Prayers of the Night

 I've just published a novella, Prayers of the Night, on Kindle.

It responds to a question that occurred to me many years ago--what would a priest do, how would he cope, if forced to become a vampire?

So, yeah, this story isn't for everyone. But if you're a fan of gothic fiction, and stories of wrestling with faith and fate, and a few surprises, then it's for you.

The first section was completed about thirty-five years ago and I thought for a long time that it was simply a short story. The main character lingered in my mind, though, and eventually I wrote more. And then more. The ending, a resolution, didn't come until the moment I began typing that page (which meant I needed to go back and change a few things, but direct paths are less interesting than winding ones).

To buy it for Kindle for just $2.99, click here. It's published under "Timothy Mosher," making rare use of my official first name.

I'm planning to also offer it in paperback through Amazon in the near future. Though I have reservations about Amazon (Bezos related), it's the best option at the moment. If a publisher expresses interest I can always make a change. There's not much of a market for novellas in any genre and self-publishing through Kindle or Nook or the like is one of the only ways to give people a chance to see this story. So, as my main character discovers at length, the ideal and the real wave at each other across a great chasm.

Send me questions if you'd like. Best is by email or text; leaving them here might not catch my eye so quickly.

Short Talk at an Olympia Indivisible Event

 

This brief self-introduction was a part of a group presentation on March 7, 2026.

       Our team is new and “who’s involved” is expanding, so instead of a roster with resumes, let’s get personal. Why have I joined the LGBTQ+ team?

            I grew up in Miami, Florida in the 1970s and at first I was afraid, I was petrified, as Gloria Gaynor sang in “I Will Survive.”

       When I was 18, the Miami Metro government passed an ordinance protecting gay people. These were basic protections—no one could be fired just for being gay, no one could be evicted. At that point about forty other cities in the U.S. had passed similar protections.

            The backlash was immediate and loud. Led by Anita Bryant, an entertainer who starred in TV ads for Florida orange juice, a campaign formed to repeal the ordinance. The Save Our Children campaign, as it was called, spouted distortions and repeated stereotypes and made absurd claims, but since many people shared those biases, it gained traction.

            I was the gay son of a conservative church pastor. I watched as anti-gay violence spiked in the Coconut Grove district, the hub of Miami gay life. I listened as people in my church and school bashed all things gay. I was afraid. Even though I was deeply in the closet, I crawled further in and piled up furniture by the door. What would have happened to me if I had been outed? Probably I would have been thrown out of the house and onto the street, or forced into hostile therapy.

            My church placed a petition for the repeal election in the lobby and my father, the pastor, encouraged everyone to sign. Of course, that included me. After a Sunday service I got in line but I had picked a busy moment and the lobby was full of people and conversations and activity. I stepped up to the table and pretended to sign and walked away. No one noticed. I was lucky.

            A few months later, voters repealed the protection ordinance by almost seventy percent. I watched on TV as gay people gathered in Coconut Grove to cry together and shout defiance. And I have never felt so alone. All I could do at that moment was boycott orange juice.

            That’s when I promised myself that if I could, some day, I would help protect LGBTQ+ people. I would not allow others to go through what I had. I’d have their backs.

            Now, having survived Anita Bryant and coming out and other challenges, I’m trying to fulfill that promise once again. We’re confronted with two hateful ballot measures in Washington and it’s time for action. To my transgender siblings, I’ve got your back. Our team has your back. No Hate in Washington State*really has your back. And we need to win—for the people whose lives will be enhanced or protected, whose dignity and worth will be affirmed.

            Once I was afraid, I was petrified. But not anymore, especially with such good company. And I drink orange juice now, sometimes in mimosas.

            Our seven team members, both allies and LGBTQ+ people, invite you to join us.

* No Hate in Washington State is an organization formed to oppose two ballot propositions which target transgender people. Those are almost certain to be on the November ballot.

An Amendment to Limit the Presidential Pardon Power

The Problem

Many people have found alarming the use of presidential pardons and commutation for entirely political purposes, a use which subverts the judicial system and often undermines goals of fairness and justice. Though Trump has been widely criticized for his highly partisan pardons, commutations, and threats to pardon himself, other presidents have received smaller measures of disapproval for similar reasons. The fact that many pardons are saved until the end of a president’s term to limit the political damage that might result is instructive in this regard.

 

A Proposed Amendment

Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) reintroduced an amendment for consideration in January, 2025, and it is worthwhile. See his congressional page for his comments and the amendment text. It covers who may be pardoned and places off limits a number of people connected to the president by blood, employment, or political affiliation.

An addition to this amendment should be considered. Suggested text follows.

1. Presidential pardons or commutations shall be approved or declined by a commission of five members appointed by the Congress from its membership. The term in office shall be three years, and members may be reappointed once. Vacancies shall be filled by the Congress by special appointment to finish the term.
2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

 

Comments

Cohen’s amendment deserves to pass and be ratified. Adding to it a mechanism of accountability outside the executive branch makes abuses less likely, even if one party dominates Congress, simply because additional leaders would be accountable for unpopular or unethical pardons and commutations.

The foundation of a power to pardon or commute rests upon several tenets: first, that sometimes mercy is needed to counter too harsh a ruling; second, that errors can occur and should be speedily corrected; and third, that the offer of a pardon might more quickly restore peace in a time of great turmoil. These and other considerations are discussed in The Federalist 74 by Hamilton.

Experience, however, has shown that this power (like any other) can be abused, and that no safeguards exist in law to constrain it. Cohen’s amendment, and the suggested additional text above, would rein in this unbridled and sometimes wildly applied power.

A Presidential Recall Amendment

 The Problem

It’s been clear at least since the first attempt to impeach Trump that partisan politics renders the impeachment process and Amendment 25 provisions about removing a president for disability ineffective. Those well-intentioned laws have no realistic chance of succeeding if a party places itself above the national interest as has been the case recently.

