Toxic Trump

Sheldon Richman on Trump’s aggrieved-Empire routine.  Antiwar.  Relevant chunks:

The key to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign – the feature that explains nearly everything else about that toxic dump – is his aggrieved-nation shtick. Just about everything Trump says (when he’s not adoring himself or belittling others) is about how the once-great American nation has been humbled by the rest of the world. To hear him tell it, the United States is a 99-pound weakling who repeatedly has had sand kicked in his face by everyone. “We don’t win anymore,” he says. “We don’t win with trade. We don’t win with the military. We don’t win…

Trump promises to get even, to turn things around so that we eat their lunch, finally. For Trump a deal – and he is the self-proclaimed master of the art – is for the purpose of dealing someone a defeat. “I beat China all the time,” he told an interviewer, referring to his private business. (In reality trade is free cooperation for mutual benefit, a win-win endeavor.)

In Trump’s view (or in his view of what others want to hear), foreigners are not the only ones who abuse America. There’s also a fifth column that’s stabbing “us” in the back. These are the forces of political correctness – the pansy “liberals” who aren’t tough on protesters, illegal immigrants, Muslims and lots of other Others. These appeasers are as much the enemy as those outside the country. It’s a vast conspiracy aimed at real Americans to keep “our country” from being great again. And so they must all be stopped, even if it takes a little strong-arming.”

I will always find it hilarious that Trump voters believe they’re the vanguard of some revolution to “re-take America”.  But Republicans always, always run on a platform of “taking our country back”.  Trump doesn’t care about liberty, or peace, which are the only truly revolutionary platforms.

US soldiers that attacked charity hospital, leaving 42 dead, won’t face criminal charges

The October 3rd, 2015 aerial attack on a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Afghanistan left 42 people dead.  The soldiers responsible won’t face criminal charges, but they have been “disciplined”.  So, a thorough chewing-out is a sufficient punishment for what has all the characteristics of a war crime.  Chicago Tribune

FBI threatens to demand iPhone source code if Apple remains uncooperative in encryption case

From Yahoo Finance: “…the FBI said that if can’t require Apple to create the weakened software, it may demand access to what it described as Apple’s “crown jewels” instead. Source code is the list of programming code instructions used to create the software that runs the iPhone. The code controls everything from the background colors on the screen to the most critical security protections the phone has. Apple’s secret signature is a digital “key” required to update software on all iPhones.

If the FBI got access to those two items, the bureau, or outside programming experts it hired, could try to write the security-weakened version of iOS and install it onto Farook’s iPhone without Apple’s assistance.”

Cops who ransacked marijuana dispensary and ate their weed cookies will be charged

ABC News.  On May 26, 2015, cops raided Sky High Holistic, ransacking the place.  They destroyed what they thought were all the cameras and then proceeded to help themselves to some “cookies”.  They joked about kicking the amputee owner in her nub, after the knuckle-dragger was informed that the owner knew the raid was going to happen.  The video may shake your faith in the pure character of “our men and women in uniform”.

Another round between Apple and the FBI

From Reason: “Apple is getting the last word before Tuesday’s court date with a final brief, which does not pull punches, either rhetorically or technically. It blasts the Justice Dept. for misreading (probably deliberately) the context of previous decisions invoking the All Writs Act (legislation intended for the courts to use to force compliance to legal orders in certain situations) and trying to get the courts to completely ignore both the consequences of conscripting a private company to produce software on demand, as well as the consequences of demanding a weakening of phone security because it may help (possibly, but maybe not) the government get useful information.”