Gut punch.

Joe Biden pardoned Hunter. It was another selfish decision to go along with his pretending to be fit to serve a second term.

What a disappointment. What a disaster for democracy.

He is Trump's greatest enabler.

      "For all Biden’s insistence that the rule of law was of paramount importance and his talk about restoring democracy, in the end he made it much harder for his own party to hold President-elect Donald Trump to account."

             Politico

 

     "Trumpers . . .  can now say: 'See, they’re all alike.' Meaning Trump’s not so bad, by comparison; politicians are crooks. . . . He has a bolstered rationale now to wreak havoc on American justice. Sure, they’re all alike—the Trumpers will say—but at least he’s strong."

               Joe Klein, Sanity Claus on Substack.

Joe Biden complained that the Republicans were out to "get" Hunter Biden. Of course they were out to get Hunter. 

After all, Hunter is the president's son, in and out of the White House, openly trading on his connection to his father. Hunter Biden was not living a private life. He was a "player" in the political game, making a handsome living from it. Hunter was chest-deep in the ugliest and most corrupted part of the political swamp, the crony-capitalist, influence-peddling, revolving door of favors and contracts and campaign contributions and regulatory capture. Hunter wasn't being picked on in some special way. He got exactly what judicial nominee Brett Kavanaugh got when Democrats examined what 16-year-old Brett did at that teenage party 30 years prior and what cabinet nominee Pete Hegseth is getting now as Democrats examine what he did at that conference that led to paying hush money to a woman. 

Hunter Biden wanted it both ways. He wanted to benefit from his close tie to his father's offices, but he also chose to misbehave with drugs, alcohol, sex, financial corruption and then gun laws. He videotaped himself! Joe Biden could have said he loved his son but kept him at arm's length. He didn't. The question was never whether Republicans would investigate Hunter Biden. The question was whether they would find he committed embarrassing and illegal acts. Hunter Biden did both. He wasn't falsely accused. He was correctly accused. He was guilty. His prosecution is the justice system at work. (He would probably have gotten a slap on the wrist from the judge because that is how most white collar crime is treated for first offenders, but at least it would have been the judicial system that did that, not the political system.)

Advice for people in public office: Don't do illegal stuff. Don't let family members do illegal stuff. If you can't be good, then get out of politics.

Democrats ask: How can good Christian Republicans ignore Donald Trump's flagrant bad behavior? Democrats think there is a clear moral distinction between Biden and Trump. Biden's supposed brand was America-the-good, the country of checks and balances and "no one is above the law." Biden blew that up. Biden showed that everyone is a swamp creature. At least Trump acknowledges that the system is rigged. Biden is the hypocrite who pretends it isn't, but then gets his son out of trouble.

Since the whole system is corrupt, voters are evaluating leaders on the scale of effectiveness, not virtue. Who is strong, not who is good. Biden couldn't solve problems: inflation, the border, transgenders in female bathrooms. Trump, however, is good at the lawless exercise of power. He bullies rivals. Trump will break eggs to make the omelet. Americans showed that they don't consider democracy to be a good in itself. Democracy is a tool to make a safe, prosperous society. Who better kicks ass and takes names than a strong narcissist bully?

Joe Biden just gave permission to Trump to do whatever he wants in the politicization of our justice system. Biden showed there was no lingering virtue to preserve. It is all rigged, just as Trump has claimed all along.

[Note: To receive this blog daily by email, go to: https://petersage.substack.com Subscribe. The blog is free and always will be.]

MAGA in Boston: 1974

No analogy is perfect.

History doesn't repeat. But the 1974-1976 populist revolt in Boston rhymes with MAGA.

Today's post is a follow-up on Saturday's guest post by Boston civic leader Larry DiCara. He wrote about the populist revolt against court-ordered busing of students to achieve racial integration of schools in Boston's racially and ethnically homogeneous neighborhoods.  

I illustrated Larry DiCara's post with these photographs:

The Boston revolt had ugly elements, including an angry White man using the point of a flagpole to stab at a restrained Black man. The photo is all-too genuine. But it is the worst, a caricature of the era, and one could draw an overly-simple conclusion. There was plenty of anti-Black racism, but outsiders would misunderstand the protest if they concluded it was mostly about race. It was as much or more about neighborhood. That wasn't phony or pretense. Neighborhoods were a tribe, although in part a racial or ethnic tribe. Busing broke the boundaries of neighborhoods.

I lived in the Dorchester neighborhood during this era. I took the Red Line subway spur into City Hall for work, a straight shot. There were zero Blacks in my neighborhood, nor along the one- mile walk to the subway station, nor getting onto the subway car with me, nor at the eight or so stops into the city center. I never entered "Black neighborhoods," not even when driving a car on a weekend, exploring the city. My then-wife, a woman of Polish ethnicity and a Boston native, warned me against going into them. They were "dangerous," and we risked some generalized menace if we entered their turf. I felt the same way about the ethnically-Irish neighborhoods of South Boston and Charlestown. White street-toughs might somehow sniff out that I was an outsider from Oregon and my wife Polish, not Irish. I would have been unwelcome, I thought, and it made me uncomfortable. I wasn't part of their neighborhood.

Part of the rhyme in this 50-year-old mirror is the sense of invasion by outsiders. Democrats scoffed at Fox News and Trump's characterization of uncontrolled immigration as an "invasion," but that is how a great many Americans feel about it. Too many of the wrong people, some of whom are dangerous, want in, and then they are conspicuous in their presence. Boston protesters thought they were defending themselves, their values, and their identity.