In fact, historically, no president has ever been removed by impeachment or an Amendment 25 process. Arguably, Andrew Johnson should have been removed though the articles of impeachment in 1867 were far more political than factual. The impeachments of Clinton and Trump fell well short of the two-thirds Senate vote needed, regardless of the merits of the cases against them, and were determined more by partisan affiliation than by any other cause. And, no Amendment 25 process has ever been attempted; whether one was ever seriously discussed behind the scenes is unknown. The mechanisms in place to remove a disastrous or problematic president have proven ineffective so far. The one case where the threat of a successful impeachment forced a resignation, Nixon’s, was at best an indirect success.

Since the constitutional mechanisms we have are ineffective especially in partisan, polarized political culture, we need another option. A direct democracy approach would have a credible chance of success without being too easy and thus subject to abuse. The proposal below would not replace Amendment 25 or the Constitution’s impeachment process, but would add a mechanism designed to circumvent the partisan fawning of Congress or the Cabinet over a deeply flawed leader.

 

A Proposed Amendment Text

1. Congress, upon the submission of petition signatures from twenty percent of the number of citizens over eighteen of the United States as determined by the Census Bureau, shall set a date for a presidential recall election to be held within two months.
2. Alternatively, Congress, on the submission of resolutions from state legislatures including the District of Columbia Council representing sixty percent or more of the number of citizens over eighteen of the United States as determined by the Census Bureau, shall set a date for a presidential recall election to be held within two months.
3. No state may refuse to participate in a presidential recall election.
4. The text of the ballot will be, “Shall [name] be recalled and no longer serve as president of the United States?” The only two ballot options shall be “yes” and “no."
5. Removal shall be affirmed by a “yes” vote of at least sixty percent of votes cast.
6. Congress shall certify the results of the election not later than two weeks following election day.
7. At the moment of certification, if the national vote has affirmed recall, the president shall be removed and the next officer in the line of succession sworn into office.
8. Presidents thus recalled lose their presidential pension and would no longer be eligible to hold an elective or appointive office of the United States or of any state.
9. Congress shall have the power to enforce these provisions by legislation.

 

Comments

Please note that though a partisan Congress might not want to do these things, sections 1, 2, and 6 require Congress to act if a triggering event occurs. Also, states cannot opt out of a recall election, another support for a nonpartisan and equitable process.

Congress could determine by law how petition signatures would be collected and checked. This could be arranged by adding to the duties of an existing agency under Congressional control such as the Government Accountability Office, or the duties of the clerk of the House or some other nonpartisan officer, or by creating a temporary organization designated for that purpose.

The large number of petitions that would be needed nationally, or the supermajority of citizens 18 and above represented by state legislatures required for the resolution process, would establish a near consensus but provide a reasonable chance of success, probably more so than impeachment. Decisions about leaders should never be on whim, but a widespread belief that it is necessary to remove an official as consequential as the president should also be respected. The sixty percent national vote required for removal would also be difficult to achieve but not unattainable.

Possible obstructions could include quibbling about or contesting Census Bureau numbers related to 1 and 2; a state obstructing voters in the recall election; attempting to delay the certification process, either at the state level or by Congress; and a president refusing to leave when recalled. In those cases, the people of the United States would simply have to insist through lawsuits, other court action, and political pressure.  If necessary, given lengthy obstruction of this process, they might instead choose to institute a new government as discussed in the Declaration of Independence paragraph two.

Retaining an impeachment process would still allow Congress to rise above partisanship and remove a president for cause. Retaining Amendment 25 would still allow the vice-president and Cabinet to act if a president becomes disabled (probably physically). Both have value though both can be abused or neglected because of partisan bias. Adding a presidential recall provides a way around unreasonable, parochial interests.

As of this moment (December, 2025), it seems likely that either method to initiate a recall would have a chance of succeeding if this amendment was currently in place. Collecting petition signatures or waiting for state legislatures to act would not lead to a rapid resolution, but could still do what no portion of the Constitution currently has ever done—remove a president.

Retirement, Dec. 13, 2025

              I turned in grades for my last two classes a few minutes ago, and I mean quite literally my last classes.

            Give or take a few emails, I’m done with teaching after a college career of 36 years plus 3 years before that teaching middle school. I’ve been tired for several years and it’s time, though whether the money will last well enough is related to mortality tables and other factors over which my control—or my input—is limited.

            What’s good about retiring? I avoid grading, which has been an albatross hanging around my neck for 39 years. Constantly having to evaluate other people and be accurate, thoughtful, compassionate but not a pushover, and fair is terribly difficult and thankless. My brain has also been made tundra by the endless instances of uncritical thought and horrible writing I’ve encountered. But they are not endless, for now there will be no more, thank God.

            Students who have no motivation or are forced  along by parents or coaches or parole officers are no longer mine to inspire. Again, thanks be to God. Most of my students did not fit this category but those who did sucked the life out of me a drop at a time. Goodbye, people who did not want to be doing this.

            I’m also no longer subject to college bureaucracies, bean counters who have no sense of a college’s mission, and all but a few administrators. Several of those have been terrific but speaking historically, that’s not the way to bet.

            Meetings, gone. Work red tape, done. Commutes, entirely a thing of the past since I’ve been teaching mostly online since Covid anyway. Huge piles of pointless emails, nearly over—I have to monitor email for a little longer but that’s the only work-related task I have left.

            What will I miss, given this litany of horrors? Much.

            I’ll miss most of my students who have kept me thinking and engaged and lightly in touch with contemporary popular culture. I’ll miss especially the ones I could provoke into interest when they arrived with little, and most of all the ones who were curious and fascinated and asked questions from the start.

            The experience of working hard in a classroom to transcend the ordinary and watch their faces change as they understood or became interested or horrified or excited—nothing will replace that. The days that teaching worked well were so much fun I couldn’t believe they paid me. (Not that I got much.)

            I’ll miss my colleagues, most of them, more than they will ever know. I worked throughout my career with some of the best teachers and instructors and professors one can imagine, and I always looked forward to talking shop with them. And simply hanging out with smart and caring people.

            What’s next? I don’t know in detail, but volunteering and local travel and a few writing projects are on the horizon. I won’t be tutoring or anything resembling teaching. I’ve done my time.

