Bye bye Bannon.
"are u calling an uber for us steve" pic.twitter.com/cyoxM1hbFp
— darth:™ (@darth) August 18, 2017
And thank you, always, @darth.
This is the earliest in the day I’ve made the call on the tweet of the day. But, I feel pretty confident that nothing will top this today:
Sometimes Breaking News comes at exactly the perfect moment: pic.twitter.com/0SNczBHCzU
— Melissa Jo Peltier (@MelissaJPeltier) April 17, 2017
As the kids these days say, LOL.
also is anyone with institutional power ever going to notice the sole policy priority of this horror show administration is ethnic cleansing
— Gerry Canavan (@gerrycanavan) February 10, 2017
Today was a day of reflection and introspection, as I’m doing lots of reading towards a research proposal I’m writing.
Amidst that work, I checked in on Twitter and the news periodically. To me, the story of the day was the immigration enforcement raids that are apparently occurring across the country. Couple this with the #MuslimBan, and, well, yeah…
On a few occasions over the last few weeks, I’ve wondered privately and publicly about GOP legislators and what they think and believe and do and say in relation to the words and deeds of President Trump and his team. For my own sanity, I have to believe that there are some actual “compassionate conservatives” out there who will ultimately do more than just shake their heads privately or even just comment publicly about disagreements. “How do they sleep at night?”, I continuously ask myself.
Similarly, I wonder if these “compassionate conservatives” read the sorts of things I’ve read about Steve Bannon and really grok the idea that he’s the brains behind his puppet, Donald Trump. Did they read the transcript of the remarks Bannon made to a conference inside the Vatican in 2014? Have they read the Politico piece about Bannon’s intellectual influences? And what about the articles from today about Bannon’s fascination with Italian Nazi-affiliated thinker Julius Evola? Those are in the mainstream outlets, and then there are analyses like the one Daniel Kreiss did of Breitbart News, which Bannon ran. I mean, we’ve now got a pretty clear composite picture of who Bannon is and what he believes, and it’s VERY scary stuff. And, he’s at President Trump’s side all of the time. And, two of the biggest policy efforts within the first 3 weeks of the Trump administration have been the #MuslimBan and now immigration raids.
So, yes, Gerry Canavan, it’s clear as day to me that the top priority of this administration IS ethnic cleansing. I don’t think that’s overstating it. Where are those “compassionate conservatives” who have the power to reign this in? I’m sure there are some GOP legislators who favor ethnic cleansing. But, I refuse to believe there aren’t a handful of GOP Senators (which is really all we’d need) who have any kind of moral compass.
I spent some time analyzing Breitbart's articles, and they reveal the ideas underlying Trump's executive orders:https://t.co/u2Kyv5F31y
— Daniel Kreiss (@kreissdaniel) January 29, 2017
I received inquiries from about 1.6 million people about not having posted a tweet of the day yesterday. To my yuuuge audience, I apologize; I had some technical/server issues that knocked out my site throughout the day yesterday. A good webcraftsperson, though, never blames her/his host; I’ll take the blame. My deepest apologies…
Yesterday’s tweet of the day came from Daniel Kreiss who is a professor at, get this, UNC. Ugh.1. #GoDuke. Silly partisanship aside, the analysis of Breitbart.com that Kreiss conducted is really useful if you’re trying to understand the worldview behind the Executive Order (#MuslimBan) issued on Friday. I have pulled no punches in claiming that Steve Bannon (and to a lesser extent Stephen Miller, who, I must confess, is also a Duke alum… sigh) is the puppetmaster of this administration. Thus, given Bannon’s association with Breitbart.com in the past, the major themes of the text on the site are, if not surprising, certainly revealing. “Breitbart’s writers very explicitly rejected the three pillars of multiculturalism, cosmopolitanism, and globalism they claimed represented Obama’s presidency and candidacy…” And, here’s the kicker:
Breitbart is, in part, about defining the symbolic border of the nation and protecting the white, Christian body politic in a way that is premised on exclusion.
Yeesh. When I put my (dusty, lightly used) law degree hat on, I’m interested in the legal case against the Excecutive Order. In particular, I’m interested in what sorts of evidence can and will be used to make the argument against the EO. Can and will Rudy Giuliani’s interview on Fox News be used to prove legislative intent? Can President Trump’s tweet from this morning, wherein he himself, uses the word “ban” be used for the same purpose? And then I think about Kreiss’ analysis. IF it can be argued that Bannon was a significant party to the drafting of the EO, do the words of Breitbart.com, a media outlet he helped found and oversee, serve as evidence of legislative intent? It’s probably a stretch. Nevertheless, thank you Professor Kreiss for your cogent analysis. For that, you get the honor of having produced the tweet of the day (yesterday).