We can definitely use more non-politics questions at questions@electoral-vote.com, and some more assessments of Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) as a presidential candidate at comments@electoral-vote.com.

Also, as long as we are at it anyhow, today's posting is definitely PG-13 rated. You are forewarned.

Fascism Watch, Part I: Trump "Fires" Fed Governor Lisa Cook

We would like to reiterate, once again, that it goes against our training as academics to use words like "fascism," which are very loaded, and which are often used to score cheap rhetorical points. But Christ Jesus Almighty. (Z) was teaching yesterday, and would check his e-mail and text messages before and after lectures. And every damn time he did that (six times in total, spread across about 9 hours), there was yet another new story about something the Trump administration had done, or announced, or threatened, that could easily have come out of the Mussolini playbook.

For example, when it came to the Italian economy, Mussolini embraced fascist corporatism. It's a little weedy, but he wanted all aspects of the economy to be managed by a partnership between the government, corporate interests and labor, with the government as the VERY senior partner in the partnership. In practice, this effectively means that the government (i.e., Mussolini) called most of the shots, and then it was up to the other "partners" to figure out how to implement those directives. It did not work out very well.

Trump, of course, wants to make the single most important cog in the U.S. economy—the Federal Reserve—into a group of a**-kissing, incompetent underlings along the lines of would-be leader of the Bureau of Labor Statistics E.J. Antoni, who will then set interest rates at whatever level Il Donald commands. Then, he would slash the rates down to nothing, because that would help his personal business interests, and would also make it cheaper for the government to borrow money in order to cover the massive costs of the BBB.

This leaves us with so many questions that we'd really like the answers to (not that we are going to get them). For example, does Trump have ANY concept how much harm his schemes would do to the economy? We recognize that he's not worried about getting reelected, whether he stands down or declares himself dictator-for-life. However, all the gerrymandering nonsense was triggered by his desire to preserve the trifecta after the midterms. If he wrecks the economy, and sends inflation skyrocketing, that's not going to happen.

Similarly, does he have any awareness that the key to the Fed is that they operate independent of the White House and the party that controls the government? The Fed governors set the federal funds rate, of course. And many/most banks then take that number, add a little profit for themselves, and that's their prime rate. But they are not bound by law to honor the federal funds rate, and they won't do so if they believe that the number set by the Fed does not reflect a prudent approach to the state and the health of the economy. Here's a thought exercise: Imagine that Trump orders a lackey-led Federal Reserve to set the federal funds rate at -1000%. No bank would follow suit, because they would be out of business. So, there's a limit to the banks' tolerance, and that limit will arrive very quickly if the Federal Reserve is turned into an adjunct of the Trump Organization.

Whatever Trump is, or is not, aware of, he's definitely doing everything he can to bend the Fed governors to his will. And yesterday, after a week of talking up alleged "fraud" by Governor Lisa Cook, Trump announced that he is firing her. This is the first time in the 110-year history of the Fed that a president has tried to do that.

It is true that the law allows Trump to remove governors... for cause. Cooking up a "cause" like this, which involves an unproven and un-prosecuted claim that Cook lied on her mortgage paperwork, is very thin. It gets thinner when you consider that the alleged "crime" took place well before her appointment to the Fed. If anything anyone does in their pre-public-service life is basis for termination AFTER Senate confirmation, that opens up many cans of worms.

It's not at all surprising that Trump went after Cook first, as he has particular enmity for Black people in politics, and for women in politics, and so Cook pushes two of his biggest buttons. That said, his real game here is to establish a precedent, however shaky, so he can then find some excuse to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell. Who knows, maybe Powell once cut the tags off his mattress.

Trump's problem here (and see below for more) is that, while he doesn't seem to realize it, he is moving closer and closer to his "the emperor has no clothes" moment. That is to say, he's going to flex his flabby fascist muscles, and someone is going to tell him to go fu** himself. And someone else. And someone else. Not only is such defiance humiliating to him, but it underscores that he's more bark than bite.