            How do I feel? Nothing has sunk in yet. Ask me in a month or two when I’m not busy with the next semester. My life has been measured in semesters for so long that I’ll need to find a new rhythm, a fresh way to engage regularly with the world. I’ll still be helping Mom navigate being 91, and still be thinking and reading plenty about history and politics though I’ll no longer be teaching the subjects. But what will I do every morning instead of opening college email and the class portals?

            Something else. At last.

Could the House Change Hands?

 

      Could the House of Representatives change hands during the current term?

            Recent developments suggest that it’s possible.

            At this moment (Nov. 24, 2025), Republicans hold 219 seats while Democrats have 213 and three seats are vacant. Who will fill them?

            Vacancy for the Texas 18^th District: Rep. Sylvester Turner (D) died in March, and the GOP leadership of Texas has been in no hurry to fill the vacancy. A runoff will be held on Jan. 31 between the two biggest vote getters from the first round. Both candidates are Democrats.

            Vacancy for the Tennessee 7^th District:  Rep. Mark Green (R) resigned in July. The winners of the Oct. 7 primary will contend on Dec. 2; the district tends to vote heavily Republican and national polling organizations list the seat as “likely” GOP.

            Vacancy for the New Jersey 11^th District: Rep. Mikie Sherrill resigned on Nov. 20 after being elected governor of New Jersey. The current governor set a primary for Feb. 5 and a special election for April 16. The general expectation is that a Democrat will win the seat.  

          

       Expected vacancy for the Georgia 14^th District: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene announced recently that she would resign from the House effective Jan. 5. Under Georgia law, the governor can set a date for replacement elections within ten days of a resignation taking effect, and call for one as early as thirty days later, so the earliest possible date would be in February. It is not yet clear how Gov. Brian Kelly (R) will handle the timing. The district is considered safe for Republicans but the surprise and turmoil surrounding Greene’s announcement are a wild card. I’d still expect this seat to go to a Republican, but whether of the MAGA variety is less certain.

            Some Congressional staffers have been reported to say that that more resignations by Republicans are quite possible. Those events can’t be evaluated until they occur—if they do.

            Based on what we know at this moment, the numbers in the House following the special elections listed above will probably be these:

    GOP:             220
    Democrats:        215

            If no vacancies exist, 218 constitutes a majority. If further resignations drop the GOP below the number of seats held by the Democrats, the House would change hands. GOP members considering resignation would be pressured heavily not to do so if the numbers get any closer than they are.
Further, if a seat becomes open for a district which actually might change hands following a special election, then the possibilities for this rare swap increase. For reference, the last time control of the House moved from one party to the other during a term was in 1930.

            Of course, events could continue to develop and surprises sometimes happen. Beyond unexpected resignations, people sometimes die; the median age in the House right now is about 57.5 years, and annual mortality rates for people of that age are a bit less than one death for every hundred people, so three or four vacancies by natural causes would not be surprising before next November’s midterm elections. Deaths will also not correlate in any predictable way to party affiliation.

          I’ll update this topic as warranted.

Current Options for Removal (Oct. 11, 2025)

 

    By ignoring court rulings, attacking free speech, violating the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, and illegally using the Defense Department (it’s not called “War” until Congress says so) to attempt to control American cities, Trump is posing such an affront to democracy that I can imagine a day—perhaps quite soon—when Americans who support the Constitution will need to remove him from office. Assuming that we might not have until midterm elections alter Congress, how could that be done?

    Scenario 1:  impeachment and removal. This will remain profoundly unlikely as long as Congress is in the craven, cruel, grasping hands of the Republican Party. Speaker Johnson will not allow an impeachment vote, but far before that the process would stop with committees refusing to even schedule hearings or votes on impeachment articles. And should a series of miracles move the House to vote for impeachment, the Senate would need almost a score of GOP senators to break with their party to vote Trump out. It’s more likely that the moon will turn to cheddar overnight.

    Scenario 2: removal via Amendment 25. Also deeply unlikely as it would require action by Vice-Pres. Vance and half plus one of the Cabinet, generally all Trump loyalists. The grounds would be mental disability unless a stroke or some other physical ailment presents itself, but we cannot count on those officials to do their jobs by being loyal to the Constitution and the country rather than Trump and this authoritarian version of the Republican Party.

    Sidebar: the two main Constitutional mechanisms for presidential removal are clearly not workable because of partisanship. We need to think of better means and pass an amendment to remedy this set of problems when the fascistic poltroons are no longer in charge.

    Scenario 3:  military coup. After the recent assembly of top brass at the insistence of Trump, and the bizarre set of remarks they heard from him and Hegseth, I’d regard this as more likely than ever before. The nonsense they witnessed, the dementia they observed, the insults they fielded—it must have been apparent to many in that room that the administration is led by fools and that those fools are trying to use U.S. armed forces for unconstitutional purposes. I don’t know exactly what form an armed forces coup might take, and certainly see deep dangers should this be attempted, but clearly also a number of top brass would be unlikely to follow unconstitutional orders. If Trump insists, or continues firing those more loyal to the Constitution than to him, a military coup is conceivable and might be worth the risk and dangerous precedent.

    Scenario 4: popular uprising. The problem is that many people are agitated but feeling helpless, and perhaps thirty percent of the voting public will lick Trump’s boots no matter what he does. Such uprisings need not be uniformly popular, but do require a threshold of support. With the president’s approval rating hovering at 40%, we may not be at that threshold yet. And who will lead? Few movements of this sort spring entirely from the grassroots. I’ve seen some speculation that an uprising could be inspired and led by past presidents, perhaps with other prominent political figures (say, Obama and Bush and Romney and several governors and whomever else will step to the fore). But who is stepping up? If this is happening, it’s hidden from public view but of course public uprisings cannot be for long. I don’t see this one baking in the oven yet. It’s a bunch of ingredients sitting in a pantry (unless clandestine cooks are at work in a secret kitchen).

    Scenario 4: storming the White House with Trump in it. This would be a bloody mess at best, and exactly who would do it? The Maryland and Virginia National Guard? A huge crowd of protestors? I think of barricade scenes from Les Misérables except with less singing and more actual dying and wonder if we’ll come to this. A crowd would need to be supplemented with rocket launchers to prevent a helicopter from whisking the president and other officials away. The provoking moment would need be egregious, perhaps Trump trying to suspend habeas corpus and locking up political opponents, or tight clamps on freedom of speech, or something even worse—like sacking Portland or Chicago.

