin part of the “Deep State.”)

OK.  So, no real understanding by Trump of what is really going on in Iran and Iraq for starters.  No long-range strategy for dealing with Iran in light of the US's unilateral abandonment of the nuclear deal.  No achievable goals for peace in the region.  No plans for war either, apparently.  No close allies for this latest provocation.  So why, and why now?

I have come to the conclusion that transactional Trump did this for just one reason.  It happens to have nothing to do with Iran, Iraq, the rest of the Middle East, Israel, or the US European allies.  As noted above, it all comes down to one word, that begins with the letter "U”: Ukraine of course.  If Trump is the master of anything beyond his constant strategy/tactic of "Always attack; Never defend," it is his mastery of his own WMD: Weapons of Mass Distraction.

On Dec. 29, 2019, came out The New York Times report on what really happened in the engineering and attempted implementation of the Ukraine extortion plot.  This report is supported by numerous unredacted emails made available under a FOIA request that the Administration was unable to block.  Indeed, the evidence drop confirmed an attempted extortion plot against Ukrian carried out under the direction Trump.

This report lays it all out, in a way that Trump, Mulvaney, Pompeo, and various White House staff would have.  Under oath, they could not have wriggled our of this one.  Trump clearly did commit an impeachable offense.  Now that the report shows that there was a clear violation of the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, Trump may have provided the basis for a Third Article of Impeachment to be added by the House.  (Please, Madame Speaker: do not send over the first two articles anytime soon!)

This news had been all over the front pages of the real newspapers, all over the chryons of television news.  Have you noticed?  It's not there today (that is Jan. 3).  And it is anybody’s guess if it will survive under Trump’s drumbeat of war.  Depending upon what the House does with the new Ukraine extortion plot emails it may come back into the news.  But for now, Trump has what he wants, transactionally.  The Trump-action has taken away almost all of the attention from a set of documents that seal the deal on the Trump-Ukraine extortion plot, to transform the narrative into "Trump as a man-of-action."  That is even though he didn't bother to leave Mar-a-Lago for the totally secure White House Situation Room in the face of the largest international crisis of his time in the Presidency.  Can't miss too many rounds of golf, donchaknow?

Steven Jonas, MD, MPH, MS is a Professor Emeritus of Preventive Medicine at StonyBrookMedicine (NY) and author/co-author/editor/co-editor of over 35 books.  In addition to his position on OpEdNews as a “Trusted Author,” he is a contributor to Reader Supported News/Writing for Godot; a contributor to From The G-Man; a Contributor for American Politics to The Planetary Movement; an occasional contributor to BuzzFlashReborn; and a Deputy Editor, Politics, and a “Witness to History,” and an occasional contributor for The Greanville Post; He is also a triathlete (37 seasons, 256 multi-sport races).