For example, Cook says she's most certainly not stepping down, and she's going to keep showing up to work. Trump will undoubtedly respond by filing suit, and trying to have her removed at the end of a judge's order. But again, his argument is as thin as watery oatmeal. And the Supreme Court, back in May, did everything possible to warn him to keep his grimy mitts off the Fed. In a decision where they allowed him to remove a member of the National Labor Relations Board, they also added that the Fed "is a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity that follows in the historical tradition of the First and Second Banks of the United States."

So, he's going to lose, and he's going to look weak, and he's also going to fail to remove Powell. And that's not the only "the emperor has no clothes" dynamic that was in the news yesterday. For example, John Bolton got raided this weekend, and how did he respond? With an op-ed lambasting Trump's Ukraine policy. In other words, "You don't scare me, Donald."

Similarly, Trump decided to get a cheap shot in at the expense of Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D-IL), in advance of a near-certain invasion of Chicago by the White House. And so, flanked by "AG" Pam Bondi, VP "J.D." Vance, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, Trump gave yet another bizarre and rambling press conference, during which he called Pritzker a "slob" and "ought to spend more time in the gym, actually." That's pretty rich, given that Trump himself has never seen the inside of a gym, and that he, uh, would never be mistaken for Twiggy, let's say (On the other hand, a Muppet whose name rhymes with "Twiggy?" Maybe).

Pritzker quickly returned serve, remarking that "It takes one to know one on the weight question," and adding "I would say also that his personal attacks on me are just evidence of a guy who's still living in fifth grade. He's the kind of bully that throws invectives at people, because he knows that what he's saying is actually commentary on himself."

We don't propose that the "resistance" has arrived, quite yet. But every time another person makes clear that they'll stand up to Trump, the easier it becomes for the next person, and the next one after that. And we haven't even mentioned Gavin Newsom yet (but see below, and tomorrow). (Z)

Fascism Watch, Part II: Trump "Bans" Flag Burning

One of the (many) reasons we would never want to be president is that, for all the talk of being the most powerful person in the world, you have to do a lot of stupid, embarrassing crap. For example:

And there are at least a half-dozen other shots like this one out there. Nobody really believes that Trump loves the flag, do they? Certainly not enough to treat the flag the way his VP treats a couch. Salute? Sure. Hand over heart? OK. But kissing and hugging it? Weird, and humiliating.

Anyhow, as part of his ongoing I-love-the-flag-more-than-anyone performance art, Trump signed an executive order yesterday that criminalizes the burning of the American flag. The Supreme Court has already ruled, in Texas v. Johnson, that flag-burning is protected speech under the First Amendment. The executive order tries to get around that by arguing that flag burning constitutes "fighting words," which is an established exception to freedom of speech.

Already, one person has been arrested under the terms of the new directive. A man named Dave Terry, who identified himself as a 20-year veteran of the Armed Forces, showed up in front of the White House and torched an American flag, decreeing that it was his right as an American.

We think that attitude is very common among veterans, even if Trump does not realize it. We thought we'd also share this, from reader A.H. in Newberg, OR, in support of that observation:

Our dear leader has just announced that he, through executive decree, has criminalized the burning of the American flag.

My father, father-in-law, numerous uncles and aunts, a brother, brother-in-law, cousins, a son and daughter, and more nieces and nephews, as well as myself have taken the oath to defend the Constitution from all enemies both foreign and domestic. We have served under that flag. In my household, we possess the flags that were on my father's and father-in-law's caskets. We have a flag that our daughter carried while airborne over Iraq and Afghanistan. We have another flag with no special personal meaning that we proudly fly on appropriate days: Memorial Day, Fourth of July, etc. If someone wants to come and take my flag, I will have to explain how they were so grievously injured when they tripped, and that I administered appropriate medical assistance!

HOWEVER, if someone wants to burn a flag in protest of the Felon-in-Chief's authoritarian tendencies, give me a call. I will pony up for the flag and matches. I am a little long in the tooth to be waving a burning flag around, but I will proudly defend to the death the right to peaceably assemble and express our grievances to our elected officials. I did not serve under that flag to see some 2-bit wannabe DICK tator dry hump it in front of an audience of witless sycophants.