Another rhyme is the protest that rules and sensibilities of the managerial class were being imposed upon working people. The rules were burdensome and asymmetric. A financially and physically comfortable federal judge was making rules that working people were forced to live under. They were the deplorables, condemned for being "racist" when all they really wanted was to keep a safe neighborhood where their own kind of people could live their lives. Federal Judge W. Arthur Garrity Jr. lived in the wealthy Boston suburb of Wellesley. His neighborhood wasn't affected. He could afford that era's equivalent of "woke values." Two hours on a bus each day was not his problem; it was the kids'. A rich, educated guy with 24-7 security could impose disruption on others for the greater good of a social justice experiment that pushes new boundaries. Well-educated policy advocates who shape Democratic politics can defend, and even insist, upon pronoun-pronouncements, indigenous land recognition statements, mass-immigrant asylum claims, diversity statements as part of job applications, and trans "invasions" of traditionally women's spaces in bathrooms, locker rooms, and athletics. Those policies reflect elite sensibilities. 

MAGA doesn't have a single federal judge to blame, but it can blame the entire weight of modern culture and the people who read and write The New York Times and other "fake news" media -- educated, secular, cosmopolitan, diverse, and judgmental people -- which is to say Democrats.

Boston busing opponent Louise Day Hicks was elected to Congress. Mayor Kevin White, the moderate Democrats who tried to hold things together, lost his chance for higher office.

It rhymes.

Boston is a different, better place now. What fixed it? The simplest answer is prosperity. Boston's position in education, health care, and technology changed it from a working-class, blue-collar city to a magnet city for highly-paid educated people.  

[Note: To receive this blog daily by email, go to: https://petersage.substack.com Subscribe. The blog is free and always will be.]

Easy Sunday. Mexican president to Trump, "No way, Jose."

The Mexican president tells Trump that Mexico is a neighbor, not a doormat.

President-elect Trump spoke on the phone with Mexico's president, Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo.

Trump promptly claimed "mission accomplished" on Truth Social:

    "Just had a wonderful conversation with the new President of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo. She has agreed to stop Migration through Mexico, and into the United States, effectively closing our Southern Border."

She disagreed, promptly "clarifying" on Twitter/X:

     “In our conversation with President Trump, I explained to him the comprehensive strategy that Mexico has followed to address the migration phenomenon, respecting human rights. We reiterate that Mexico’s position is not to close borders but instead build bridges between government and people.”

The following letter is a translation into English of her follow-up letter to Trump. It is a primary source, written in the measured, firm-but-polite manner of diplomacy, so there is no trace of emotion. No indignation. No accusation. It is a cool statement of facts and position. Within the genre of international diplomacy leader-to-leader communication, it is a sharp push-back. She is saying, in effect: Not so fast, fella. We aren't the problem, YOU are the problem. And if you impose new tariffs, it's going to bite you in the ass. 

Letter from Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo

“Dear President-elect Donald Trump, I am writing to you regarding your statement on Monday, November 25, concerning migration, fentanyl trafficking, and tariffs. You may not be aware that Mexico has developed a comprehensive policy to assist migrants from different parts of the world who cross our territory en route to the southern border of the United States. As a result, and according to data from your country’s Customs and Border Protection (CBP), encounters at the Mexico–United States border have decreased by 75% between December 2023 and November 2024. Moreover, half of those who arrive do so through a legally scheduled appointment under the United States’ CBP One program. For these reasons, migrant caravans no longer arrive at the border. Even so, it is clear that we must work together to create a new labor mobility model that is necessary for your country, as well as address the root causes that compel families to leave their homes out of necessity. If even a small percentage of what the United States allocates to war were instead dedicated to building peace and fostering development, it would address the underlying causes of human mobility. On another note, and for humanitarian reasons, Mexico has consistently expressed its willingness to help prevent the fentanyl epidemic in the United States from continuing. This is, after all, a public health and consumption problem within your society. So far this year, Mexican armed forces and prosecutors have seized tons of various types of drugs, 10,340 firearms, and have detained 15,640 individuals for violence related to drug trafficking. Furthermore, the Mexican Congress is in the process of approving a constitutional reform to classify the production, distribution, and commercialization of fentanyl and other synthetic drugs as a serious crime without bail. However, it is publicly known that the chemical precursors used to produce this and other synthetic drugs are illegally entering Canada, the United States, and Mexico from Asian countries. This underscores the urgent need for international collaboration.

You must also be aware of the illegal trafficking of firearms into my country from the United States. Seventy percent of the illegal weapons seized from criminals in Mexico come from your country. We do not produce these weapons, nor do we consume synthetic drugs. Tragically, it is in our country that lives are lost to the violence resulting from meeting the drug demand in yours. President Trump, migration and drug consumption in the United States cannot be addressed through threats or tariffs. What is needed is cooperation and mutual understanding to tackle these significant challenges. For every tariff, there will be a response in kind, until we put at risk our shared enterprises. Yes, shared. For instance, among Mexico’s main exporters to the United States are General Motors, Stellantis, and Ford Motor Company, which arrived in Mexico 80 years ago. Why impose a tariff that would jeopardize them? Such a measure would be unacceptable and would lead to inflation and job losses in both the United States and Mexico. I am convinced that North America’s economic strength lies in maintaining our trade partnership. This allows us to remain competitive against other economic blocs. For this reason, I believe that dialogue is the best path to understanding, peace, and prosperity for our nations. I hope our teams can meet soon to continue building joint solutions.”

 

[Note: To receive this blog daily by email, go to: https://petersage.substack.com 
Subscribe. The blog is free and always will be.]