Category Archives: Keeping track

Humans Got Gender!

Leave a reply

(The new speculative fiction, E Unum Pluribus, is narrated by Jack Shirley, a bureaucratic intern whose behavior transcends gender expectations of present day Amero-European culture.  Anticipating that the character of Jack may generate comments, this and future posts will share some thoughts around those expectations.)

Look up ‘gender’ on the Internet these days and you may well encounter vehement statements to the effect that ‘gender does not exist’ or ‘there is no such thing as gender.’  What these claims seem to intend is that the concept of ‘gender’ in human beings is an imagined construct foisted on us by radical academics and activists to confuse or obscure what the commentator believes to be a real and eternal truth: that being ‘a man’ or ‘a woman’ is simply and absolutely a matter of one’s fixed and binary biological sex*. 

To that point, on the first day of his second term, Mr. Trump issued an Executive Order purporting to set the record straight on “Gender Ideology” and “Biological Truth**.”  Sex, as defined by the Order, is determined by the reproductive cells which one’s body may produce, which means it can be confirmed only by some fairly invasive medical examination and so is of no use in common daily life.  Even if we allow that the authors of that Order were just searching for a more legally-defensible way to avoid saying what they really meant – that any person who was born with an apparent penis is absolutely and forever ‘a man’ and anyone born with genitals that did not look like a penis is absolutely and forever ‘a woman’ – the same limitation is true. What sort of genitals a person carries – and even more, what their genitals looked like at birth! – is simply not determinable in any normal sort of public interaction. 

Despite that, we regularly refer to or address even total strangers as him or her, Mr., Miss, Mrs, Ms, Ma’am or even “hey Dude!”  Every time we do so, we are making assumptions based upon a variety of cues other than the form of their genitals or the reproductive cells which might issue therefrom.  What we do use in making those assumptions are a wide variety of stereotypes accumulated over the course of our lives.  A short list of attributes that can influence whether we identify an individual as man or woman might include the configuration of their garments (dress, skirt or pants; and if the latter, their fabric, colors, trim, tailoring and tightness), length and shape of one’s hairstyle (and the naturalness or artificiality of the hair’s cut, color and styling), bodily characteristics (height, bulk, proportions, muscular definition), carrying a purse in hand or a wallet in a pocket, use of cosmetics or scents (and which scent!), how they move (or throw a ball…), how they speak, what tasks they perform in the family, what outside occupation they do or do not have and even which emotions they readily express or how they express them.

Since none of those deciding factors actually involve knowledge of the person’s sexual organs/cells, the resulting assumptions about a person’s identity cannot be based upon their ‘sex’ as defined by Mr. Trump’s order and similar doctrines. For that reason, it is customary to refer to that complex of factors and the summary judgements based upon them as ‘gender’ and that is why conscientious conversation, writing or legislation uses different words for a person’s sex – ‘male,’ ‘female’ – than for public gender – ‘man, woman, boy, girl’.  Humans developed language because it facilitates useful communication and effective language around gender reflects the way we make assumptions, thereby serving the needs of speakers and listeners, writers and readers.

Human gender exists. If it did not, our everyday language wouldn’t employ gendered words and presumptions to address issues which are not actually sexual.  Future posts in this series will share more thoughts on some of those issues.

* Since these posts are about gender, not sex, they won’t delve into the scientifics of the latter.  Suffice to say, nothing here or which follows is intended to accept that the biological ‘sex’ of humans is as simple, absolute and binary as sometimes claimed.

** https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/DCPD-202500135/html/DCPD-202500135.htm provides the text of Mr. Trump’s proclamation.

(Illustrations in this post taken from The Standard Bearer, an 1664 painting by Vigor Boucquet, in the collection of The Louvre, Paris.)

P. S. – E Unum Pluribus is a speculative fiction exploring one way in which the political overreach of our current leadership may bring an end to the U. S. A., and what might come in its wake.  With a thrilling plot driven by politics and economics (as well as gender, class, language and even the origins of faith) the novel is currently being serialized online and anyone can read it, at no cost, by returning to this website’s home page and selecting E Unum Pluribus from the top menu, or via this link: https://robinandrew.net/2026/01/01/e-unum-pluribus/

If you think this post has value, feel free to share it!

If you like what you read here at robinandrew.net, please consider subscribing – it’s totally free of charge!

‘Farewell to the Troops’?  Don’t bet on it!