Trust me, I DO NOT like or want to see our flag desecrated; it is a powerful symbol of our nation. But, more than that. I DO NOT want our Constitution to be abrogated and trashed like quilted Charmin at the whims of the Orange Menace who shall not be named.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER

Phuque U DJT

(Z) spoke to several other veterans yesterday; all echoed the same sentiments.

Undoubtedly, this is headed to court, and eventually it will reach the Supremes. We do not pretend to know what they will do. The answer should be clear-cut, especially since the administration's legal theory is a gross offense against fighting words doctrine. That said, the decision in Texas v. Johnson was 5-4 (with one of the liberals in the minority!), and current associate justice Samuel Alito sure does love his flags. So, it's certainly possible they'll sustain Trump.

We think the huge mistake here is not that Trump could suffer an embarrassing loss in court (though he might!). The mistake, which occurred to us immediately, and which has also occurred to many others across the political spectrum, including staunch conservatives, is that he's just handed everyone a cheap and easy way to say, well, "Phuque U DJT." And sure, the administration arrested Dave Terry. And they'll arrest other people, too. But what are they going to do if 100 people burn flags all at once? Or 1,000? Or 10,000? What if there's a Day of Flag Burning across America, and 500,000 people from coast to coast all burn an American flag? It is impossible to arrest, much less jail, that many people. Especially given that the jails are already jam-packed with alleged undocumented immigrants.

Again, Trump seems to be doing everything he can to hasten the moment of mass resistance, when it becomes clear to everyone he has no ability to back most of his plays. And from then on, it is, to borrow a phrase from The Spaniard, "Humiliations galore." In his nearly 80 years, has Trump never heard that you have to be careful not to overextend yourself? We guess not. (Z)

Fascism Watch, Part III: The Brownshirtifying of the National Guard Continues

As far as we can tell, we are the first people ever to use the word "Brownshirtifying." The only Google match was for an Instagram account that's actually about women who want to tint their brows, which is not at all the same thing. You are welcome that we allowed you to be here for this historic moment.

Anyhow, as part of a spate of executive orders he signed yesterday, Donald Trump ordered Pete Hegseth to begin development of specialized National Guard units, who will be "specifically trained and equipped to deal with public order issues."

This is not inherently a bad idea. That is to say, if there was a clear gap in the nation's security/policing needs, and if it was made clear how and why the National Guard is the best idea for filling that gap, then... maybe. But the administration has not enunciated what gap exists, or how the National Guard would be used to fill it. And since the Guard is already "specifically trained and equipped to deal with public order issues," and since this administration pretty much always lies about its true plans and its true motivations, there is just nothing good about this new plan, whatever the ultimate goal is.

Last week, Fox entertainer U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro announced that people in the District will no longer be charged with a felony for carrying rifles or shotguns in public. This was, until last week, a felony violation without a special permit, per a measure passed by the D.C. City Council.

Pirro's announcement was framed as a Second Amendment thing, and maybe it's that, too. But it's clear that what is really going on is that the administration is doing everything it can to turn up the heat, and cause someone in D.C. to commit an act of violence. Then, the Trump administration can pounce, spend the next few days going on Fox to say "See! We told you D.C. was out of control!" and then, in turn, use that as justification for plans to invade Chicago, Baltimore, New York City, etc.

We assume that the folks in D.C. know what it looks like when they are being goaded into acts of violence, and we hope that they won't give the Trump administration ANYTHING to work with. Because it could get ugly fast. Although, don't completely discount the possibility that if the National Guard troops are actually asked to do something illegal, immoral, or cruel, they will refuse. They did not sign up to be fascist shock troops. (Z)

Fascism Watch, Part IV: Trump Breaks Wind

Revolution Wind, that is. That is the name of an offshore wind farm being built off the coast of New England. It cleared many and varied regulatory hurdles, has been under construction since August 2023, is roughly 80% complete, and is expected to provide a couple hundred jobs and to have a capacity of a little more than 700 MW. To put that in context, that's enough power for 350,000 houses, or one Trump tanning-bed session. And, as of this past Friday, construction is halted, thanks to a stop-work order issued by Matthew Giacona, the Acting Director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management at the US Department of the Interior.

