TMI Show Ep 88: Chaos in Trumpworld

Live at 10 am Eastern/9 am Central time, and Streaming 24-7 Thereafter:

The Trump administration has sparked controversy with aggressive moves to reshape the federal government and military. Budget director Russell Vought ordered federal agencies to plan mass layoffs, targeting thousands of workers at agencies like the IRS, FEMA, and Social Security Administration, aligning with Trump and Elon Musk. Over 20,000 federal employees have been fired, prompting lawsuits from unions and outrage from affected workers. Now a federal judge has ruled that all of those firings were illegal and must be reversed.

Simultaneously, Trump executed a dramatic Pentagon purge, firing Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. C.Q. Brown and five other top officers, aiming to make military leadership loyal to him, and plans to expel transgender soldiers, airmen and sailors. Critics, including lawmakers, warn this politicizes the military, with some alleging a rejection of “woke” policies. Courts are blocking other initiatives like changes to birthright citizenship. Public and political backlash is growing, with protests across the country, yet Trump presses forward, framing the chaos as a drive to achieve efficiency.

As the rapid, polarizing overhaul continues to unfold, “The TMI Show” hosts Ted Rall and Manila Chan predict the road ahead for the mayhem in Trumpworld. Will the deep state strike back?

DMZ America Podcast Ep 194: Is This 1933?

Live at 10 am Eastern/9 am Central time, and Streaming 24-7 Thereafter:

Hitler was elected democratically and consolidated his dictatorship after seizing power. Donald Trump just won a fair election. Is he plotting to subvert American democracy?

There are signs that suggest “yes.”

Presidents may only serve two terms, yet Trump repeatedly suggests that he ought to run and win a third term. A “Third Term Project” was announced at CPAC. This past week, Trump called himself “The King” and quoted the French Emperor Napoleon, who argued, “He who saves his country does not violate any law.”

More materially, Trump fired the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and two other top military officers. He will be replaced with a MAGA loyalist. History shows that the military is key to a successful coup d’état or revolution. And Trump has a strong reason to want to stay in office: if and when he steps down, he again becomes vulnerable to criminal charges.

Is it 1933 in Germany? Editorial cartoonists Ted Rall (from the Left) and Scott Stantis (from the Right) talking about the prospects for democracy under Trump on today’s DMZ America Podcast.

TMI Show Ep 82: Trump Wants To Slash Defense

Live at 10 am Eastern/9 am Central time, and Streaming 24-7 Thereafter:

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered Pentagon officials to draw up plans to cut 8% from the military over each of the next five years, the most radical attempt to rein in such spending ever.
There would be 17 exceptions to the proposed cuts, including military operations at the southern border. Cuts to defense will face opposition in Congress, where lawmakers focus on budget cuts that could affect their districts.
On “The TMI Show” Ted Rall and guest cohost Robby West discuss this shocking attempt to co-opt anti-militarism as an issue away from the Democrats.

TMI Show Ep 62: “Trump’s Foreign Policy Begins to Take Shape”

Live at 10 am Eastern time/9 am Central time and Streaming 24-7 thereafter:

After being unanimously confirmed, Secretary of State Marco Rubio immediately met with his “Quad” counterparts from Australia, India and Japan, signaling a focus on China. Rubio also supervised a 90-day suspension of all foreign aid payments.

In the Middle East, Trump said that he was not optimistic about the prospects for the new ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, and eliminated Biden’s sanctions against some West Bank settlers accused of violence against Palestinians. Meanwhile, Israel appears to be taking advantage of the ceasefire to escalate military attacks and settler violence in the West Bank. Will Trump, an ally of Israel, be able to rein in Netanyahu?

Trump plans to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin during the next few weeks and said that they will discuss bringing an end to the war in Ukraine. Most experts believe that Russia will wind up with about a fifth of Ukrainian territory and a guarantee that a rump Ukraine will not join NATO.

Nick Cruse of the Revolutionary Blackout Network joins “TMI Show” hosts Ted Rall and Manila Chan to discuss the state of the world and the American role under Trump.

TMI Show Ep 62: “Trump’s Busy First Day”

Listen and Watch LIVE at 10 am Eastern time/7 am Pacific time today and Streaming 24-7 thereafter:

After a strange inauguration speech that really wasn’t, President Donald Trump charged out of the gate on his first day with a blizzard of executive orders and actions designed to remake the government as quickly as possible in his image. Within hours, he pardoned or commuted the sentences of the January 6th defendants and inmates, declared an emergency at the Mexican border that allows him to send the military, shut down the main immigration app, declared drug cartels to be terrorist organizations, fired over 1000 Biden appointees, threw a lifeline to TikTok, re-declared Cuba a partner of terrorists, withdrew from the Paris climate agreement and the World Health Organization, and attempted to end birthright citizenship.