    Of course none of these scenarios would play out if Trump had the grace and courtesy to die or become physically incapacitated. A post-Trump political world might be messy or horrible, but Trumpists will not necessarily become Vance supporters with similar enthusiasm, and that would provide an opportunity for the saner Republicans to reassert themselves. But we can’t be sure about any of this, having no comparable event in our history for reference, and so it’s worth remembering that forcing Trump out would not guarantee that our political culture would regain balance.

    Removing Trump is the first step, not the last.

Peak Summer in Olympia

 Update, Aug. 19, 2025

            Peak summer in Olympia gets a good rating from me. We’ve had a few hots days—last week it hit 94—but heat waves don’t last long. Two or three days of high temps are offset by nights that do eventually cool off and the more typical weather that follows. Three days ago the high was in the upper 60s with showers and we’ll have a couple more similar days soon. We don’t have air conditioning and will do without it since we’d only need it about ten days a year.

            My brother arrived on Aug. 1 and he left this past Thursday. I wish he could have stayed longer and he pledges to do so in January when he returns. His visit was divided roughly in two by our excursion to Springfield, MO, for the second Butler family reunion. With mom, we drove an hour to Seatac at the crack of doom, flew to Kansas City, and drove three plus hours to the Queen City of the Ozarks (a better title than Hog Princess of the Ozarks by a small margin). Quite a travel slog. Flying into Springfield is so expensive these days that the extra driving hours paid for themselves.

            But the reunion was worth the slog. Most of our cousins and spouses, some of their offspring and spouses, and a spouse to be named later attended and we had a very good time catching up. My cousins have generally inherited the sardonic humor gene and use it prolifically. Cousins Carla and Kristi presented some of the growing body of research on the Butler lineage and showed us a few mysteries that might be solvable or just as likely will produce horror novels. After the official event including a good catered dinner at the hotel meeting room, some of us gathered in the lobby for Mexican Train dominoes, using Moody house rules.

            I also had a chance to see my dad’s wife Pam and my longtime friends David and Tammy Moody. They created those domino house rules. Avoid the double blank.

            While my brother was here we took an air-conditioned drive on a hot day and saw the badly named Millersylvania State Park, which is quite beautiful, and ate out a few extra times. Brian was the big winner at the Lucky Eagle Casino before the reunion trip. And he made Nanaimo bars (online recipes easily findable) and for a recent meal, excellent cashew chicken.

            Otherwise, what’s been happening? Down time for projects and rest between semesters. I’ve been prepping two classes for the fall semester which starts Aug. 25, but I’ve enjoyed the break since about July 10 very much. One sour note—since March and April I’ve noticed more hearing loss in my right ear. I had it checked and that got elaborate: a hearing test (loss confirmed and asymmetrical which piqued the attention of the audiologist), blood tests to rule out autoimmune disease (it’s ruled out), an MRI to look for a probably benign tumor (none there, and is there a less comforting phrase than “probably benign”?), and now further audiology to determine whether I need new hearing aids. I’m listening to less music. I hope that’s temporary as these changes play out.

            Mom and I continue to watch BritBox detective/mystery series nearly every evening. Right now it’s “Father Brown,” somewhat loosely based on the title character from detective stories by G.K. Chesterton though only a few of the episodes are based on his stories and then loosely. Key term? Loosely. Brown is played by Mark Williams (Arthur Weasley in the Harry Potter films).

            Reading a Ray Bradbury short story collection (weird stories, they used to call them, sort of horror lite) right now. On deck: old novels or story collections by Robert Silverberg, Damon Knight, Walter M. Miller, Jr., and James Blish; a more recent award-winning novel, China Mountain Zhang; and outside of S-F, the novel Invisible Cities by Italo Calvino and stories by M.R. James, the Edwardian ghost story paragon. Not a serious tome in sight, because summer.

            I’m trying not to let politics bother me beyond stirring up revolutionary thoughts. When we’re done ousting Trump and company, what should be our systemic focus? Several reforms:  1) institute public financing of campaigns, 2) greatly limit or outlaw the use of personal wealth to run for office, 3) cap the total amount of wealth a person may control, because money rots politics, 4) ideally change to a party-list electoral system for the House of Representatives which would end gerrymandering, 5) declare corporations to have rights less than people and empower Congress to restrict them, 6) alter the Supreme Court though I’m conflicted about exactly how, 7) constrain the president’s pardon power, and 8) ban convicted felons from running from office.

            We might also want to charge large numbers of Trumpists with sedition, but that’s not systemic. "Let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an everflowing stream" (Amos 5:24, RSV).

            What’s happening with all of you? Spill. Please.

Trump's Exit

Prediction is often another word for illusion, and since I am not Tiresias or some other prophet from Greek mythology, I won’t attempt it. Still, everyone must go, from presidents to paramecia, and only a set number of options exist. Here are those related to Trump.

Death, Natural. He’s 79 and not in the best physical condition. Something sudden or quick is both entirely possible and not at all certain. I do not expect a narcissist to commit suicide, at least not directly, though eating lots of nachos would make him more orange and could lead to arterial catastrophe. Four sitting presidents have died in office of natural causes to date. None have died from broader natural disasters and probably neither will Trump.

Might he survive a second term (or even more, should he become an effective dictator), he’ll die eventually. Give or take Enoch and Elijah, everyone dies—Stalin, Pol Pot, Pinochet, Khrushchev, Disney. Some died as dictators, others in retirement, and we’re not sure about frozen Disney and if he might be revived at some point to fire corporate leaders.

Death, Assassination. This cannot be ruled out for any president. I do not recommend this as a course of action, both for ethical reasons and because an assassinated Trump would become a martyr to his cult and make it more likely to persist. Since four presidents have died after being shot and others have survived attempts, on a percentage basis the job is rather dangerous.

Death, Apocalyptic. With his finger on the big red button, who knows?