Leave a reply

Heather Cox Richardson used her newsletter on this year’s Flag Day to remind us all just how tenuous was the Continental Army’s 1783 victory over the larger and more established British forces. Her comments on General George Washington’s leadership bring up another momentous and improbable triumph which was crucial to our nation’s founding: Washington’s choice a few months later to voluntarily resign his leadership of the army and with it the near-certain opportunity to have reigned as autocrat over the territories he had done so much to free from Kingly rule. 

By that act of humility and principle, he granted the newly-ex colonies critical time to mature into what the USA has been – imperfectly but earnestly – until very recently: a nation of the people, governed for the people by the people’s chosen representatives.

Many watching today fear we shall not see such a transition to representative rule when the current administration’s tenure ends in January 2029.  A man who has deceptively denied the results of one election and appeared to encourage his followers attempt to overthrow its result, who seems to regularly ignore the rule of law and aggrandizes his own birthday through a grotesquerie of brutality, defacing a landmark of which he is at most temporary steward, is unlikely to accept even the clearest electoral defeat with graciousness, humility or respect for tradition, law and Constitution. 

Such a man cannot be trusted to follow in the footsteps of one like General – later, President – George Washington. 

E Unum Pluribus is a speculative fiction exploring one way in which a President’s determination to hold onto power might play out and just how extensive the resulting damage might be.  The novel was written and is offered as a cautionary tale, while there is still time to avoid anything like the events it imagines. 

To those ends, E Unum Pluribus is currently being serialized online and anyone can read it, at no cost, by navigating to the home page of this website and selecting E Unum Pluribus from the page’s top menu, or via this link: https://robinandrew.net/2026/01/01/e-unum-pluribus/

That is not Democracy!

Leave a reply

Word recently that the US Postal Service is attempting to take nationwide control over who can receive vote-by-mail ballots brought to mind an image begun back in 2020 but set aside when the 2020 Election suggested (prematurely, it turns out) that our nation’s red vs. blue fever had broken.

Viewed in conjunction with continuing efforts by ‘red’ states to gerrymander dissenting citizens into insignificance, this new tactic makes clear that Mr. Trump and his MAGAminions have abandoned any pretense of winning over the majority of Americans to their views and aim instead to silence all opposition in order to ensure perpetual Republican control of the Federal government.

No doubt some critics will point out that the U. S. has never been an absolute democracy, governed by plebiscite of every citizen on every issue, but a republic, or a representative democracy, or however they prefer to state it. All true, but however you characterize their hard-fought compromises, our founders and the imperfect Constitution they handed down to us certainly intended perpetual competition between varying points of view under accepted rules that allowed a naturally eterogenous polity to choose and change directions at set intervals.

Changing electoral rules in order to lock in a minority’s power are about as ‘un-American’ as anything can be and totally inconsistent with any ‘originalist’ reading of the documents.

Another point that quote leaves unspoken is that, notwithstanding Stephen Miller’s pompous pronouncements, tyranny never lasts. Throughout history, tyrants have trumpeted their power only to be brought down hard, whether through revolt of the tyrannized, invasion by outsiders jealous of their stolen wealth or by the sly knives of their own ambitious underlings.

That is small comfort though, as the longer tyranny reigns, the greater the burdens it inflicts upon the tyrannized. How much better our future and our children’s future will be if enough voters, including Republicans (of which I count myself one), will choose to foil MAGA’s takeover attempt in this year’s elections, and especially that of 2028!

This post is public, please share it as widely as you wish.

P. S. – E Unum Pluribus is a speculative fiction exploring one way in which power-hungry monomania could bring an end to the U. S. A. – and what sort of world might be left in its wake. With a thrilling plot driven by murder and conspiracy (as well as gender, class, language and even the origins of faith) the novel is currently being serialized online and anyone can read it, at no cost, by navigating to this website’s home page and selecting E Unum Pluribus from the top menu, or via this link: https://robinandrew.net/2026/01/01/e-unum-pluribus/

Big Plans, Big Questions

Leave a reply

The Kingdom – of Saudi Arabia, that is – illuminates MAGA ambitions.