Oh, and the DOGE bromance ended 6.75 hours into Trump’s second term.

On today’s “TMI Show” hosts Ted Rall and Manila Chan tell you what’s likely to stick and what’s not, what’s happening and why it matters, and predict what’s coming next down the pike.

Capitalism At a Glance

Before he allegedly killed United healthcare CEO Brian Thompson, Luigi Mangione was considered intelligent, thoughtful, kind, funny, and well-adjusted in every way. Now, because he killed someone, probably for political reasons, he’s considered insane. But what does that say about all the other people who kill for political reasons, like the President? Or Thompson himself?

Are Killers Insane?

           As is typically the case after a high-profile murder, people are speculating about suspect Luigi Mangione’s state of mind when he allegedly killed United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson outside a Hilton hotel in Manhattan.

            We have a likely (political) motive in the form of a handwritten statement Pennsylvania police say they found on Mangione when they arrested him. “Frankly, these parasites simply had it coming,” it reads. “A reminder: the US has the #1 most expensive healthcare system in the world, yet we rank roughly #42 in life expectancy. United is the fourth largest company in the US by market cap, behind only Apple, Google, Walmart. It has grown and grown, but as our life expectancy? No, the reality is, these [indecipherable] have simply gotten too powerful, and they continue to abuse our country for immense profit because the American public has allowed them to get away with it…It is not an issue of awareness at this point, but clearly power games at play. Evidently I am the first to face it with such brutal honesty.”

            Thompson’s death immediately prompted the widespread assumption that his killer had to have been motivated by something personal. The CEO must have been the victim of a vengeful patient, or someone who loved and lost a person to an insurance denial. There are, after all, numerous Americans whom United Healthcare refuses to cover for medical treatment. Some die. But the man they arrested doesn’t fit the bill. Though Mangione’s social media feeds indicate that he had major back surgery following an injury, the operation appears to have been successful. There is no evidence that an insurance company denied his claim. United Healthcare says Mangione has never been their customer.

This looks like a case of self-radicalization.

Mangione was privileged and high-functioning. If he can become a one-man terrorist group, anyone can.

The establishment press can’t wrap its collective head around it.

Writing in The New York Times, David Wallace-Wells is among the many journalists who wondered aloud: “We’ve seen the video of him shouting at the press as he’s pulled into the courthouse, which suggests perhaps some disquiet. But we also haven’t heard from anybody who interacted with him at any point in his life who found him anything but levelheaded, cleareyed, calm and even kind.” Why might someone with Mangione’s background (white, well-off, Ivy-educated), looks (women have been swooning over him online) and social currency (he was friendly and popular) stalk a business executive he’d never met and gun him down?

            Perhaps, some reports suggested, back pain from spondylolisthesis drove him insane. Or that pain made it impossible for him to have sex and that made him nuts. Or his turn to violence was inspired by Ted Kaczynski’s Unabomber manifesto. He was 26, the average age when schizophrenia first manifests—maybe a mental time bomb was behind his psychotic break. One of these explanations may prove true. Or none. Luigi Mangione may be sane. He may simply be a class traitor.

            Wallace-Wells continued: “In many ways, the obvious explanation is that the attack was the result of some kind of breakdown. But aside from the shooting itself, we haven’t seen any real signs of a breakdown.” (Except for shouting at the press. Wallace-Wells thinks that makes you unwell.)

            Interesting questions arise from the assumption that mental illness is “the obvious explanation” for why people kill. We are going to have to radically rethink our society if that’s true.

Are prison employees who administer capital punishment insane? What about combat troops who kill enemy soldiers whom they have nothing against personally, simply because they’re given an order? Are members of the military lunatics? Must one be crazy to serve as President, a job that involves ordering men and women to shoot and bomb other people—sometimes en masse—and signing off on extrajudicial assassinations, as with drones? Harry Truman dropped The Bomb. Was he psycho? What of a police officer who shoots a suspect? If a health insurance company unfairly denies life-saving medical care to a patient and the patient dies, which one can argue is tantamount to murder, does that make a CEO like Thompson a murderer too—and therefore insane?

            If everyone who kills a human being is psychotic, shouldn’t every killer be granted an insanity defense and automatically be sent to a psychiatric facility rather than prison?

            What about farmers who kill animals? Vets who euthanize them?

            When Marianne Bachmeier entered a German courtroom in 1996 and shot to death the man who raped and murdered her seven-year-old daughter, there was no confusion. Everyone understood her motivation. It was personal, relatable and therefore there was no talk that she might be bonkers.