Incapacity, Natural Causes. Might he have a stroke or develop a disabling disease and be subject to a 25^th Amendment action by his supporters? If the incapacity is serious enough. A physical disability would do the trick more certainly than mental illness (because differentiating between a mentally ill Trump and the one we currently see is problematic). When might Vice-Pres. Vance and a majority of the Cabinet make this move? I imagine only when the incapacity becomes unavoidably obvious and is unlikely to change in the short term. A serious stroke, or a coma, or some other problem in that neighborhood would be sufficient. If he did not recover, Vance could serve out the remainder of the term and inadvertently, constantly remind everyone that he’s not a cult figure to most Trumpists.

One argument Vance and others might make is that the 25^th Amendment includes a method for the president to be restored to office if the president is once again able to serve.

Incapacity, Caused By an Attack. The same motives would be in play but with overlays of hagiography from Trump’s base. If the president was forced out of the action by physical injuries that did not kill him, it might be more difficult to operate those never-used portions of the 25^th Amendment. Quite possibly conspiracy theory would dominate Trump’s base since for the majority of them it’s their default mode anyway. Expect accusations against Vance and possibly others, without documentation but with enormous outcries. This might easily also apply to incapacity by natural causes though then the president’s personal physician would have to be in on the conspiracy which is without a doubt what some Trumpists would say even though they might be pristinely uncontaminated by evidence.

Resignation. At the moment this seems a remote possibility. If it ever occurs, it would be forced as Nixon’s was though Trump may not be as capable of rational political analysis as Nixon, especially since he’s only a fraction as intelligent. And what moral core exists in Trump? Nixon showed traces of one, but we have no evidence that Trump would feel enough remorse and regret over any action to voluntarily resign. Stranger things have happened than a Trump resignation, but not many and not often.

Impeachment and Removal. What would it take for Republicans in Congress to unify and act against Trump in sufficient numbers to force his removal? Again, the mind boggles at what would be needed. They have swallowed whole so many mouthfuls of what most Republicans of the past would have spit out. If it ever became incontrovertible that Trump was a Russian agent, that might do the trick. But the GOP is so craven these days that the key word in that sentence is “might.” And the Democrats do not have the numbers to impeach without considerable Republican help.

Prevented From Running Again. Sure, it’s unconstitutional for Trump to stand for election again in 2028, but he’s already talked about violating the hell out of our framework of government and running anyway. But the GOP may look for a younger and more tractable candidate instead. And if he makes a serious attempt to keep power at that point, the next couple of possibilities become more likely.

Coup. Quite a few sources these days assert that Trump is alienating many in the military, and also many Democratic governors who might be able to persuade some National Guard units to help. This whole scenario is an enormous question mark since if a coup is being planned, no one is leaking the details to the Associated Press. Is one possible even if improbable? Before 2025 I’d have bet not. Now, I’m not betting at all though when pushed I’d guess that it’s not likely—yet.

Avoiding this route would be better for democracy for the long haul. Since a coup might conceivably start a civil war, it should be considered a nightmare rather than a daydream for those who despise this hideous presidency. And the precedent it would set is exactly what the delegates at the 1787 Constitutional Convention hoped to avoid.

A foreign-led coup would be unthinkable except that I wonder what the G7 leaders talk about when Trump’s not around. American craziness is automatically global craziness.

General Uprising. To paraphrase Tom Jefferson, Ben Franklin, and John Adams (what a composition committee) in paragraph two of the Declaration of Independence:  “when lengthy and frequent abuses and unlawful takeovers make clear the goal of reducing the people under despotism, it is their right and duty to throw off such government, and to create new safeguards for their future security.”

From the vantage of June, 2025, I don’t know when or if a revolt might occur. But our respect for authority must end when that authority abuses people regularly and systematically. Or, if you prefer, our respect for the Constitution and constitutional process must supersede our deference to any person regardless of position. If some members of the Supreme Court argue the opposite, then the general uprising might need to take them into custody as well. Not only presidents are capable of abuse. And I’d rather trust the ideas of Madison and Hamilton than those of Thomas and Alito.

What would happen to Trump if enough people rose up? He might escape to a friendly haven (Dubai? Moscow?). He might disappear, by which I mean that he would be taken to a secret location and kept there, alive or dead. He might be summarily executed as Ceausescu and Gaddafi were. Or, he might be captured, placed on trial, and given either life in prison or the death penalty. All of these options are not simply uncharted waters, but oceans on planets we have not yet discovered.

Conclusion. I cannot predict, or guess, or speculate about how Trump’s presidency and life will end, but they will, as certainly as we are all mortal (even Keith Richards). Our corrupt and amoral and narcissistic and generally foolish president will some day die or be incapacitated or leave office some other way.

Is it wrong to long for that moment? If we respect the Constitution and love our country, and those are under threat, then no. To quote the Declaration near its conclusion, a leader “whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”

Searching for Light

 Searching for light as our democracy dims to dusk.

Plenty of resistance can be found on Bluesky.

Thanks to Bruce Springsteen and Taylor Swift and other artists who've spoken out.

Pleased with GOP critics of the regime--Liz and Adam and a handful of others.

Cheered to see a few outspoken Democratic members of Congress pushing back hard. Bravo to Cory Booker especially.

Thankful for the courts though they may need to turn some double plays to help us catch up.

Thousands of people work for public good every day just in my part of the South Puget Sound.

Those who value the Constitution and human rights will persist, no doubt about it.

One way or another, the sun will rise and light will flood back. Until then, hold your candles and lanterns high and work for the day.

From the Land of Rainfall

 Since the move to Olympia, I have not been in touch enough with many of my friends. This post may help a little, though actual conversations will be even better.

