Today's Belle

Very strong points.

• Troops aren't props
• We've been losing the peace after we've won the war 
• Knowing is half the battle - the other half is violence
• You don't win hearts and minds when people resent you being there

Today's Rich

People will turn on you when you fuck with their money.

Whooda thunk it?

Milo Bringin' It

That Nutty Newsom Thing

click 'em to pick 'em

⇩

Today's Belle

Not that MAGA will even notice.

Re-Upping The Kompromat

This guy is no conspiracy pimp.

The idea that the Kremlin has kompromat on Trump seems increasingly plausible

If the White House capitulates to Putin on Ukraine, it will grossly and perhaps fatally betray the principles on which Nato was founded

Whether or not the Islamic Republic of Iran politically implodes in the aftermath of the American-Israeli aerial onslaught, and regardless of whether there is an uneasy truce or phoney war between the participants, a far greater issue confronts the Continent of Europe – namely what will become of Putin’s ongoing war against a sovereign UN member state, Ukraine.

Far from ending that war – which has caused far greater casualties than the recent three years’ fighting in the Middle East within 24 hours – as Trump boasted he would to American voters this time last year, Putin is raising the military stakes in an unabated attempt to subjugate Ukraine.

What is Trump doing to stop Putin’s war? Nothing, it seems. But why? Any display of substantial US military assistance for Ukraine could make further prosecution of Putin’s invasion futile. It would not involve American boots on the ground in Ukraine. It would not risk nuclear warfare. If Putin sensed that the US was serious in preventing a win for Russia in Ukraine, a ceasefire followed by a peace conference would ensue.

But Trump won’t even countenance further sanctions against Russia. He astonished his so-called allies by calling for Russia’s readmission to the G7 summits. He regularly suggests that Ukraine somehow started the war with Russia. He called President Zelenskiy a dictator and insulted him grossly at an ambush in the Oval Office – the political pigsty where idiotic parodies of international diplomacy are staged. He has hardly more than murmured against the Russian missile onslaught on Ukrainian cities.

What is his real strategy? Is it to collapse the Ukrainian state by weakening its resistance to Russia or to re-establish Ukraine as a Russian satellite? Is it to divide the mineral and oil assets of Ukraine with Russia, in line with the “deal” he imposed on Zelenskiy in a Corleone-style offer he couldn’t refuse? Is the “dictator” Zelenskiy now to be the object of US-backed regime change as part of a capitulation to Russia?

Or is there some different hidden policy agenda in the White House? I used to be sceptical about claims that Putin had access to kompromat on Trump that explained his grovelling relationship with the Kremlin. But if such kompromat is not the explanation, it is hard to see why the White House is behaving as it does towards Ukraine.

It was fascinating to read the Kremlin’s response to the US bombing of the Iranian nuclear facilities. The Russians condemned it as the violation of international law and the UN charter against the territory of a sovereign state member of the United Nations. As the invader of Ukraine, Moscow’s verbal posturing was the worst form of sanctimonious, hypocritical humbug. It was the least – and the most – it could do for Iran, the supplier of much of the components for its drone weaponry used in Ukraine.

Now we are told that the US is completely committed to Nato. The US permanent representative, Matthew Whittaker, speaking at the alliance’s conference in The Hague stated that the US “isn’t going anywhere” and is going to be a “reliable ally” for its Nato treaty members. The 5 per cent target for defence spending by Nato members seems to have rekindled Washington’s affection for the alliance.

It isn’t necessary for Ukraine to join Nato or indeed the EU in order for the US to stand by the security pledge it gave Ukraine in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union. This pledge was in exchange for Ukraine giving up the nuclear arsenal that was located on its territory in USSR days. It may well be that the pre-1954 status of the Crimea as part of Russia will ultimately be reinstated as part of a peace deal.

But a successful Russian subjugation of Ukraine and a follow-on subjugation of Moldova and Georgia would bring the Nato alliance into a directly confrontational physical and geographical relationship with Russian despotism from the Caucasus to the Barents Sea.

Ukraine must have its previous security guarantees reinstated as part of any peace deal. It must have the means to defend itself. It must have the right to choose at least the trading relationship with the EU that EEA members now enjoy, if it is not to become a fully fledged EU member.

It is now suggested that Trump may plan to meet Zelenskiy again. If so, that meeting must be based on mutual respect and truth – unlike the shameful Oval Office ambush. The White House must understand the concerns of its allies. It must understand that Nato is not simply transactional. The alliance is about a commitment to democratic values.

The preamble to the 1949 Nato treaty stated that the alliance was founded on preservation and defence of the “principles of democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law”.

If the White House capitulates to Putin on Ukraine, it will grossly and perhaps fatally betray those principles.

Today's Dead Wingnut

One of those obituaries

that puts a smile in my heart

James Dobson, Focus on the Family founder and key leader on the Christian right, dies at 89

James Dobson, a child psychologist who founded the conservative Christian ministry Focus on the Family and was a politically influential campaigner against abortion and LGBTQ+ rights, died on Thursday. He was 89.

Born in 1936 in Shreveport, Louisiana, Dobson launched a radio show counseling Christians on how to be good parents and started Focus on the Family in 1977. He became a force in the 1980s for pushing conservative Christian ideals in mainstream American politics alongside fundamentalist giants like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.

At its peak, Focus on the Family had more than 1,000 employees and gave Dobson a platform to weigh in on legislation and serve as an adviser to five presidents.

His death was confirmed by the Dr. James Dobson Family Institute. He is survived by his wife of 64 years, Shirley, as well as their two children, a daughter-in-law and two grandchildren.

‘Mount Rushmore’ of conservatives

Dobson interviewed President Ronald Reagan in the Oval Office in 1985, and Falwell called him a rising star in 1989. Decades later, he was among the evangelical leaders tapped to advise President Donald Trump. in 2016.

In 2022, he praised Trump for appointing conservative U.S. Supreme Court justices who allowed states to ban abortion.

“Whether you like Donald Trump or not, whether you supported or voted for him or not, if you are supportive of this Dobbs decision that struck down Roe v. Wade, you have to mention in the same breath the man who made it possible,” he said in a ministry broadcast.

Focus on the Family moved from California to Colorado Springs, Colorado, in the 1990s, establishing the city as a hub for evangelicals, sometimes going by the nickname “Vatican of the West.”

Dobson belongs on the “Mount Rushmore” of Christian conservatives, said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, another group Dobson founded. He promoted ideas from “a biblical standpoint” that pushed back against progressive parenting of the 1960s, Perkins said.

Weighing Dobson’s legacy

In his 1970 parenting book “Dare to Discipline,” updated in 1992, Dobson said parents should spank their kids to discipline them and enforce boundaries. Children should not be struck in anger, but he advised that “the spanking should be of sufficient magnitude to cause genuine tears.”

“I know that some of my readers could argue,” he wrote, “that the deliberate premeditated application of minor pain to a small child is a harsh and unloving thing to do. To others, it will seem like pure barbarism. I obviously disagree.”

John Fea, an American History professor at Messiah College in Pennsylvania, has been critical of Dobson’s politics and ideas. However, he recounted how his own father — a tough Marine — was a better parent after becoming an evangelical Christian and listening to Dobson’s radio program.

“Even as a self-identified evangelical Christian that I am, I have no use in my own life for Dobson’s politics or his child-rearing,” he said. “But as a historian what do you do with these stories? About a dad who becomes a better dad?”

Possible presidential run

After developing a following of millions, Dobson considered running for president in the 2000 election, following in the footsteps of former television minister Pat Robertson’s surprise success in 1988.

“He had a big audience. He was not afraid to speak out,” said Ralph Reed, a Christian conservative political organizer and lobbyist who founded the Faith and Freedom Coalition. “If Jim had decided to run, he would have been a major force.”

Despite their close association later in life, Reed’s enduring memory is of Dobson’s voice as his sole companion while traveling through rural America as a younger political organizer.

“I’d be out there somewhere, and I could go to the AM dial and there was never a time, day or night when I couldn’t find that guy,” Reed said. “There will probably never be another one like him.”

A political juggernaut for decades

James Bopp, a lawyer who has represented Focus on the Family, said Dobson was able to rally public support like few other social conservatives.

Records compiled by the watchdog group Open Secrets show that Focus on the Family and Family Research Council, have combined to spend more than $4 million on political ads and close to $2 million lobbying Congress since the late 1990s.

Dobson helped create a constellation of Family Policy Councils in around 40 states that work in tandem with his organization to push a socially conservative agenda and lobby lawmakers, said Peter Wolfgang, executive director of one such group in Connecticut.

“If there is one man above all whom I would credit with being the builder — not just the thinker — who gave us the institutions that created the space for President Trump to help us turn the tide in the culture war, it would be Dr. James Dobson,” Wolfgang wrote in an online column last month.

Opposition to abortion and LGBTQ+ rights

Dobson left Focus on the Family in 2010 and founded the institute that bears his name. He continued with the Family Talk radio show, which is nationally syndicated and is carried by 1,500 radio outlets with more than half a million listeners weekly, according to the institute.

His radio program featured guests talking about the importance of embracing religion and promoting the idea that people could change their sexuality.

“The homosexual community will tell us that transformations never occur. That you cannot change,” he said in a 2021 video posted on his institute’s site that promoted “success stories” of people who “no longer struggle with homosexuality” after attending a ministry. He said there is typically a “pain and agitation” associated with homosexuality.

Conversion therapy is the scientifically discredited practice of using therapy to “convert” LGBTQ+ people to heterosexuality or traditional gender expectations.

The practice has been banned in 23 states and the District of Columbia, according to the Movement Advancement Project, an LGBTQ+ rights think tank.

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed in March to hear a Colorado case about whether state and local governments can enforce laws banning conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ children.

Today's Trump Theater

Our tax dollars "at work".

The fact that these guys are touring the monuments and prowling Georgetown is all the proof anybody should need that this is all just more of Trump's theatrical photo op bullshit.

And:

Trump says he will go on patrol in Washington with police, military

WASHINGTON, Aug 21 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said he would patrol the streets of Washington, D.C. on Thursday night with the police and military, after deploying National Guard troops in the nation's capital last week.

"I'm going to be going out tonight, I think, with the police, and with the military, of course," Trump said in an interview with Newsmax reporter Todd Starnes on his radio show.

Remember this one from 2020?

Federal Takeovers Suck

10th Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

We asked 604 D.C. residents about Trump’s takeover. Here’s what they said.

Though crime continues to be a concern, most residents strongly oppose Trump’s actions and don’t think they’ll make D.C. safer, a Washington Post-Schar School poll found.

Washington, D.C., residents overwhelmingly oppose President Donald Trump’s decision last week to take over the D.C. police and order federal law enforcement and the National Guard onto District streets, and 65 percent don’t think his actions will make the city safer from violent crime, according to a Washington Post-Schar School poll.

Thirty-one percent of District residents say crime is an “extremely” or “very” serious problem in the city, down from 50 percent in May and 65 percent in spring 2024. While the latest poll finds strong opposition to several tactics Trump has employed, residents show some agreement on one view: Just under half think increasing punishments for convicted teenagers would reduce violent crime.

The vast majority of residents, though, don’t want Trump controlling law enforcement efforts in the city. About 8 in 10 D.C. residents oppose Trump’s executive order to federalize law enforcement in the city, with about 7 in 10 opposing it “strongly.”

Residents of the District, where Trump won just 6 percent of the vote in the 2024 election, disagree with the president’s many characterizations of the city as overrun by crime. On Monday, Trump said Washington had been “the most unsafe place anywhere,” but 78 percent of residents say they feel very or somewhat safe in their neighborhoods. This is similar to 76 percent in May, but the percentage who feel “very safe” is up from 26 percent then to 39 percent now.

“Trump’s overheated rhetoric about D.C. crime has evoked strong feelings among many residents offended by such characterizations of their city,” said Mark Rozell, dean of George Mason University’s Schar School of Policy and Government, which co-sponsored the poll.

“A federalized takeover of any aspect of a city’s operations will naturally create a backlash, and that is clearly happening here,” he said. “Residents are saying it is not as bad as the president claims, and they want to reclaim the image of their city against a presidential narrative that is tarnishing D.C.’s reputation.”

The poll of 604 D.C. residents was conducted over four days starting Thursday, in a week that began with Trump signing an executive order declaring an emergency for the District of Columbia citing “out of control” crime.

But in response to an open-ended question about what they see as the biggest problem facing the District, residents are about as likely to say Trump as they are to answer crime. Twenty-four percent name Trump, his takeover of D.C. police or federal overreach as the biggest problem facing the city (double the percentage who named the president or a related issue in May), while 22 percent cite crime as the city’s top problem (compared to 21 percent in May).

Trump’s actions also appear to have spurred support for statehood among residents, with 72 percent saying the District should become a state — more than in any of the dozen polls since 1993 when The Post first asked that question. Relatedly, 55 percent say it’s “extremely important” for the District to govern itself without oversight from the federal government.

Joseph Clay, 89, a Navy veteran who has lived in his Northeast Washington home since 1966, says he strongly opposes the president’s takeover of law enforcement in the District. “We’re becoming a police state. I’m afraid of that, I really am,” Clay, who is Black, said in an interview Tuesday. “I wonder if they’re looking at Blacks and Browns and if I myself could be stopped and asked for my credentials.”

Clay described his neighborhood as excellent and said he hasn’t been a victim of crime since the early 1990s. “The only crime I hear about is what I read in The Washington Post,” he said.

Nearly 9 in 10 Washingtonians say their neighborhood is an excellent or good place to live, including 46 percent who say it’s “excellent.” Those numbers have risen consistently across seven Post polls since 1988, when 56 percent rated their neighborhood positively, including 18 percent who called it excellent.

Residents’ responses in this month’s poll are at odds with the picture painted by Trump, Attorney General Pam Bondi and U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro of a dirty and lawless city overrun by thugs and drugs. D.C. residents say they are concerned about crime, but they believe the situation is improving.

Fifty-four percent say D.C.’s crime problems are getting better, up from 29 percent who said this in May. Compared with last year, significantly fewer D.C. residents say now that they worry about being a victim of carjacking, theft, home burglary or assault.

Violent crime in D.C. has been declining since 2023, part of a nationwide drop over the past two years that in 2024 brought homicide rates to their lowest level in decades.

For Courtney Priebe, who is White and has lived in Northwest Washington for three years, Trump’s decision to take over law enforcement in the District has made her more fearful, not less. It “is honestly striking more fear into residents than making them feel safe,” said Priebe, 29. “It feels like a show of force to distract from other things.”

Over half of D.C. residents (55 percent) say they’ve noticed more federal law enforcement officers in D.C. since Trump issued his order. Among those who have noticed more federal agents, 61 percent say this made them feel “less safe,” while 18 percent feel safer and 20 percent say it hasn’t made a difference.

Specific steps taken by the administration are also unpopular with people living in the city. About 7 in 10 residents say D.C. police should not help with federal deportation efforts.

Also, more than 6 in 10 Washingtonians oppose the city shutting down homeless tent encampments and requiring people to move elsewhere (64 percent), while 25 percent support this. Opposition is up from May, when 55 percent of D.C. residents opposed it and 33 percent were in support.

Christopher Brosman, 45, who works for the federal government and has lived in Northwest Washington for six years, says he doesn’t want D.C. police assisting in deportation efforts and called the administration’s removal of homeless encampments “the wrong approach to fixing the problem.” He also opposes the federal takeover of D.C. police. “I feel like it’s against American principles and D.C. self rule,” said Brosman, who is White.

Overall, about two-thirds of D.C. residents (65 percent) say Trump’s recent actions will not help combat violent crime. There are some steps that they believe could help, though.

Majorities of District residents think crime would drop in response to increasing economic opportunities in poor neighborhoods (77 percent), stricter national gun laws (70 percent), increasing the number of D.C. police officers on patrol (63 percent) and violence interruption strategies (57 percent). Almost half (47 percent) think the same about increasing punishments for teenagers convicted of crimes.

The poll finds that about 4 in 10 D.C. residents support treating 14-year-olds accused of assault and carjacking like adults, and nearly 6 in 10 say the same for young murder suspects.

Brenden Clark, who lives with his husband in the NoMa neighborhood near North Capitol Street, says he voted for Kamala Harris in 2024 but he supports the takeover of the police and the National Guard presence. “My day-to-day experience living in D.C. proper over the past three years honestly has been the worst experience of my life,” Clark, who is White, said in an interview.

Clark, 37, said his husband once had to hide when a man in a wheelchair outside their apartment building pointed a gun at someone walking behind him. The couple paid $3,700 a month for a two-bedroom apartment, but Clark says they were both afraid to walk in their neighborhood because “there are lots of gangs and people walking around smashing windows.”

Thirty-five percent of city residents say they, a family member or a close friend have been victims of crime in the past five years. Support for Trump’s actions rises to 34 percent among D.C. residents who know a recent violent crime victim, but 60 percent in that category still oppose his actions. Among those who don’t know a crime victim, just 8 percent support Trump’s actions.

Clark says he doesn’t agree with everything Trump does and “obviously [I] don’t think he’s very presidential,” but he supports the law enforcement push and thinks the president is “making things happen that in my view benefit people like me, younger people who don’t have generational wealth.”

Though he says he has felt safer in the few days since Trump took over law enforcement in the city, he doesn’t think he’ll stay. “I’m actually working on plans with my husband to move back to Oklahoma, where I’m from,” he said.

Support for D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) is unchanged since May. A small majority (53 percent) of Washingtonians approve of how Bowser is handling her job, while 41 percent disapprove. About half of Washingtonians say she should do more to oppose Trump (48 percent), 3 in 10 say she’s “handling this about right” (30 percent) and 12 percent say she should do more to support Trump, a figure that is up from 5 percent in May.

D.C. police maintain similar approval ratings: 54 percent of residents say they’re doing an excellent or good job, while 39 percent rate them “not so good” or “poor.” Those ratings are nearly identical to 2024, but down from 74 percent positive in 2017.

“I find that the city is a peace-loving city,” says Michelle Jones, 70, a lifelong District resident who lives in Southeast Washington. She thinks D.C. police “could do a better job and be more proactive in areas where there is high crime.” But Jones, who is Black, strongly opposes the president taking control of the police and ordering National Guard troops into the city.

“He has shown he is an authoritarian and he has demonstrated this is an authoritarian regime across the country,” Jones said. “To make these grandiose statements that the city is filthy and filled with gangs, I don’t understand it.”

The poll was conducted by The Post and the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University by telephone Aug. 14-17, among a random sample of 604 adult residents in Washington, D.C., with 70 percent interviewed by live callers, including 51 percent on cellphones and 19 percent on landlines; 30 percent completed the survey online via a cellphone text invitation. Results have a margin of error of plus or minus 4.1 percentage points. Sampling, field work and data processing is by Braun Research of Princeton, New Jersey.

Nature Is Metal