Should it turn out that Mangione’s motive was personal, and that he or someone he cared about suffered pain at the hands of the health insurance industry, the discomfort of the chattering classes would be mitigated. Oh. That makes sense.

            It is possible, though—likelier, really—that Mangione engaged with the question of America’s for-profit healthcare system impersonally and intellectually, yet passionately. Like those who marched against the Vietnam and Gaza wars despite having no personal stake in the conflict, it is hard not to feel disgust and outrage when one hears horrific accounts of insurance companies denying and delaying valid claims as they rake in billions. Mangione had to have known, as everyone does, that there is no prospect of healthcare reform coming out of a Washington in which neither political party wants to fix the system.

People kill other people in service to far more abstract concepts than affordable healthcare. Political leaders kill over such dubious controversies as arbitrary borders and the Domino Theory and NATO Expansion and the Shia-Sunni Schism, yet nobody thinks they’re insane.

Murder, all societies agree, is wrong—unless it’s committed by someone officially authorized to take life. Vigilantism is problematic because, taken to its logical extreme, the rule of law would collapse.

Dismissing a vigilante’s actions as the product of an unsound mind, however, thoughtlessly brushes off the question of why he feels compelled to resort to an act so drastic that it will probably end his own life as well. When one is confronted with massive suffering and heinous injustice, when society doesn’t offer a legal mechanism to stop these horrors, is it inherently insane to say to yourself: someone should do something? Or to conclude: if the answer is yes, why not me?

(Ted Rall (Twitter: @tedrall), the political cartoonist, columnist and graphic novelist, co-hosts the left-vs-right DMZ America podcast with fellow cartoonist Scott Stantis and The TMI Show with political analyst Manila Chan. His latest book, brand-new right now, is the graphic novel 2024: Revisited.)

The TMI Show Ep 21: “Is Pete Hegseth Up to the Job?”

On The TMI Show, co-hosts Ted Rall and Manila Chan investigate Pete Hegseth, the obscure Fox News weekend host nominated to become Trump’s Secretary of Defense. Why was he chosen? Is he qualified? Will the Senate confirm him?

The Pentagon is a vast bureaucracy that controls an annual budget of nearly $1 trillion a year and employees nearly 3,000,000 people around the world stationed at over 1000 overseas military installations and hundreds in the United States. It is the second largest employer on planet earth, and if you include subsidiary contracting firms, it is by far the biggest. In addition, it controls the military academies as well as four separate intelligence agencies. Considering all that, is Hegseth, a veteran with no relevant experience, out of his depth?

Ted and Manila pose that big question to Michael Maloof, a former senior security policy analyst in the Office of the Secretary of Defense with almost 30 years of federal service in the U.S. Defense Department and as a specialized trainer for border guards and Special Forces in select countries of the Caucasus and Central Asia. His answers may surprise you!

What’s Left 9: Foreign Policy Under the Left

            Every country needs a coherent foreign policy. And it’s impossible to overstate the importance of the United States’ military and diplomatic posture.

            The U.S. has the world’s second-largest and most sophisticated nuclear arsenal, exclusive comprehensive command over the oceans, perfect strategic geography, has nearly a thousand military bases overseas and is by far the biggest dealer of weapons and ammunition. And it uses them a lot: we have been at war throughout all of our history since independence from Britain.

            Backed by this “hard” power, which is used to disrupt and overthrow governments, destroy infrastructure and economies, and generally wreak havoc and mayhem, the U.S. deploys formidable “soft power” via its cultural and linguistic hegemony, which has established English as the world’s lingua franca. It determines whether up-and-coming nations are “permitted” to join the “nuclear club” or whether they can be recognized as sovereign countries. It controls a vast array of intelligence operations (including those purporting to work for other countries) and non-governmental organizations, which pull the strings of foreign-based media outlets. The U.S. even hosts the United Nations.

            Our military, economic, cultural and diplomatic power is incalculably formidable—and our reach is infinite.

            We have an awesome duty to exercise our massive power responsibly, intelligently, with restraint, and in service of the greater global good; sadly, the opposite has been true more often than not.

            When the Left takes over control of the nuclear missile silos, the defense budgets and the embassies circling the globe, everything must change radically.

            President Jimmy Carter hinted at what is possible when he promised to prioritize human rights in foreign policy. Though he fell woefully short of his self-professed ideal, propping up brutal dictatorships like the Shah’s torture regime in Iran and arming the far-right anti-Soviet jihadis in Afghanistan, the U.S. did not launch any wars or proxy conflicts during the late 1970s.