How's it going? Like this:

• I'm teaching three online classes this semester and dealing with the red tape and required trainings of two colleges
• unpacked with my brother for days after his and Mom's stuff arrived; a transfomer blowout killed the power while the movers were unloading
• had major problems with the moving company at all points of the process; I would not recommend them for any task including breathing
• unpacked my stuff on my own; it filled the garage, which only two days ago finally had room for my car
• bought and licensed a used car in very good condition
• supervised a bunch of renovations, including installation of a stair lift for Mom (which took weeks because of a glacial state permit process), replacement of a furnace--in the attic, replacement of a stove (a gift from my brother), installation of a step-in shower for Mom in place of a tub shower (still waiting to get the doors for the shower installed), minor repairs and drywall work by a good handyman, and I'm sure I'm forgetting others
• helped mom with unpacking and sorting
• cooked nearly all evening meals plus shopped for all the groceries and other things
• drove Mom to hair appointments and so far one doctor's appointment
• had a doctor's appointment myself
• rearranged rooms and furniture
• tried to settle in to my bedroom I'm at about 75%
• hung wall art with my brother though I have a bunch of smaller ones to hang on my own
• changed addresses and set up new accounts for things like internet, power, HOA, etc.
• wrestled mightily with Kaiser Permanente procedures and systems not designed for use by humans
• ran into ridiculous numbers of electronic and online roadblocks as I tried to do simple tasks
• figured out where pharmacies and grocery stores and Home Depot and shredding services and Trader Joe's and Costco and other things are, though that's still in process
• took astonishing amounts of corrugated cardboard and plain (moving) wrapping paper to the county recycle center along with glass; both glass and cardboard can't be put in recycling bins here
• recycled used electronics and scrap metal and a burned-out CFL bulb
• donated a whole bunch of stuff that we decided we never should have moved to Goodwill; gave away an extra office chair to the handyman
• tried to get on a routine schedule during the week, but both Mom and I are still adjusting and so I forget to check the mail or come back inside to find my glasses when I'm about to drive somewhere, or we forget where we stashed something
• doubtless I'm forgetting other major items

Busy is putting it too gently.

But there's much to like here. The land of rainfall and humidity has improved my allergies and dry skin. I've enjoyed spending more time with Mom. The south Puget Sound boasts good bookstores, libraries, and restaurants though I haven't had a chance to try many of the latter yet. Trees including many evergreens are everywhere. It's fun exploring a new area--I've just started and there's much more to come. It's another blue state--several neighbors have Ukraine flags up and one down the block posted an LGBTQ+ support sign. All the contractors and installers and such that we've encountered have been pleasant, talkative, and skilled at what they do. On all socio-geographic accounts, so far so good.

Gas today at a nearby Costco is $3.69 a gallon.

Plus I won $100.15 playing just $20 on a Planet Moolah slot machine yesterday at the Lucky Eagle Casino south of here. I've been checking out the local Indian casinos for an upcoming lunch-and-slots outing with Mom, or at least that's my excuse.

I have not had time yet to make new friends here, though now that house renovations are in later stages I hope to make that more of a priority.

And I miss my friends. All of you Bay Area people, I wish I could see you and hang out and sip beverages while talking and laughing until after midnight. I hope to visit briefly in August, so maybe we can arrange some of that.

I think of you often and wish you were here.

Is Donald Trump a Fascist?

 Please read the whole thing (less than 1700 words), but here’s a hint: it’s not about ideology but about behavior.

As a political scientist, I approach the application of the term “fascist” to any contemporary figure with caution.

My reluctance is based on three major reservations. First, people often use the term pejoratively, sometimes out of ignorance, and not technically. Just ask President Obama. Second, using a term so closely connected to particular historical figures such as Mussolini, Hitler, and Franco can be misleading when we consider how the term might be used at present about far-right authoritarian figures such as Viktor Orbán of Hungary. The historical context might actually distract us from understanding contemporary varieties of fascism. Third, in political theory this term is essentially contested, meaning that no consensus definition exists.

Still, since the term is flying around like Mr. Trump’s hair in the wind, I’d like to decide whether it is appropriate.

A variety of definitions for fascism have been suggested by political theorists, politicians, and cultural commentators. I’ve selected a recent one from the throng that seems to shed the most light on the current situation. (Several others are similar in large degree; if we can’t come to a consensus definition, it seems to me that political theorists can probably agree on three-quarters of the term’s meaning.)

The definition I’ll use is by Columbia history professor emeritus Robert Paxton from his book, The Anatomy of Fascism (Vintage Press, 2005, on page 218):

“A form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.”

Taking relevant phrases one-by-one will serve as my evaluation of Mr. Trump and his supporters. (I must evaluate his supporters at least generally; fascism may feature one man but must be, by most definitions, a mass movement.)

1) “obsessive preoccupation with community decline”—At the core of Trump’s message, this theme drives much of the rest. He asserts, and his followers declare, that America has fallen from greatness (in no particularly defined way). The “Make America Great Again” slogan sums this up neatly. This theme has been visible in his bashing of many American cities as crime-ridden and decrepit though this view is not factually in line with a number of recent trends in many cities.

2) “humiliation or victimhood”—This sums up Trump’s hazy views of foreign policy and helps explain some of his haphazard actions in that sphere. America, he says, is treated as second-rate by China and disdained by Iran and ignored by others in the international realm. Bluster and isolated military action (for instance in Syria) were his response. Trump also evokes as victims the citizens who are working class or small business owners, not prospering economically, white, and male. The fact that Trump, a big business owner who has shown little concern for workers in his own dealings, perhaps causes some measure of this victimization is an irony apparently invisible to many of his supporters.

3) “compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity”—Trump pays ample lip service to unity, by which he means absolute agreement with him. He continues to tout his energy (and that of his supporters), but in the current campaign has often looked tired and has rambled bizarrely, causing many observers to question his fitness. He has since 2015 continually disparaged immigrants as a form of support for white American purity. Some of those comments are so extreme (“they’re eating cats”) that they provoke laughter—and then deep concern that he would say such nonsense and be taken seriously by anyone.

4) “mass-based party of committed nationalist militants”—This seems to be how he regards his base, though because they number about a third of the electorate, he must also appeal to independent voters. The ultranationalist commitment of many Trump backers, and their willingness to excuse anything he says and does, remains as clear now as ever. Also, some of his most militant supporters include the KKK, American Nazis, and other white nationalists who exhibit fascist characteristics.

5) “working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites”—The Republican Party to a great extent has become the Cult of Trump. Leaders such as Sen. Mitch McConnell disparage Trump on occasion but usually treat him as the party leader and support him in public. Many in the GOP back him without question or reservation despite the anti-democratic comments he has made and actions he took as president. A large minority of prominent GOP officials and staffers have refused to cooperate with him this election, including his own former vice-president and more than half of his cabinet officers plus many from previous Republican administrations and former-nominee Mitt Romney’s staff. Still, the bulk of the GOP, the traditional elites, support him. Also, economic elite contributions to Trumpist candidates for office continue to flood in. Would many GOP leaders wish for a different candidate? Yes, but despite their misgivings, they did nothing to make that happen.

6) “abandons democratic liberties”—He’d like to. He does not respect democratic process or norms, civil rights, freedom of the press, separation of powers, and ethics laws and norms. The list of events in which Trump has thwarted or attempted to thwart the rule of law is too long to catalog—if a person is unaware of it, that’s simply self-delusion. In particular, his disdain for the electoral process (or rather his warped view of it) has continued unchanged from his 2015 candidacy.

7) “pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints”—Trump has incited violence, both during the 2016 campaign and during his term, particularly against scapegoated groups. He incited violence on Jan. 6, 2021, in what may be most accurately called sedition. His verbal attacks in this regard have almost no parallels in the history of presidents. And, as stated in 2016, “does Trump have personal ethical restraints? Have we seen any? (I’ll state this as an open question in the hope that someone will point out when he took an ethical stand that would not also result in some benefit to himself. My internal reference point on this topic is the Trump University scam and his series of lies by way of explanation.)”

8) “goals of internal cleansing and external expansion”—Trump’s internal cleansing as president took the form of deportations of undocumented people with no clear strategy or consistency; the targeting of Muslims from particular countries but not others (with no rationale to explain the distinction); the targeting of sanctuary cities, which are usually liberal and opposed to Trump in general; withdrawal of federal support for the civil rights of particular groups of citizens (for example, people of color and the gay and transgender communities); and vicious attacks on the free press. So far, Trump has not emphasized territorial expansion, though bellicose actions and rhetoric without a clear rhyme and reason were his presidential norm (as with Syria, NATO, Iran, and North Korea). He appears to be isolationist rather than expansionist. However, the “internal cleansing” agenda, including threats to his political opponents if he should be elected again, is clear.

A few relevant items may be added to Paxton’s description.

He has spoken and acted in such a way that he received the endorsement of white nationalist groups and leaders. They are in essence fascists. His endorsement by both Jean-Marie Le Pen and Marine Le Pen, the famed French fascists, is in keeping with this theme.

He holds no respect at all for fact and truth. If he truly believes all the contradictory things he says, then he has a serious psychological problem. If he does not, he’s an opportunistic, manipulative, and constant liar. Many fascist leaders historically have exhibited this characteristic—indeed, have specialized in it.

As president he surrounded himself with far-right advisors—that is, when he was not engaged in nepotism.

He cannot, for more than a few minutes at a time, behave publicly as presidents need to behave. His erratic statements and visceral loathing for anyone who disagrees with him—his bullying threats, his personal put-downs—are not remotely presidential and are unworthy of that office. (They are, however, reminiscent of a couple of famous fascist dictators.)

Finally, theorists speak often of a charismatic leadership principle in fascism. Trump’s few policy statements are notoriously vague, inconsistent (some are fairly liberal, some conservative), and frequently incomprehensible. The most famous is probably his grand claim that he would make Mexico pay for his “beautiful wall.” How would he make China kowtow to American trade interests? How could he accomplish any of the changes he advocated? Trump’s answer: he will do these things through the force of his personality and will.

But of course he was not able to. He had enough charisma to get elected in 2016—barely. He does not have enough to govern effectively, or to gain the cooperation of enough people in government to achieve his goals. For example, his failure to effectively address the COVID-19 pandemic created quarrels inside his administration and contributed to his loss to Biden in 2020.

Is Trump a fascist? Not ideologically, because he’s not ideologically much of anything except a plutocrat. However, to the extent he was able as president, he acted, functioned, as a fascist.

And that means it’s time for Americans of all political stripes to stop him, by any legal and ethical means, for example in the 2024 election.

What’s at stake? For Republicans, your political party is being undermined and sullied by this crass authoritarian. For all of us, the stakes are our liberties, our identity as Americans, and ultimately ourselves.

 

Note: During the 2016 presidential campaign, I posted an evaluation entitled, “Does This Term Fit That Candidate?” I updated it in August, 2017, after half a year of a Trump presidency. Now, with the 2024 election less than a week away, here are further thoughts. I’ve revised all earlier comments.

Setting a Book Aside

 2/25/23

          About two years ago, I picked up a Thomas Merton book and read a few pages and put it down and later gave it away.

          Merton wrote about the virtues and benefits of solitude.

          He knew what he wrote about, having lived and contemplated for years as a monk and many people I know appreciated his ideas, among them Kris. The book was his, found in one of the boxes of papers I sorted through alongside photographs and fifteen-year-old notes from friends and piles of ancient receipts and ephemera. I kept a handful of his books and gave others away.

          I’d always thought I might read Merton, having encountered him at essay length and wanting more. But at that moment reading a paean to solitude jabbed me, reopening fresh wounds.

          In early 2021 we neared the end of the first plague year. I’d been cut off from nearly all friends and family for months, and Kris had succumbed to cancer the previous August. Solitude, like any good form of discipline, can become too extreme. Circumstance had isolated me so extensively that I was probably clinically depressed but that didn’t seem unusual or special at the time since so many people experienced that, then. I missed Kris terribly. I saw a few friends once a week, people who were already Covid survivors as I was, and that kept me going. Barely. Solitude in excess nearly cut off my air.

          Sometimes a good book arrives at the wrong moment. I may take it up again or another Merton title someday. We’ll see—because today I ran across the following prayer from the same book, words I don’t recall having read before, but they became at once my prayer too.

Merton wrote, “My Lord God, I have no idea where I am going. I do not see the road ahead of me. I cannot know for certain where it will end. Nor do I really know myself, and the fact that I think I am following your will does not mean that I am actually doing so. But I believe that the desire to please you does in fact please you. And I hope I have that desire in all that I am doing. I hope that I will never do anything apart from that desire. And I know that if I do this you will lead me by the right road, though I may know nothing about it. Therefore I will trust you always though I may seem to be lost and in the shadow of death. I will not fear, for you are ever with me, and you will never leave me to face my perils alone” (from Thoughts on Solitude, 1956).

Time Waits for No One

Waiting.

Waiting for an email response from a local non-profit that I’m trying to donate some in-package printer cartridges to. This is the third organization contacted; the first took a full week to respond.

Also, I’m waiting for a message or call from a key person before we can proceed with setting up an event. (Vague on purpose.)

And I’m waiting for a local jeweler to reply to an email about setting up an appraisal and possible sale of a number of Kris’s old items. (This was the earliest I could face doing it, a year and ten or so months after his exit, so before this I was waiting on myself.)

Also waiting for a response from my medical provider to a question about how much it will cost if I start using a recommended prescription medication. Waiting since last Thursday.

And, more immediately, I’m waiting for students to submit an assignment due today so that I can grade them. So far five people have turned it in though there are twenty-five in the class.

Other waits are happening though they are less tied to specific moments. I’m waiting for social opportunities to resume at full tilt. I’m waiting for news, later this summer, about whether I’ll be teaching in person with a mask on in the fall. Waiting to see what the United Methodist Church will become as it whirls apart over LGBTQ inclusion. And I’m waiting to meet a special someone (though plans to make that happen keep shifting and evaporating like a movie project in Development Hell).

At least I’m not waiting on a list of songs about time and waiting. They keep popping into my head.

“Time Is On My Side,” Irma Thomas, ripped off by the Rolling Stones.

“Tired of Waiting for You,” the Kinks. And so perfectly languid.

“Wonderful Tonight,” Eric Clapton, about waiting for his wife to get dressed to go out.

“Anticipation,” Carly Simon. “Making me wait.”

“Sooner or Later,” the Grass Roots, but I do not agree with the inevitability implied.

“Stranded,” Van Morrison. He sounds cheerfully resigned.

“You Can’t Hurry Love,” the Supremes. Painfully accurate.

“Time the Conqueror,” Jackson Browne. Among the conquered are all of us.

“The Waiting,” Tom Petty. Yes, it’s the hardest part, just as he says.

Plenty of other songs describe aspects of this universal experience, John Mayer’s “Waiting for the World to Change” and “I’ll Be Waiting” by Adele among them. Like the writers of those songs, I’m tired of watching the world take so long to change; of friendships and relationships progressing at what feels like such a slothful pace.

It’s possible to make quite a playlist but instead of taking the time to do so I declare myself ready for all these waits to be done.

Because, as Mick and Keith say in another Stones song, “Time waits for no one/And it won’t wait for me.”

Hidden Though They Shine

 

Hidden Though They Shine                                                               9/7-11/21

 

          I’ve been walking in the early evening most days, aiming for about five times a week for health purposes but motivated more by getting out of the apartment for a break. Like many people during the pandemic, I’m at home a great many hours.

          Recently I’ve been leaving the apartment just before or right after sundown. This allows a walk in a reasonable temperature and quite a few other walkers in my neighborhood use those moments, too.

          I’ve noticed a few things.

          A reasonably good dog census could be formulated based on how many are wandering the streets while towing owners, plus the number of barks I hear from inside houses and behind fences.

          Quite a few people own pleasant suburban houses in my part of San Jose. This means they are millionaires, or at least they will be when they sell their homes. Many of them already have pricey cars.

          But what has captured my attention most often in the past few nights are objects beyond the neighborhood streets.

          Venus has been rising as the sun goes down and that planet is the brightest object in the sky after the sun and moon. I’ve noticed that it’s visible within a quarter of an hour after the sun sets, a point of brilliance near the horizon and ready to be mistaken by the unwary for a nearby plane or UFO.

          On the other side of the sky, Jupiter appears early in the evening, almost as bright as Venus, remote but vivid due to its size and currently at opposition. Draw a line from the sun through the Earth and extend it; Jupiter will be near that line right now out in its orbit. Saturn is just visible, higher and not far from Jupiter, following a track similar to its huge cousin as they both trace roughly the sun’s course across the sky. Little by little they move about, differences evident only by comparing this night’s view to the scene in a week or more.

          Saturn is hard to see; a small handful of stars are visible from my city street.

          Once I was in the Sierra Nevada mountains on a moonless, crystal night and saw a multitude of stars. The Milky Way and smudges that were galaxies and nebulae covered the heavens, a breathtaking display. In my city now, with light pollution and smog, I see a dozen or at most two. And I can barely make out Saturn even when I know exactly where to look.

          Thousands of stars are hidden though they shine on.

          As I got home last night and paused to scan the sky again, now well past sunset, I wondered what most human beings, living at most times in history, would think of our night sky.

          Light pollution and smog are byproducts of the industrial revolution, and no, I’m not suggesting that we go back to the days before factories and machinery made modern life possible. Those mechanisms mean I have more clothes by far than a person with a comparable living in 1750; those changes also made possible or contributed to later revolutions in chemistry and medicine and precision equipment of all kinds. I’m fond of electric light, and my medications and refrigeration and automatic blood pressure cuff and recorded music. Especially the music.

          People exchanged old for new in the transition to factories and technology-as-product, for good or ill. This one was certainly unintended. The consequence of electric light run rampant along with expanding cities was to obscure a view into the cosmos that had been the shared experience of nearly everyone. It could be useful, too, to watch the skies for regular events that informed planting or harvest or aided navigators. But the planets and stars and galaxies and rare visits by comets and flashing meteors also provoked awe and wonder. They prompted on many nights conversations about our place in the cosmos. Those sights were with us from the first moments that anyone could have been called human until, depending on where one lived, some point in the past 200 years. A few people far from cities still see the cosmos revealed every cloudless evening. I’m envious.

          We have artificial light, and therefore increased safety in our growing cities, and the advantage of extended hours for pleasure or work. Few of us would permanently trade places with those billions who lived before the industrial revolution. We hold many wonders.

But they had the stars.