0
0
Does it bother you to know that you live in a country where masked men are roaming the streets in organized gangs rounding up kids and other innocent people, dragging them off to awful prisons in places unknown without due process. I don’t much care that they have I.C.E. on their jackets. They are still despicable thugs. How about being the 10 year old son of one of those guys, asking about your father’s job and being told that Daddy is one of those good guys who keeps us all safe from foreign invaders. These perpetrators wear masks for lots of reasons, but chief among them is the fact that their identities must be hidden so that their neighbors don’t spurn them and their families, so that people don’t treat them as they have been hired to treat others.
******
In all of the commentary about the Trump-Musk dust-up, there are some dots that I haven’t seen connected—dots that must make Harvard’s lawyers happy. Although he doesn’t really intend to do it, part of Trump’s bravado is that he might consider terminating Musk’s governmental subsidies and contracts. Why? Simply because Musk dares to speak out against Trump’s big-beautiful-bill, simply because Musk insults or resists him. Very simply, Trump is saying as clearly as publicly as possible that he feels he has the right to punish individuals and institutions if they do not agree with him, if they utter words or engage in practices that he personally does not like. In essence, he is declaring loud and clear for all the world to hear that he is free to deal out punishment for free speech. Yes, I know that there’s a loaded conservative Supreme Court. I know that two justices are so far into Trump’s pocket that they will find some way of justifying the President’s behavior. But anyone who has even a fifth grader’s appreciation of the Constitution must see what is going on. Trump’s threats, whether aimed at Harvard or his mad South African former-friend, are part of a broad pattern that stand in utter contradiction of the law. My guess is that Harvard’s lawyers will point that out to the Justices, that there is no way the majority of them can see it any other way—at which point Harvard will prevail, and prevail with certainty, by using the President’s words as their chief source of evidence.
*******
The Library of Congress recently delivered a masterclass in institutional independence by refusing entry into the building to Trump’s appointees, who arrived claiming new authority after the President abruptly fired Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden, an accomplished leader with broad bipartisan support. In a remarkable display of backbone, Library staff and legal counsel stood firm, denying the appointees access and even calling in Capitol Police, refusing to recognize their authority without explicit direction from Congress. We send wishes of good luck to those, as they say in Les Mis, who stand firmly at the barricades.
*******
It’s amazing the way Trump goes after most of his opponents, the ones who can’t touch him, hurling the most despicable insults at them without any restraint. They are “vermin,” they are “radical left thugs.” They are criminals and rapists who pose a danger to our well-being and safety. But when it comes to Putin and Musk, Trump’s worst invective goes the route of ”I’m very disappointed in him,” or when he has been directly attacked or reputed, making the most hollow of threats. It’s a sure sign of a bully who knows down deep that he is more than a bit overmatched and scared. He so wants so badly to have them as friends and buddies. He wants to know that he can reason with them privately and look good afterward. And then he sees that they have absolutely no interest in doing his bidding, no interest at all in kissing the ring. Ah well, you know what they say about blood-thirsty dictators and multi-billionaires: Can’t live with ‘em, can’t live without ‘em.
Well put.