            First and foremost, the U.S. must adopt a fully defensive military posture. Troops may only be deployed, and then aggressively, in the event of an invasion or armed incursion—or imminent threat thereof, as defined under international law—of U.S. soil.

            The U.S. must never enter into any treaty or mutual-defense arrangement under which it might be legally or otherwise obligated to assist or intervene as the result of a conflict to which it is not a party. For example, we should cancel our membership in NATO, a mutual-defense pact whose member states treat an attack on one as an attack on all, Three Musketeers-style. As the lead state that created NATO, we should encourage its dissolution as the type of dangerous interlocking alliances that triggered World War I.

            A defense-only defense policy will allow the “defense” budget to shrink to a small fraction of current levels, freeing up trillions of dollars to attend to urgent yet long-neglected domestic needs like fighting poverty and improving our schools. It will eliminate such misbegotten foreign adventurism as the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, covert participation in regime-change “color revolutions,” backing coups such as those that transformed Libya and Honduras into failed states, and the current doomed proxy war against Russia in Ukraine as well as our support of Israel’s war against the Palestinians. Countless lives will be saved and improved as a result. We will acquire fewer enemies, thus reducing the possibility of future terrorist attacks. Here at home as well, we will see fewer hate crimes directed as those who seem to somehow be affiliated or related to whatever nation-state or ethnicity we happen to be designating as our enemy at any given time.

            A key part of a comprehensive swords-to-plowshares strategy is to close all of our hundreds of military bases around the planet and bring our troops home where they belong. This will bring an end to the perverse practice of stationing soldiers in a place where they are likely to provoke an attack only to then double- and triple-down on our presence in order to protect the previous force. Smarter not to station them there in the first place.

            When a foreign crisis or conflict seems to call for military intervention in order to restore law and order, as may be the case currently in Haiti, to stop genocide as we saw in Rwanda in the 1990s, or for some other benevolent reason free of self-interest, U.S. involvement should be reluctant and carefully considered, and then, should be voted upon directly by the people rather than our elected representatives. Then, should we choose to be involved, any such action must be coordinated by the U.N. in conjunction with a coalition of other member states. The U.S. is neither the world’s policeman nor its mob enforcer; it ought not to pretend otherwise.

            As the world’s foremost arms developer, dealer and distributor the U.S. is uniquely positioned to initiate and organize a bold new era of arms control and deescalation. A leftist U.S. will unilaterally point the way forward by methodically dismantling its nuclear stockpile, while encouraging others to do the same. Many countries, like China, Russia and North Korea, spend money they don’t have to build nukes for fear of a U.S. first strike; they would welcome a statement from U.S. that we would never fire nuclear weapons first and that they no longer need to try to keep up with us. We should join the international treaty banning the use of landmines. Similarly, we should forswear the manufacture, deployment and use of unmanned drone weapons, and ask the world to join us in a global convention prohibiting assassination drones.

            A Left country prioritizes peace. Thus it is absolutely imperative that a Left-governed United States establish and maintain full and, to the fullest extent possible friendly, diplomatic relations with every other country, no matter what. Because we value and respect each nation’s right to self-determination, it is not the place of the State Department to attempt to pressure or influence the political orientation or style of government of any other country. Whether or not we agree with a foreign state’s ideological, economic, religious or cultural attitudes is irrelevant; a leftist diplomatic corps is always willing to talk to anyone about anything and to remain available to assist U.S. nationals traveling or living in other countries. In keeping with this openminded approach, the United States will end any and all economic and other forms of sanctions against all foreign governments, and promise never to deploy them in the future for any reason whatsoever, no matter how seemingly justified. Sanctions are coercive gangsterism. As the socialist government of Cuba plainly proves, they don’t work anyway. And sanctions only affect ordinary people, never the elites.

            The U.S. should never wield trade policy as a cudgel, such as imposing tariffs against imports from one producer but not another. While trade policy should always prioritize the protection of American companies and workers, tariffs and regulations should be applied uniformly to all imported goods without favor or disfavor to one or any group of producers.

            To the world, we say: we wish to be your friends. And if we cannot be friends, we will at least do everything in our power not to turn ourselves, as we have done so often in the past, into your enemy.

            Next time, what the Left should do about law, order, policing and punishment.

(Ted Rall (Twitter: @tedrall), the political cartoonist, columnist and graphic novelist, co-hosts the left-vs-right DMZ America podcast with fellow cartoonist Scott Stantis. You can support Ted’s hard-hitting political cartoons and columns and see his work first by sponsoring his work on Patreon.)

 

Mixed Messages

At the same time the U.S. is supplying weapons and cash to Israel to arm and fund its war against Gaza, it is dropping food supplies to the Gazans who are starving as a result.

keyboard_arrow_up
css.php