What, exactly is the basis for stopping work on a project that cleared the vast array of regulatory hurdles, and that is almost done? Giacona's order brusquely refers to "concerns related to the protection of national security interests of the United States and prevention of interference with reasonable uses of the exclusive economic zone, the high seas, and the territorial sea." Requests for further clarification, at least the ones from reporters, have gone unanswered.

It's certainly possible that some real national security issue has presented itself. And, if so, the administration is well within its rights to take a look at it, and to keep things close to the vest. However, for a number of reasons, that explanation doesn't really pass the smell test. To start, experts are having trouble coming up with a plausible scenario in which there would not only be a national security concern, but one that was not noticed by anyone during the last 4 years of development/regulatory approval, and yet was caught by Team Trump, which is not known for being either detail-oriented or... well... competent. Also setting off the B.S. radar is the fact that a very similar project, Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (CVOW), has NOT been halted. That one is located very close to a U.S. Navy base (Naval Station Norfolk), so if there was really a legitimate security concern, it seems probable it would also extend to CVOW. And, on top of all of these reasons for skepticism, there is the fact that the Trump administration lies about its real motivations all the time.

So, if the administration is not being forthright, what might be going on here? There are many theories that suggest themselves:

• Trump's FeeFees: Trump has famously hated wind power since a wind farm was built offshore but visible from his golf course in Scotland. He could be acting on that hatred, particularly if he's extra-cranky this week, for some reason. This theory would be strengthened if the Virginia project also gets stopped.
  
  
• Own the Libs: Trump could be engaging in general anti-lib hatred, since the libs like renewable energy, or he could specifically be screwing with Govs. Ned Lamont (D-CT) and Daniel McKee (D-RI), who are definitely furious, and are promising to fight back. Virginia, of course, has a Republican governor.
  
  
• The Art of the "Deal": The administration stopped work on a different project this year, namely Empire Wind in New York State. That situation was "resolved" when Gov. Kathy Hochul (D-NY) agreed not to oppose Trump-backed efforts to build a new natural gas pipeline through the state. So, we could be looking at, in effect, a protection money scheme here. "That's a nice wind farm ya got there. Would hate to see you fail to complete it for... some reason."
  
  
• This Land Is Your Land? This Land is MY Land: The company building Revolution Wind is Ørsted, which is 50.1% owned by the Danish government. We haven't heard much about acquiring Greenland lately, but all it takes is for one Laura Loomer to say "So, what's happening with the Greenland plan, Mr. President?"

Who knows when we will find out. Tomorrow? Never? Anything is possible.

Oh, and these days, anytime the Trump administration does something controversial, it is wise to look around and see if Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) has come up with a countermeasure. In this case, just hours after the White House stopped the Revolution Wind project, California announced a wide-ranging agreement to work with Denmark on research into green technology, cybersecurity and AI. We very seriously doubt that the Newsom administration managed to throw together an agreement in a matter of hours, but there might have been some indication that the Trump administration's decision was coming, or the Californians and the Danes might have hustled to dot the i's and cross the t's to be able to announce on the same day. (Z)

The Strangest Culture Wars Battle... Ever?

(Z) has surely mentioned once or twice that one of the best classes he took as an undergrad was Folklore and Mythology 15, with Prof. Peter Tokofsky. The basic idea of the class, which was entitled "Urban Legends," was that you can break down the various urban legends that somehow caught fire, and figure out what's really driving them. For example, one of the case studies was the then-recent urban legend that the ship that appears on the Snapple iced tea bottles is actually a slave ship. This cost the company a fair bit of money. And it can be pretty conclusively shown that what gave that urban legend its juice was Snapple's decision to hire, as a pitchman, Rush Limbaugh. He was, well, kind of racist. And if Snapple hired him, they must be kind of racist. And if they are kind of racist, then they'd probably put slave ships on their bottles. That's the basic analysis.