BBC online had a valuable article yesterday* about retrenchment on some of the megaprojects previously announced by the Saudi government and its de facto ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman al Saud (MbS for ease).  Predictably, it has proven easier to commission breathtaking renderings, simulations and press releases than to execute incredible (literally, as it turns out) projects that challenge the limits of environment, resources, technology and economics.  Given that the USA’s current leadership so clearly aspires to emulate MbS and other autocrats down through history, this brought to mind their own Napoleonic building endeavors.

Mr. Trump likes to describe himself as a master developer, but considered on an international, or even a national scale, the projects his multiplicity of accounting entities have actualized are hardly ambitious.  Where others might develop an entire urban neighborhood (Hudson Yards, in New York for just one example of many) combining multiple uses, extensive civic infrastructure and multi-tiered approval processes open to public scrutiny, Trump branded properties seem to consist of single-tower condominiums (for the reliably lucrative luxury market), golf clubs (ditto) or hotels (ditto – and neither particularly large nor grand for today’s hospitality industry). Not to mention refurbishment and rebranding of existing properties or application of TRUMP identifiers to properties developed and/or managed by others.  Innovative solutions to thorny challenges; years of diligent project development and phased execution; navigating a complex mix of users, stakeholders, overseers and sophisticated lenders to meet the requirements of customers not predisposed to dispose of excess wealth?  Not so much.

All of which makes one wonder just how well thought out the current White House Ballroom project really is.  Aside from ballooning cost – $200 million at announcement, to $400 million supposedly raised at no taxpayer expense to now $1 billion discussed in a request for funding out of public pockets by his Republican congress – has his ever-changing design team really worked out the structural issues of spanning such a large space in a traditional architectural style and roof height clearly suited to short spans?  How about the issues of HVAC and acoustics for such a large space – with no evidence of supply pathways and registers, rooftop equipment/penthouse, cooling towers, boiler plant, exhaust and intake airways?  For that matter, is there adequate site space for parking, queuing, shipping and receiving to serve such a space, or trash and recycling for a top-quality food service operation of the magnitude described?  Site design, multi-discipline engineering and value engineering on a project such as this normally consumes months of work after selecting and assembling a large and well-coordinated team and nearly always requires adjustments to early visual design concepts.  Doing all that while earthwork and foundations are already being placed is a sure path to expensive over-design or even-more-expensive change orders during the procurement, construction and commissioning process. 

The projected 250 ft tall Arch de TRiUMPh is another very large question mark, regardless of what one thinks of its visual design or true promotional intent. 

Unlike a common hotel or condo building, such a behemoth will require bespoke geotech/structural engineering to support and stabilize its mass on the sedimentary soils likely present on such a riverine site.  The stated intent to have it designed and constructed by July of next year precludes proper attention to this and many other issues, leading one to anticipate significant changes, delays, overages or failure over time (‘Pisa’ comes to mind….).

All of which brings us to the ‘Trump Class Battleships’ announced with great fanfare earlier this year. 

Foregoing questions about the applicability of ‘Battleships’ to contemporary and future warfare (a really big forego according to commentators with insight into military matters) such a state-of-tomorrow’s-art weapon requires years of study and proof-of-concept testing, development of new technologies and systems and establishment of unique production facilities and supply chains.  Nothing in Mr. Trump’s behavior (or that of those serving his whims) suggests such an in-depth effort has been thought through. To the contrary, the public talk of how soon the first ship is to be built and commissioned suggests it has not. 

‘Waste fraud and abuse,’ the mantra of Mr. Trump’s now abandoned DOGE debacle, tends to be a self-actualizing cry – the louder one claims to be attacking that triumvirate of supposed sins, the more likely it is that one‘s own efforts will actually perpetrate them. The American public should thus be prepared to learn in future that these and other such grand projects are either cancelled, scaled back or revealed as boondoggles, their flaws predictably disowned by those who proposed and sold them. 

As Saudi megaprojects are going today, so shall this administration’s MAGAprojects go tomorrow.

P. S. – E Unum Pluribus is a speculative fiction exploring one way in which the parallel political overreach of our current leadership may bring an end to the U. S. A., and what might come in its wake.  With a thrilling plot driven by politics and economics (as well as gender, class, language and even the origins of faith) the novel is currently being serialized online and anyone can read it, at no cost, by navigating to the website robinandrew.net and selecting E Unum Pluribus from the home page’s top menu, or via this link: https://robinandrew.net/2026/01/01/e-unum-pluribus/

*‘How Saudi Arabia’s spending spree reached the end of the line,’ Sebastian Usher, BBC Global affairs correspondent, BBC online, 2026-05-24.

We don’t need no stinking election!

Leave a reply

Where this administration – and our nation – may be headed.

Thomas B. Edsall has a column in today’s N Y Times titled ‘When you think of it, We Shouldn’t Even Have an Election’ – a direct quote from a recent Reuters interview of Mr. Trump.  The piece goes on to summarize all the ways in which Mr. Trump and his enablers in the Executive branch, Congress and the highest courts are working to either swing the upcoming elections their way or, if that is not successful, to justify invalidating the results so that they may hold onto power indefinitely. 

Scary stuff that, and very credible to anyone whose been following the news. Our aspiring monarch, it seems, will stop at nothing to protect his power and secure himself a place atop Mt. Rushmore. All the more reason for every patriot to vote this November for candidates of any party with the courage to stand up to demagoguery and reestablish the role of Congress in making law, policy and appropriations of the public’s funds.*

P. S. – E Unum Pluribus is a speculative fiction exploring one way such subversion might lead to the end of the U. S. A. as we know it, and what sort of a world might take its place.  With a thrilling plot driven by politics and economics as well as gender, class, language and even the origins of faith, the novel is currently being serialized online and anyone can read it, at no cost, by navigating to the home page of this website and selecting E Unum Pluribus from the top menu, or via this link: https://robinandrew.net/2026/01/01/e-unum-pluribus/

*for one more small step each of us can take to resist polarization, see also: https://robinandrew.net/2026/01/11/change-your-party-change-the-future/

How Style Reveals Character

Leave a reply

Heather Cox Richardson has a tasty piece this morning (see Letters From an American, on Substack) about the moment when Robert E. Lee surrendered the Confederate Army to U. S. Grant – Lee dressed in a brand new dress uniform, Grant in the worn and dirty private’s outfit he’d worn the day before, with scant insignia added to indicate his true rank. That instance of appearance as an indicator of the two men’s divergent characters, brought back to mind some thoughts I’d been working on not long ago, before they were (rightly) eclipsed by the chaos of our nation’s attack on Iran. Herewith:

Viewing the renderings of Mr. Trump’s replacement for the White House’s late East Wing, I’ve been surprised no one seems to be questioning the description of it as a “Ballroom.”

To these ears, the zeal and subterfuge with which The Donald is pursuing this particular bit of noncritical infrastructure suggests there is more at stake here than his enthusiasm for ballroom dancing and debutants (though the latter could be a factor…).

Administration PR pretends this cavern is vitally necessary for legitimate diplomatic events, but given Mr. Trump’s disdain for actual diplomats and his preference for small group strong-arming, that seems a stretch. More likely, the room’s programming will lean toward pseudo-events designed to flatter and reward loyal contributors to his continual fund-raising ventures (including, of course, the cost of this boondoggle itself) and to dangle the bait of future seating arrangements to extract still more contributions and concessions from others.

A means, in other words, for Mr. Trump and his chosen people to more-convincingly imitate the persons he obviously idolizes: the nation-owning monarchs and autocrats of the Middle East and elsewhere.

For that reason, I suggest we all just call this construction what it is – The Donald J. Trump Throne Room, at the Trump™ White House™.

On which note, does anyone really believe Mr. Trump will graciously depart what he is busily turning into the Presidential Palace – having finally gotten it redecorated to his taste – just because his current term expires? Having previously experienced the diminution of becoming an ‘ex-’ Chief Executive? Having in this term solidified his dominion over the rabble thanks to a compliant Supreme Court and supine Trumpublican Party? Having for his entire life scooted around every legal and moral constraint and gotten away with it all?

Note that Mr. Trump’s favorite head of state, Vladimir Putin, will have been in power for thirty years when his current term ends. The House of Saud has ruled its Kingdom for over ninety years (and a somewhat smaller realm for generations before that). China’s Xi Jinping is currently enjoying his third five-year term with no end in sight thanks to the 2018 elimination of the prior term limit on that office. Israel’s Netanyahu is over 18 years in control; Turkey’s Erdogan around 23 (Hungary’s Orban a mere 16). True, Napoleon Bonaparte lasted only 15, but Uncle Joe Stalin managed over 50…

On the turgid scale of those role models, a mere eight years in office would hardly rate inclusion. If, indeed, the style of Mr. Trump’s civic works is true indication of his character, we are in for a bumpy January 2029.

P. S. – E Unum Pluribus is a thrilling speculative fiction exploring one way in which a President’s attempt to overstay his welcome might affect our nation’s survival. It is currently being serialized online and you can read it, at no cost, starting at https://robinandrew.net/2026/01/01/e-unum-pluribus/

Pardon Who, Mr. Trump?!

Leave a reply

We learned yesterday that Mr. Trump has commuted the sentence of George Santos, the ex-congressman rightly convicted of fraud and identity theft. No reasonable explanation has been given for letting this criminal off after having served only a few months of a multi-year sentence with Mr. Trump’s wishes for “Good luck…” and “… a great life!”

Our executive has no concern, apparently, for the luck and lives of the people and organizations who now have absolutely zero chance of collecting the restitution due to them by judgement of the court which convicted Mr. Santos.

It is possible, perhaps, that Mr. Trump truly believes Santos “has been horribly mistreated…” and awarded this commutation to a political supporter for no reasons other than his love of justice and his compassion for the wronged. If so, let him demonstrate it by paying equal attention to the case of Subramanyam “Subu” Vedam, who was recently released from custody after serving 43 years in prison for a murder which reports say it is now clear he did not commit. Rather than being allowed to enjoy his “Good luck” and look forward to a “great life,” he was immediately taken into custody by ICE and placed in crude detention while they process him for deportation, based upon a drug offence to which he reportedly confessed as part of a plea deal; an offence which even if it has any validity, is entirely overshadowed by the exemplary behavior he displayed during 43 years of wrongful imprisonment..

If George Santos has been “horribly mistreated” in serving three months for multiple crimes which were obvious and adjudicated in full, how much more deserving of compassion is Mr. Vedam?

Mr. Trump, please demonstrate your thoughtful and compassionate nature by commuting his charges and allowing him to spend his remaining years with his family rather than in a nation thousands of miles away from them and to which he has virtually no connection. Or, if that is too heavy a lift, at the very least direct your Attorney General to initiate a full examination of Mr. Vedam’s treatment with even a fraction of the zeal she has exhibited in prosecuting your political opponents.

Show us your true colors, Mr. Trump!

Please share this Post

to bring more attention to Mr. Vedam’s

plight.

And, if you appreciate what you see on this site,

please subscribe – it’s absolutely free!

Share

One Ring to Rule Them All – The Breathtaking Cynicism (and Naivete) of Trump v. United States

Leave a reply

It is over a year since the Supreme Court issued their 6-3 ruling on Docket no. 23-939, Donald J. Trump versus the United States of America, which ruling granted the President immunity from Federal prosecution for virtually any acts while in office.

No such immunity having been written in the Constitution, their reasoning (originalism be damned) seems to have been that the fear of prosecution would be an undue distraction from the office’s duties and that the fear of such prosecution would impede a President from taking actions he otherwise believed necessary or justified. 

This ruling was cynical first in that it assumed a person who had sought and won the highest office in the land would value his own fate (political, financial or otherwise) more highly than the proper execution of that office.   Sadly, in the opinion of some observers, they have already been proven correct on that count.

The ruling was cynical second in assuming that even such a self-interested person, upon achieving the office whose responsibilities include selecting the head of its Department of Justice would not have sufficient faith in his appointees and the legal system they administer to rely upon that system to issue proper verdicts in the event he was subjected to improper prosecution. In this, the Court disregarded the basic conservative rationale that the possibility of prosecution provides a necessary and effective deterrent to illegal behavior. In this respect, their cynicism has freed the incumbent to act with total disregard of credible legal justification.

Third, and most cynical of all, is that the Justices did not themselves have sufficient faith in the American legal system, of which they are the figurehead, to use their position, prestige and ruling to assure the President that he could rely upon that system for protection.  Every other person in every U. S. jurisdiction lives every day of their lives knowing they could be prosecuted for something of which they do not believe they are guilty, and every one of us has no choice but to trust in the legal system to protect us.  And yet, our Supreme Court deemed it unwise to ask the holder of the highest public trust to do the same?  Breathtakingly cynical, and shameful.

Those thoughts were on my mind at the time the ruling came out, and I considered posting them, but sadly, did not get around to it.  Now, as Mr. Trump’s second term reveals its true form, it is clear that ruling was not only cynical, but at the same time equally naive.  By freeing the President from any accountability other than impeachment (the highest hurdle in the legal system and one which has not once taken effect, in nearly 250 years), the court’s ruling has encouraged him to act as he pleases, including to persecute with impunity anyone he chooses.

Moreover, in doing so while also leaving in place his virtually unlimited power to pardon, the Court allows him to hand a ‘Get out of Jail Free’ card to anyone who does his bidding.  Far from protecting the nation, this greatly encourages improper acts of any sort by anyone who believes they can maintain the President’s favor.  In the few short months of this administration, we can already see this effect at work; that the Court’s majority did not foresee this outcome but instead enabled and encouraged it, exhibits breathtaking naivete, at the least. 

The result of these twin privileges, one clear in our Constitution and the other added to it by the recent decision, is that the chief executive may now act out his every whim, without fear of legal restraint for him or his followers.

If this was the ‘original intent’ of the authors of the Constitution, then that document is not at all what generations of us have been taught to believe it was.  If that was not the original intent, then shame be on the authors of the Court’s opinion in the case so very aptly named: Donald J. Trump versus the United States.

Thank you, Washington Post!

Leave a reply

Just yesterday I read Clare Malone’s All the Billionaire’s Men (New Yorker, 2025-05-26) reviewing Jeff Bezo’s stewardship of the Washington Post. The article raised worthwhile concerns about his commitment to the paper’s independence and integrity, his apparent capitulations to Mr. Trump and his MAGA illusion (epitomized by Amazon’s $40m licensing deal for a puff documentary about Mrs. Trump), and implicitly, whether the Post could continue to be a beacon against darkness. Serious issues to this subscriber and daily reader (online) of the Post.

Today, the Post published Karen DeYoung’s and Cate Brown’s exclusive reporting (contributed to by Heva Farouk Mahfouz) headlined ‘Gaza postwar plan envisions ‘voluntary’ relocation of entire population‘ revealing a well-developed draft of one truly atrocious postwar plan for Gaza which the administration appears to be considering with great favor.

There’s much to be said about such a venal land grab, right now however, I’d like to thank the Washington Post newsroom, staff, editors and – assuming its Ownership continues to support such journalism – Mr. Bezos. As our government bends to the whim of a single autocrat, with policies developed in secret sessions among unelected plotters – when they do not spring fully formed from the ruler’s daydreams alone – we the people depend on committed and professional journalists to reveal what is really going on.

Thank you, Karen DeYoung, Cate Brown, Heva Farouk Mahfouz, the entire Washington Post staff and editorship and you too, Mr. Bezos, for keeping the lights on.

Robin Andrew

Doublespeak Becomes our National Language

Leave a reply

The events of January 6, 2021, wherein thousands overran security at the U. S. Capitol Building, directly and violently assaulted security forces then broke into and vandalized that pre-eminent Federal facility, all while threatening bodily harm and even death to the elected representatives doing the nation’s business there, did not require the then-President to take any action and were actually “a day of love,” in Mr. Trump’s words or “a normal tourist visit,” in those of Georgia Representative Andrew Clyde.

But:

The events of the last few days in Los Angeles, wherein crowds gathered in predominantly peaceful demonstrations, are “a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the U. S. government”– the standard set by 10 U. S. C. 12406 of the Code on Armed Services which the administration has abused to justify creating a national crisis by deploying Federalized National Guard and active duty Marine troops – despite urgent assurances by both local and state authorities that there was no need to do so.

Doublespeak, George Orwell’s prescient creation, is alive and active in the words of those who now govern our nation.

(There’s no excuse for throwing rocks or anything else at police forces. No excuse for looting or vandalism either, but such criminal offenses are properly and regularly addressed by civil law enforcement forces. Assembling in public to voice and demonstrate common feelings about events in one’s community is neither rebellion nor incursion but a right guaranteed to all in the U. S. by our Constitution, our laws and abundant examples in our nation’s glorious history.

Mr. Trump, who famously declared “I love wars,” who tried to declare himself, “a wartime president” back in 2020, and is eagerly anticipating his opportunity to preside over a grand military pageant, made a tactical mistake by predicating his current reign on avoiding foreign wars. To escape this bind, it seems, he has decided it is in his political and economic interest to find himself a domestic war. Stones thrown in LA are merely the pretext for this latest escalation of his own aggrandizement.)

“Good night and good luck,” indeed.