With most of the right-wing culture wars stuff (and the left-wing equivalents), it's pretty easy to use the basic tools from F&M 15 to try to figure out what's going on. For example, we assiduously avoided the Sydney Sweeney "good genes/jeans" controversy because it was so damn stupid, and because there were multiple polls showing that the whole thing was basically just 6% of the American public yelling at each other. That said, it caught fire on the left for the same reason that the Snapple legend did, namely the belief that many Republicans are racists. And then it caught fire on the right because Sweeney is white, and blonde, and a registered Republican, and the whole thing became a great way to talk about how those libs are so over-sensitive, and so easily triggered and yadda, yadda, yadda. There's some truth there, but when we saw Donald Trump prattling on along those lines, and Fox news giving Sweeney and the delicate-as-a-flower libs more than 20 hours of coverage, our thought was "Physician, heal thyself."

And that brings us to the latest chapter in the culture wars, one so ridiculous that we just couldn't let it pass without mention, but one so bizarre that it's nigh-on impossible to reverse engineer it, and figure out what's really driving it. Many readers will have heard about it by now, but for those who haven't, the current right-wing obsession is... the new Cracker Barrel logo. Here's a comparison of the old (left) and the new (right):

Seems like your fairly standard rebranding, right? Taking a somewhat cluttered logo that was probably created in the 1960s or 1970s, and making it more streamlined and web-friendly?

And yet, there are plenty of people on the right who absolutely lost their MINDS. Here are a few examples:

• Right-wing activist Christopher Rufo: "We must break the Barrel... The implicit promise: Go woke, watch your stock price drop 20 percent, which is exactly what is happening now."
  
  
• Country musician John Rich: "Will you go to Cracker Barrel now that it's going woke? This could be a 'Bud Light' moment in the making..."
  
  
• Actor and far-right activist James Woods: "Cracker Barrel was the only place I'd ever stop [on cross-country drives]. No mob fights, a fun corny atmosphere, and delicious food when you're hungry and tired. I'll never stop foot in one again."
  
  
• Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL): "In college, I worked at @CrackerBarrel in Tallahassee. I even gave my life to Christ in their parking lot. Their logo was iconic and their unique restaurants were a fixture of American culture. No one asked for this woke rebrand. It's time to Make Cracker Barrel Great Again."

The most difficult thing to understand, perhaps, is how the new logo is "woke." Huh?

Again, it's not so easy to figure out what the heck is going on here. Clearly, the restaurant chain is a focal point for... something, because this is its third turn in the culture wars spotlight in the last 3 years. In 2023, right-wingers went loony over the addition of plant-based sausage to the menu. In 2024, they were infuriated when the chain recognized Pride Month. And now it's the "woke" logo.

If readers will forgive a brief sidebar, there was a small chain of restaurants a few years back called Po'Folks. It was doing the same thing Cracker Barrel does—homestyle Southern food, "country" decor. Except that Po'Folks' food was several standard deviations better than Cracker Barrel's is (Z ate at the Buena Park Po'Folks dozens of times). Also, that location was on a prime "row" of touristy things, including Medieval Times, Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show and, at the end of the row, Knott's Berry Farm. And despite all these things, Po'Folks Buena Park went under many years ago.

The point here is that Cracker Barrel is fighting a very uphill battle; their shtick is basically 1940s nostalgia, along the lines of the show The Waltons. That, plus mediocre food, might work out OK as long as there are people around who fondly remember the 1940s. But there aren't too many people like that anymore. So, it's innovate, or die (though it might well end up being innovative, and die anyhow). To the extent that we understand the right-wing reaction, it's that not only is the idealized past imagined by the restaurant long gone, but the 1940s-referencing version of the restaurant will also soon be gone. After all, they certainly didn't have Impossible sausage or gay pride in 1946, or even in 1966. And if you're backwards-looking—which is what "Make America Great Again" is basically about—then reminders of change could well make you upset and angry. We still don't get how it's "woke," however, unless that term has become so flabby that it now just refers to ANY change at all.

We do have one other theory, though it's conspiratorial. Since this "scandal" began about a week ago, Cracker Barrel's stock value has plunged $143 million. If you were someone who thought you could produce that result, and you shorted the stock, you could have done very well for yourself. Something along those lines happened with GameStop stock, so it's not outside the realm of possibility.

In the end, it's just another reminder that, these days, much of the right and much of the left are speaking completely different languages. No wonder it's so hard to meet in the middle. (Z)

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger