It's an interesting point - Sonny Corleone style for Trump. He certainly acts that way, but is it real, or is it an act just like James Caan's portrayal? The other thing I'd note is that Sonny was a violent impulsive man, but he wasn't just talk (like when he beat up his brother in law) versus Trump, who manifests behaviors of a physical coward.
I certainly believe Trump is a malignant narcissist who listens only to his own genius mind. But those who know him personally have always said what we see isn't what he's like in private. Maybe he cultivates his image with his various outbursts and rants (that probably reflect that malignant narcissism), but he has a firm vision of what he wants to do.
UK Ambassador Craig Murray said in a recent article that Netanyahu let slip part of the end game - an oil pipeline from Iran west to Israel to ship oil through the Mediterranean. I could see the promise of the "Donald J Trump Oil Terminal" appealing to him.
But at the end of the day - maybe it doesn't matter. The supposed system of checks and balances in government has failed. Congress is beyond useless. All the billions spent on intelligence and defense have shown only a massive wealth transfer upward with careerism the primary motivation for those in positions of power.
To return to the Godfather, I fear we're going to wind up as did the heads of the 'Five Families'.
Narcissists are NOTORIOUSLY charming in person … they need the people they are with to reflect back an image of them as “wonderful” and “beloved.” That is what they are looking for. {That’s what Trump’s cabinet is giving him, with all the overarching praise they lavish on him at meetings.} They are after the image in the river of themselves as the Beautiful Beloved One. {Read the myth of Narcissus — it’s all about the reflection. And then about revenge, if anybody makes them look bad. That is the WORST sin of all, making a Narcissist look bad. Think about Don’s history …}
Me, either, but people were saying he is different “in person,” The typical narcissist is overtly “ charming,” covertly scheming, relentlessly vengeful, untrustworthy, and sociopathic. Like Trump.
I can testify to the part about narcissistic sociopaths being charming in person. I dated one for a few months, until I realized what he was. When I met him, I thought he was the most engaging, personable guy I'd ever encountered. And he was brilliant; knew at least a little bit about everything and could converse intelligently. He could draw, cook up a storm, write song lyrics, and had half a dozen other skills. But he was also a bully, petty thief, borderline alcoholic, and master liar/manipulator. And lord help you if you crossed him! He could get physically violent [with women] in the blink of an eye. Even though I broke up with him, we still traveled in the same circles for awhile, and I'd see him in bars, completely hoodwinking women and men alike, to get what he wanted. He could actually convince smart people who'd known what he was but hadn't seen him in awhile that he'd changed his ways.
He was totally unlike Rump in that he was truly intelligent, had a good sense of humor, and was very physically attractive, with no hint of what was underneath. With Rump, any halfway intelligent person could see right through him, and his superior smirk always gave him away and ruined his looks, even when he was young.
Narcissists, by virtue of needing lots of praise, are often actually quite successful, at least from time to time. {I, too, have sadly known two in close quarters.} They are so amazingly thin skinned and vengeful, though. And, they are made, not born. That’s the sad part. That such charm and skill is pushed in that direction in childhood. Like The Donald by his father. Sad.
Hello TomR... Gangsterism... ICE in Airports... Why was this Iran War launched during Negotiations?... Why The Haste?... Sounds Treacherous... I believe that Rep. Robert Garcia stated, that an Investigation into Jared Kurshner's Activities should be launched... Thom Hartmann had an interesting Article about this : Thom Hartman: Did Jared Kurshner Trigger The US Iran War?: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/jared-kushner-has-some-explaining-to-do-opinion ... Interesting, meanwhile Jared Kurshner continues to Shakedown the Middle-Eastern Countries for $$$... Like DJT, Shameless...
I've long been suspicious about Kushner, including his role in the Trump family; he got his wife to convert to Judaism and there are rumors Trump himself converted late in his first term. He certainly is involved in Chabad Lubavitch and that may be where he has the influence with Trump. And he's likely made a bunch of deals through all these negotations that bring him millions to billions.
Hello TomR... The Kurshners are Personal Friends with Netanyahu.... Netanyahu has been known to stay at Charles, Jared's Dad, residence in NYC... Jared Kurshner is in the Epstein Files... Jeffrey's Web is Thick & Wide...
It was launched in haste because Israel couldn't take the chance that differences would be settled peaceably. Much better for them if the US went to war. Not better for us of course but better for them.
Thank You Alex... Per Hartmann's Article, it was launched when Israeli Intel discovered that the Ayatollahs would be Convening to discuss the Negotiation offers... Treachery.... As Netanyahu recently said, Netanyahu has been waiting 40 years for this War...
"To me, being a gangster was to own the world... For as long as I can remember, I always wanted to be a gangster. To me, that was better than being President of the United States." .... Henry Hill ("Goodfellas")
"I’d rather be a don of the Mafia than president of the United States." ... Frank Sinatra
A lesson in cause and effect, for those who believe they are above the law: When a nation’s power operates as piracy with a flag—seizing tankers in international waters, enforcing its unilateral will as global law—it does not merely break treaties.
It breaks the civic covenant at home. It teaches its own people, in a language clearer than any sermon, that law is not principle, but the will of the strongest. That rules are for the weak. That sovereignty is a fiction to be ignored when inconvenient.
Now add the accelerant of a contracting economy: stagnant wages, impossible debt, a generation with no stake in the future.
The lesson learned abroad becomes the survival logic at home.
The result is the volatile cocktail of our generation: the vigilante, the politician defying courts, the citizen who no longer believes the system is legitimate—only that it is rigged.
You cannot break international law abroad and expect domestic law to be revered at home.
The seed of lawlessness, sown by imperial edict, is now sprouting in your own streets. This is not a political forecast. It is a spiritual law, as old as the prophets: “They sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.” (Hosea 8:7).
The aircraft carrier that seized the tanker is the same power that arms the siege of Gaza. The domestic unravelling is the inevitable reflux of that exported violence.
You are building a world on the principle that might makes right. Your own people are now learning the lesson. What will you build when they have learned it completely?
US VICE-President Nelson Rockefeller giving me the finger during the 1976 Republican National Convention in Kansas City. Senator Bob Dole and his friends got a great laugh hearing the same words that got Rockefeller so PO'd. Dole and the others wouldn't dare say the words to Rockefeller's face as I did to get this reaction
It’s very, very, VERY frightening that the one body of people that could realistically rein him in still refuses to do it, even a little. I don’t understand that. It’s confounding.
But the scenes from The Godfather movie are so reflective of Donald the Don.
Here’s how Google AI Overview responded to the question “has anybody filed suit that the iran war is unconstitutional?”... :
While widespread legal and political arguments assert that the 2026 U.S. military action against Iran is unconstitutional, no U.S. court has yet ruled on the matter, and historically, THE JUDICIARY HAS CONSISTENTLY DECLINED TO ADJUDICATE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF UNDECLARED WARS. [EMPHASIS added.]
Legal Status of the Conflict
Legal experts and some members of Congress argue the war is unconstitutional because it was initiated by the executive branch without a formal declaration or authorization from Congress, as required by Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.
Executive Action: The U.S. and Israel launched major attacks against Iran on February 28, 2026, which included the killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other leaders.
Congressional Reaction: Lawmakers quickly filed a bipartisan War Powers Resolution (sponsored by Reps. Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie) to compel the Trump administration to seek congressional permission for further activity.
Legislative Failure: In early March 2026, both the Senate (47-53) and the House of Representatives rejected resolutions that sought to rein in the military actions.
Challenges to Judicial Review
Despite the "illegal and unconstitutional" claims by various politicians and legal organizations, there are significant barriers to a successful lawsuit in U.S. courts:
Political Question Doctrine: Courts have historically used this doctrine to avoid ruling on the legality of conflicts, viewing them as matters for the executive and legislative branches rather than the judiciary.
Historical Precedent: In 1970, the Supreme Court declined to hear Massachusetts v. Laird, a case challenging the constitutionality of the undeclared Vietnam War.
Standing Limits: Litigants often lack "standing" unless they can prove a specific, personal injury beyond a general interest in constitutional adherence.
International Legal Challenges
Separate from domestic constitutional claims, the conflict faces challenges under international law:
UN Charter Violations: Experts argue the attacks violate the UN Charter, which prohibits the use of force except in self-defense against an "armed attack" or with Security Council authorization—neither of which apply to the current situation.
International Court of Justice (ICJ): While Iran has historically sued the U.S. in the ICJ over sanctions and treaty violations, experts generally see no clear path to the International Criminal Court for the assassination of foreign officials.
Yes, there is "lawfare" and equally-powerful anti-lawfare, and no genuine enforcement powers of agencies such as ICJ, and nations opting out when it suits them. International governance needs a rework (assuming we survive this mess).
It is Congress’s JOB to do that, and the mass of Americans do NOT support Trump, and Congress is supposed to investigate the president’s misbehavior, and all of his cabinet and the AG are supposed to act as guardrails, the way they did in his last administration….but he got rid of all that! …Americans DO want Congress to put a stop to what Trump is doing. But the Rs WON’T. If we CAN, we need to vote them out and get a Dem Congress to do it. That is what he is afraid of.
I am not only referring to this illegal war that Congress is “ legitimizing” after thefact. There’s tons of things to impeach him on. Literally LOADS.
It may be Congress's JOB to do that, Pat, but when was the last time any Congress paid any attention whatsoever to whether or not the American Peoples wanted America to be involved in another War?
And what "mass of Americans" do not support Trump? How MANY Americans want Trump to be stopped?
A fair way to ascertain that is to look at his approval rating. Here are the latest approval ratings released about Trump's administration:
Real Clear Polling's average of polls from Feb. 24 to March 18 shows a 45.3% approval and 55.3% disapproval rate.
The New York Times daily average of polls showed a 40% approval and 55% disapproval as of March 19.
The Economist shows that 39% of people are favorable of Trump and 56% are unfavorable of him, according to the latest update from March 19.
Rasmussen Reports poll from March 19 showed 44% approval and 55% disapproval of Trump.
A Morning Consult poll from March 13-16 showed 43% of voters approve of Trump’s performance, while 54% disapprove.
The American Research Group poll from Feb. 23 showed 36% approve and 62% disapprove.
A poll from Yahoo and YouGov conducted March 12-16 showed a 38% approval rating and a 59% disapproval rating.
A Quinnipiac University poll released March 9 showed 37% approval and 57% disapproval ratings.
An RMG Research poll conducted March 4-12 showed a 45% approval rating and a 53% disapproval rating.
A poll conducted by NPR, PBS and Marist over March 2-4 showed a 40% approval rating and 57% disapproval rating.
A Quantus Insights poll conducted March 2-3 reported a 45% approval and a 54% disapproval rating.
Are any of those showing approval more than disapproval? And SOME of the polls show disapproval of the WAR is greater than disapproval of him in general.
This country is NOT in favor of this war. Your data has not challenged that.
Trump won't/can't accept a "peace" that he can't present as a victory, and I don't believe the Iranians will offer him such a possibility. If he goes through with his ultimatum, and Iran goes through with its counter-threat (assuming it still has the capability to do so, which I believe it does) there is no way Trump will ever be able to present this as a "victory". So, if you were Trump (difficult to imagine!) what would you do?
If Trump understands this situation, which is perhaps doubtful, I could well see him deciding to nuke Iran, and explain it as saving the world from imminent disaster. Please tell me I am wrong.
That's an interesting question. Could Trump - or Netanyahu - launch a nuclear weapon without permission? Trump is temporary - same with Netanyahu. Yes, they have authorized terrible damage and harm. But would the permanent power - the real members of the Epstein class whose names are unknown - allow it as it would threaten all they have and control?
Well, first at least in the US, the President doesn't push a button. A Presidential nuclear release order is received by the National Military Command Center and requires authentication.. Without a heightened state of defense condition (DEFCON), it seems unlikely to me the military would just carry out a nuclear attack on anyone without many, many people being made aware and pushing back.
One problem is he is surrounded by sycophants, and who knows the procedure in the settler colony, and how much of their system is surviving the attacks. But we are close to the Atomic Clock reading past Midnight.
Spot on but also so uncomfortable because Trump seems so unaware of the danger of the moment. Impossible to envision him having the insight that he does not want his children/grandchildren to live in a post-nuclear world like JFK did at the time of the Bay of Pigs.
Her questionable use of exclamation points aside, Dr. Lee is putting into clinical terms what every observant, thinking person already knows: we're dealing with a psychopath whose actions reflect his illness, not any political considerations.
The obstacle is that as long as it's politically or monetarily profitable for the Rs to leave him in place, they will. At this point, they're looking at diminishing returns, so they'll have to make a decision pretty soon.
As for Dr. Lee's comments to the effect that other nations should step in, who can blame them for not wanting to get involved in our mess? Not to mention their natural reluctance to meddle in another country's internal affairs. Do I wish they would, anyway? Certainly. But I'm not holding my breath.
the small island of land called ISRAEL has maybe 200 nuclear bombs. If Iran is threated with such weaponry it would be in their best interests at this srtage of the game to wipe as many of them out as possible. Not sure how many of the jewish dysporia in Isreal will stay there during or after this war is over. But suspect a lot of them will return to their counrties of origin realizing the Greater Israel dream has turned into a nightmare. Go home jewish dysporia. Isreal is a hell hole.
Bill would like you to think that American war was not gangsterism under Ike...when every war or coup America engaged in since 1945 was. Bill quotes Ike often-it's not hard to imagine a poster of Ike in Bill's office as he mentally masturbates to Ike's eloquent words about militarism when other men had been fighting and writing against the industrial military complex long before Ike speech-protesting it while Ike was part of building it. American' only need to think of Ike today as the president who said yes to the 1953 coup that removed a democratically elected government in Iran and installed the dictatorial Shaw-the ayatollahs ONLY followed the fact that Eisenhower fucked Iran for good. Truman, when asked for such a coup said NO. American's need Canadians to teach them their history!
i’ve said this here on BV before, and it merits re-stating: Eisenhower may have talked a good game about a “Cross of Iron” and a “Military Industrial Complex,” but what did he actually DO while President to actually oppose them? Anything?
The most obscene example of that was how ~ after supporting the French from the end of WW II up to the bloody end at Dien Bien Phu in 1954 ~ he immediately pledged full support to Diem, cancelled the promised Elections, and cranked up the Advice and Assistance business to Saigon. And the rest, as they say, is history.
Why did he do this? i believe that Eisenhower signed on to a War in Southeast Asia NOT because of pressure to demonstrate his Anti-Communist credentials in the Age of McCarthyism.
My bet is that that ‘military industrial complex” ~ that he would so elegantly and eloquently warn us about as he bid Farewell ~ that MIC determined and decided that it needed and wanted another War, somewhere and against somebody, what with Korea being over, and all.
Here's what we should have learned: Ike, a former five-star general with intimate knowledge of the MIC, could contain its growth, but that was all he either could do or did do. Once he was gone, JKF and LBJ were mastered by the MIC and other forces.
We like to think presidents are all-powerful, but we also know better than that. Ike warned us that only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry that was willing to act offered us any hope of constraining the MIC. The MIC's response was to ensure Americans were neither alert nor knowledgeable; and our ability to act is now that which is constrained, even as the power of government continues to grow.
Just as Ike warned -- an ever more imposing and intrusive MIC would lead to the collapse of participatory democracy and personal liberties in America. You can argue Ike could have done more to resist this as president, but I don't think his warning was wrong.
My guess is that Eisenhower did what he felt he could realistically do and get away with without being replaced.
And far from being wrong, his Warning about the MIC[C] is easily the most important thing he ever did; far, far beyond leading the Allies to victory in World War II in Europe.
My bigger point was-Bill would like you to think that American war was not gangsterism under Ike AND ALL American Presidents since. When every war or coup America started or furthered since 1945 was grewsome and ghoulish without any decency or glory. When OTHER MEN had been fighting and writing against the industrial military complex LONG before Ike’s speeches-protesting it while Ike was part of building it. Americans ONLY need to think of Ike today as the president who said yes to the 1953 coup that removed a democratically elected government in Iran and installed the dictatorial Shaw-the ayatollahs ONLY followed the fact that Eisenhower fucked Iran for good. American sanctions continued the starvation- impoverishment-rape of Iran for one reason only- Iran did not want to be a whore to American corporatism-like the Gulf states with American bases are- that deserve to be attacked by Iran.
I have come to praise certain words and certain accomplishments of Ike, not to praise everything he ever said or did.
The overthrow of Mosaddegh in 1953 and his replacement by the Shah was both crime and mistake. Ike made many mistakes--supporting that coup was one of his biggest.
You quote Ike frequently in your recent columns without the CONTEXT of OTHER MEN had been fighting and writing against the industrial military complex LONG before Ike’s speeches-protesting it while Ike was part of building it. Take your poster of Ike down and put up one of Erich Fromm's quotes.
Oh, for goodness' sake. I have often quoted Smedley Butler, who predates Ike by 25+ years, and I'm well aware of Randolph Bourne and his warning that war is the health of the state. I'm also fond of quoting James Madison and his prescient warning of war as an insidious threat to democracy.
I'm sorry but I'm not going to cite these and OTHER MEN every time I mention Ike's name. You are well aware of them--you don't need me to keep reminding you.
Here is your new poster Bill-He does go deeper than Ike not Fromm Depth not Einstein depth on the evils of having a military-but nevertheless experience-insight depth indeed:
Smedly Butler:“War is just a racket.” “A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people… It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.” “I spent 33 years and four months in active military service… I spent most of my time being a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.” “I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in… I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street.” “I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916.” “To hell with war!” “Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.” “There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.” “Our boys will be marching off to war for the benefit of a few who profit from it.”
He's loaded with appropriate quotes. I will paraphrase. In a sick society the sickest amongst us are the most well-adjusted to the sickness. In a sick organization the sickest climb the ranks. Just as love for one individual which excludes the love for others is not love, love for one's country which is not part of one's love for humanity is not love, but idolatrous worship. Nowhere else is the Peter Principal on more full display than in the American Military-Opps that one was me. Martin Luther King studied Fromm as he studied Gandhi.
It's an interesting point - Sonny Corleone style for Trump. He certainly acts that way, but is it real, or is it an act just like James Caan's portrayal? The other thing I'd note is that Sonny was a violent impulsive man, but he wasn't just talk (like when he beat up his brother in law) versus Trump, who manifests behaviors of a physical coward.
I certainly believe Trump is a malignant narcissist who listens only to his own genius mind. But those who know him personally have always said what we see isn't what he's like in private. Maybe he cultivates his image with his various outbursts and rants (that probably reflect that malignant narcissism), but he has a firm vision of what he wants to do.
UK Ambassador Craig Murray said in a recent article that Netanyahu let slip part of the end game - an oil pipeline from Iran west to Israel to ship oil through the Mediterranean. I could see the promise of the "Donald J Trump Oil Terminal" appealing to him.
But at the end of the day - maybe it doesn't matter. The supposed system of checks and balances in government has failed. Congress is beyond useless. All the billions spent on intelligence and defense have shown only a massive wealth transfer upward with careerism the primary motivation for those in positions of power.
To return to the Godfather, I fear we're going to wind up as did the heads of the 'Five Families'.
Narcissists are NOTORIOUSLY charming in person … they need the people they are with to reflect back an image of them as “wonderful” and “beloved.” That is what they are looking for. {That’s what Trump’s cabinet is giving him, with all the overarching praise they lavish on him at meetings.} They are after the image in the river of themselves as the Beautiful Beloved One. {Read the myth of Narcissus — it’s all about the reflection. And then about revenge, if anybody makes them look bad. That is the WORST sin of all, making a Narcissist look bad. Think about Don’s history …}
Then Trump is committing the WORST sin against himself.
He doesn't need much help making him look bad.
I do not find him the least bit charming. Notorious, yes; charming, no.
Me, either, but people were saying he is different “in person,” The typical narcissist is overtly “ charming,” covertly scheming, relentlessly vengeful, untrustworthy, and sociopathic. Like Trump.
I can testify to the part about narcissistic sociopaths being charming in person. I dated one for a few months, until I realized what he was. When I met him, I thought he was the most engaging, personable guy I'd ever encountered. And he was brilliant; knew at least a little bit about everything and could converse intelligently. He could draw, cook up a storm, write song lyrics, and had half a dozen other skills. But he was also a bully, petty thief, borderline alcoholic, and master liar/manipulator. And lord help you if you crossed him! He could get physically violent [with women] in the blink of an eye. Even though I broke up with him, we still traveled in the same circles for awhile, and I'd see him in bars, completely hoodwinking women and men alike, to get what he wanted. He could actually convince smart people who'd known what he was but hadn't seen him in awhile that he'd changed his ways.
He was totally unlike Rump in that he was truly intelligent, had a good sense of humor, and was very physically attractive, with no hint of what was underneath. With Rump, any halfway intelligent person could see right through him, and his superior smirk always gave him away and ruined his looks, even when he was young.
Thanks for sharing your hard-earned experience here, Denise.
It's easy to forget there are people like this, especially when they come across initially as charming and helpful.
And like the current Occupant, they leave a trail of wreckage behind them.
Narcissists, by virtue of needing lots of praise, are often actually quite successful, at least from time to time. {I, too, have sadly known two in close quarters.} They are so amazingly thin skinned and vengeful, though. And, they are made, not born. That’s the sad part. That such charm and skill is pushed in that direction in childhood. Like The Donald by his father. Sad.
Of course, I cannot claim to know what he's like "in person." (Thank God).
Me, either! Yes, most gratefully! Just responding to what’s being reported.
Hello TomR... Gangsterism... ICE in Airports... Why was this Iran War launched during Negotiations?... Why The Haste?... Sounds Treacherous... I believe that Rep. Robert Garcia stated, that an Investigation into Jared Kurshner's Activities should be launched... Thom Hartmann had an interesting Article about this : Thom Hartman: Did Jared Kurshner Trigger The US Iran War?: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/jared-kushner-has-some-explaining-to-do-opinion ... Interesting, meanwhile Jared Kurshner continues to Shakedown the Middle-Eastern Countries for $$$... Like DJT, Shameless...
I've long been suspicious about Kushner, including his role in the Trump family; he got his wife to convert to Judaism and there are rumors Trump himself converted late in his first term. He certainly is involved in Chabad Lubavitch and that may be where he has the influence with Trump. And he's likely made a bunch of deals through all these negotations that bring him millions to billions.
Hello TomR... The Kurshners are Personal Friends with Netanyahu.... Netanyahu has been known to stay at Charles, Jared's Dad, residence in NYC... Jared Kurshner is in the Epstein Files... Jeffrey's Web is Thick & Wide...
It was launched in haste because Israel couldn't take the chance that differences would be settled peaceably. Much better for them if the US went to war. Not better for us of course but better for them.
Thank You Alex... Per Hartmann's Article, it was launched when Israeli Intel discovered that the Ayatollahs would be Convening to discuss the Negotiation offers... Treachery.... As Netanyahu recently said, Netanyahu has been waiting 40 years for this War...
"To me, being a gangster was to own the world... For as long as I can remember, I always wanted to be a gangster. To me, that was better than being President of the United States." .... Henry Hill ("Goodfellas")
"I’d rather be a don of the Mafia than president of the United States." ... Frank Sinatra
Of all the People on Earth who liked Canadian PM Carney's Davos speech January 20, most probably I liked it most!
Having the platform he magnified this tweet someone in his Office saw December 10, 2025.
@Pontifex @realDonaldTrump @netanyahu @_FriedrichMerz @MarkJCarney
A lesson in cause and effect, for those who believe they are above the law: When a nation’s power operates as piracy with a flag—seizing tankers in international waters, enforcing its unilateral will as global law—it does not merely break treaties.
It breaks the civic covenant at home. It teaches its own people, in a language clearer than any sermon, that law is not principle, but the will of the strongest. That rules are for the weak. That sovereignty is a fiction to be ignored when inconvenient.
Now add the accelerant of a contracting economy: stagnant wages, impossible debt, a generation with no stake in the future.
The lesson learned abroad becomes the survival logic at home.
The result is the volatile cocktail of our generation: the vigilante, the politician defying courts, the citizen who no longer believes the system is legitimate—only that it is rigged.
You cannot break international law abroad and expect domestic law to be revered at home.
The seed of lawlessness, sown by imperial edict, is now sprouting in your own streets. This is not a political forecast. It is a spiritual law, as old as the prophets: “They sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.” (Hosea 8:7).
The aircraft carrier that seized the tanker is the same power that arms the siege of Gaza. The domestic unravelling is the inevitable reflux of that exported violence.
You are building a world on the principle that might makes right. Your own people are now learning the lesson. What will you build when they have learned it completely?
https://rayjc.com/2026/01/13/abyss-and-the-rogue/
US VICE-President Nelson Rockefeller giving me the finger during the 1976 Republican National Convention in Kansas City. Senator Bob Dole and his friends got a great laugh hearing the same words that got Rockefeller so PO'd. Dole and the others wouldn't dare say the words to Rockefeller's face as I did to get this reaction
The behavior is indeed remarkably similar! Tough talking with nothin' to back it up, in the case of the US.
It’s very, very, VERY frightening that the one body of people that could realistically rein him in still refuses to do it, even a little. I don’t understand that. It’s confounding.
But the scenes from The Godfather movie are so reflective of Donald the Don.
Which one body of people could realistically reign Trump in and are refusing to do it. Pat?
Congress?
Or the Supine Court? Or better yet, the ICJ for both isra3l and USA, if only they had a spine.
Even when the Supremes reject Trump, he ignores them, because they need the Attirney General to enforce their edicts, and Trump’s AG is his toady.
Here’s how Google AI Overview responded to the question “has anybody filed suit that the iran war is unconstitutional?”... :
While widespread legal and political arguments assert that the 2026 U.S. military action against Iran is unconstitutional, no U.S. court has yet ruled on the matter, and historically, THE JUDICIARY HAS CONSISTENTLY DECLINED TO ADJUDICATE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF UNDECLARED WARS. [EMPHASIS added.]
Legal Status of the Conflict
Legal experts and some members of Congress argue the war is unconstitutional because it was initiated by the executive branch without a formal declaration or authorization from Congress, as required by Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.
Executive Action: The U.S. and Israel launched major attacks against Iran on February 28, 2026, which included the killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other leaders.
Congressional Reaction: Lawmakers quickly filed a bipartisan War Powers Resolution (sponsored by Reps. Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie) to compel the Trump administration to seek congressional permission for further activity.
Legislative Failure: In early March 2026, both the Senate (47-53) and the House of Representatives rejected resolutions that sought to rein in the military actions.
Challenges to Judicial Review
Despite the "illegal and unconstitutional" claims by various politicians and legal organizations, there are significant barriers to a successful lawsuit in U.S. courts:
Political Question Doctrine: Courts have historically used this doctrine to avoid ruling on the legality of conflicts, viewing them as matters for the executive and legislative branches rather than the judiciary.
Historical Precedent: In 1970, the Supreme Court declined to hear Massachusetts v. Laird, a case challenging the constitutionality of the undeclared Vietnam War.
Standing Limits: Litigants often lack "standing" unless they can prove a specific, personal injury beyond a general interest in constitutional adherence.
International Legal Challenges
Separate from domestic constitutional claims, the conflict faces challenges under international law:
UN Charter Violations: Experts argue the attacks violate the UN Charter, which prohibits the use of force except in self-defense against an "armed attack" or with Security Council authorization—neither of which apply to the current situation.
International Court of Justice (ICJ): While Iran has historically sued the U.S. in the ICJ over sanctions and treaty violations, experts generally see no clear path to the International Criminal Court for the assassination of foreign officials.
Source: https://www.google.com/search?q=has+anybody+filed+suit+that+the+iran+war+is+unconstitutional%3F&num=10&sca_esv=e5620ef2793957f5&rlz=1C1CHZN_enUS1091US1091&sxsrf=ANbL-n4kQIiwTG9pCElLqes2kAp_ZjYPdA:1774201642791&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi-u7aViLSTAxUwOjQIHSMNApQQ0pQJegQIAhAG&biw=1242&bih=552&dpr=1.1 .
Yes, there is "lawfare" and equally-powerful anti-lawfare, and no genuine enforcement powers of agencies such as ICJ, and nations opting out when it suits them. International governance needs a rework (assuming we survive this mess).
Yes.
The only way for that to happen, Pat, is for the American Peoples to DEMAND of Congress that that happen.
And what is the likelihood or even possibility of that happening?
It is Congress’s JOB to do that, and the mass of Americans do NOT support Trump, and Congress is supposed to investigate the president’s misbehavior, and all of his cabinet and the AG are supposed to act as guardrails, the way they did in his last administration….but he got rid of all that! …Americans DO want Congress to put a stop to what Trump is doing. But the Rs WON’T. If we CAN, we need to vote them out and get a Dem Congress to do it. That is what he is afraid of.
I am not only referring to this illegal war that Congress is “ legitimizing” after thefact. There’s tons of things to impeach him on. Literally LOADS.
It may be Congress's JOB to do that, Pat, but when was the last time any Congress paid any attention whatsoever to whether or not the American Peoples wanted America to be involved in another War?
And what "mass of Americans" do not support Trump? How MANY Americans want Trump to be stopped?
A fair way to ascertain that is to look at his approval rating. Here are the latest approval ratings released about Trump's administration:
Real Clear Polling's average of polls from Feb. 24 to March 18 shows a 45.3% approval and 55.3% disapproval rate.
The New York Times daily average of polls showed a 40% approval and 55% disapproval as of March 19.
The Economist shows that 39% of people are favorable of Trump and 56% are unfavorable of him, according to the latest update from March 19.
Rasmussen Reports poll from March 19 showed 44% approval and 55% disapproval of Trump.
A Morning Consult poll from March 13-16 showed 43% of voters approve of Trump’s performance, while 54% disapprove.
The American Research Group poll from Feb. 23 showed 36% approve and 62% disapprove.
A poll from Yahoo and YouGov conducted March 12-16 showed a 38% approval rating and a 59% disapproval rating.
A Quinnipiac University poll released March 9 showed 37% approval and 57% disapproval ratings.
An RMG Research poll conducted March 4-12 showed a 45% approval rating and a 53% disapproval rating.
A poll conducted by NPR, PBS and Marist over March 2-4 showed a 40% approval rating and 57% disapproval rating.
A Quantus Insights poll conducted March 2-3 reported a 45% approval and a 54% disapproval rating.
Source: https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2026/03/21/donald-trump-approval-rating/89199407007/ .
Are any of those showing approval more than disapproval? And SOME of the polls show disapproval of the WAR is greater than disapproval of him in general.
This country is NOT in favor of this war. Your data has not challenged that.
Trump won't/can't accept a "peace" that he can't present as a victory, and I don't believe the Iranians will offer him such a possibility. If he goes through with his ultimatum, and Iran goes through with its counter-threat (assuming it still has the capability to do so, which I believe it does) there is no way Trump will ever be able to present this as a "victory". So, if you were Trump (difficult to imagine!) what would you do?
If Trump understands this situation, which is perhaps doubtful, I could well see him deciding to nuke Iran, and explain it as saving the world from imminent disaster. Please tell me I am wrong.
That's an interesting question. Could Trump - or Netanyahu - launch a nuclear weapon without permission? Trump is temporary - same with Netanyahu. Yes, they have authorized terrible damage and harm. But would the permanent power - the real members of the Epstein class whose names are unknown - allow it as it would threaten all they have and control?
They might not be asked, one of those two thugs could just push the button. Obviously, already, they don't give a sh1t about the rest of the world.
Well, first at least in the US, the President doesn't push a button. A Presidential nuclear release order is received by the National Military Command Center and requires authentication.. Without a heightened state of defense condition (DEFCON), it seems unlikely to me the military would just carry out a nuclear attack on anyone without many, many people being made aware and pushing back.
One problem is he is surrounded by sycophants, and who knows the procedure in the settler colony, and how much of their system is surviving the attacks. But we are close to the Atomic Clock reading past Midnight.
Spot on but also so uncomfortable because Trump seems so unaware of the danger of the moment. Impossible to envision him having the insight that he does not want his children/grandchildren to live in a post-nuclear world like JFK did at the time of the Bay of Pigs.
For the sake of argument, say he isn't aware. But if he were aware, would he care?
I really think that Bandy X. Lee has the best insight on our current state of events and I would refer you to her most current post. I think Trump lacks capacity to see the situation realistically. I would love to know Lee's source on her statement that John Kelly used the resource she helped create in Trump 1 times. https://bandyxlee.substack.com/p/we-need-to-recognize-that-the-problem/comments?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=post_viewer
Her questionable use of exclamation points aside, Dr. Lee is putting into clinical terms what every observant, thinking person already knows: we're dealing with a psychopath whose actions reflect his illness, not any political considerations.
The obstacle is that as long as it's politically or monetarily profitable for the Rs to leave him in place, they will. At this point, they're looking at diminishing returns, so they'll have to make a decision pretty soon.
As for Dr. Lee's comments to the effect that other nations should step in, who can blame them for not wanting to get involved in our mess? Not to mention their natural reluctance to meddle in another country's internal affairs. Do I wish they would, anyway? Certainly. But I'm not holding my breath.
Well in my dreams, the US Congress steps up. But I'm not holding my breath on it.
Good that you're not.
the small island of land called ISRAEL has maybe 200 nuclear bombs. If Iran is threated with such weaponry it would be in their best interests at this srtage of the game to wipe as many of them out as possible. Not sure how many of the jewish dysporia in Isreal will stay there during or after this war is over. But suspect a lot of them will return to their counrties of origin realizing the Greater Israel dream has turned into a nightmare. Go home jewish dysporia. Isreal is a hell hole.
Churchill's warning of "a new Dark Age" in his "Battle of Britain" speech seems both literally and figuratively not far off.
Excellent point, X K.
Bill would like you to think that American war was not gangsterism under Ike...when every war or coup America engaged in since 1945 was. Bill quotes Ike often-it's not hard to imagine a poster of Ike in Bill's office as he mentally masturbates to Ike's eloquent words about militarism when other men had been fighting and writing against the industrial military complex long before Ike speech-protesting it while Ike was part of building it. American' only need to think of Ike today as the president who said yes to the 1953 coup that removed a democratically elected government in Iran and installed the dictatorial Shaw-the ayatollahs ONLY followed the fact that Eisenhower fucked Iran for good. Truman, when asked for such a coup said NO. American's need Canadians to teach them their history!
Here's an article I wrote about why I still like Ike. From 2012:
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dwight-eisenhower-memorial_b_1270232
Saying I like Ike doesn't mean I idolize him or salute everything he ever did or said.
i’ve said this here on BV before, and it merits re-stating: Eisenhower may have talked a good game about a “Cross of Iron” and a “Military Industrial Complex,” but what did he actually DO while President to actually oppose them? Anything?
The most obscene example of that was how ~ after supporting the French from the end of WW II up to the bloody end at Dien Bien Phu in 1954 ~ he immediately pledged full support to Diem, cancelled the promised Elections, and cranked up the Advice and Assistance business to Saigon. And the rest, as they say, is history.
Why did he do this? i believe that Eisenhower signed on to a War in Southeast Asia NOT because of pressure to demonstrate his Anti-Communist credentials in the Age of McCarthyism.
My bet is that that ‘military industrial complex” ~ that he would so elegantly and eloquently warn us about as he bid Farewell ~ that MIC determined and decided that it needed and wanted another War, somewhere and against somebody, what with Korea being over, and all.
I have answered this question before.
Here's what we should have learned: Ike, a former five-star general with intimate knowledge of the MIC, could contain its growth, but that was all he either could do or did do. Once he was gone, JKF and LBJ were mastered by the MIC and other forces.
We like to think presidents are all-powerful, but we also know better than that. Ike warned us that only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry that was willing to act offered us any hope of constraining the MIC. The MIC's response was to ensure Americans were neither alert nor knowledgeable; and our ability to act is now that which is constrained, even as the power of government continues to grow.
Just as Ike warned -- an ever more imposing and intrusive MIC would lead to the collapse of participatory democracy and personal liberties in America. You can argue Ike could have done more to resist this as president, but I don't think his warning was wrong.
My guess is that Eisenhower did what he felt he could realistically do and get away with without being replaced.
And far from being wrong, his Warning about the MIC[C] is easily the most important thing he ever did; far, far beyond leading the Allies to victory in World War II in Europe.
My bigger point was-Bill would like you to think that American war was not gangsterism under Ike AND ALL American Presidents since. When every war or coup America started or furthered since 1945 was grewsome and ghoulish without any decency or glory. When OTHER MEN had been fighting and writing against the industrial military complex LONG before Ike’s speeches-protesting it while Ike was part of building it. Americans ONLY need to think of Ike today as the president who said yes to the 1953 coup that removed a democratically elected government in Iran and installed the dictatorial Shaw-the ayatollahs ONLY followed the fact that Eisenhower fucked Iran for good. American sanctions continued the starvation- impoverishment-rape of Iran for one reason only- Iran did not want to be a whore to American corporatism-like the Gulf states with American bases are- that deserve to be attacked by Iran.
I have come to praise certain words and certain accomplishments of Ike, not to praise everything he ever said or did.
The overthrow of Mosaddegh in 1953 and his replacement by the Shah was both crime and mistake. Ike made many mistakes--supporting that coup was one of his biggest.
And don't forget the Coup in Guatemala in 1954.
Indeed, But American war on Iran is the topic of the day!
Your defense mechanisms that you earlier bragged about to me prevent truth from coming in- not part of mental health said Freud and Jung.
You quote Ike frequently in your recent columns without the CONTEXT of OTHER MEN had been fighting and writing against the industrial military complex LONG before Ike’s speeches-protesting it while Ike was part of building it. Take your poster of Ike down and put up one of Erich Fromm's quotes.
Oh, for goodness' sake. I have often quoted Smedley Butler, who predates Ike by 25+ years, and I'm well aware of Randolph Bourne and his warning that war is the health of the state. I'm also fond of quoting James Madison and his prescient warning of war as an insidious threat to democracy.
I'm sorry but I'm not going to cite these and OTHER MEN every time I mention Ike's name. You are well aware of them--you don't need me to keep reminding you.
Here is your new poster Bill-He does go deeper than Ike not Fromm Depth not Einstein depth on the evils of having a military-but nevertheless experience-insight depth indeed:
Smedly Butler:“War is just a racket.” “A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people… It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.” “I spent 33 years and four months in active military service… I spent most of my time being a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.” “I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in… I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street.” “I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916.” “To hell with war!” “Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.” “There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.” “Our boys will be marching off to war for the benefit of a few who profit from it.”
By citing them occasionally when you cite Ike so often you are glorifying Ike.
By not citing them occasionally when you cite Ike often you are glorifying Ike.
Thank You, Bill. i was going to ask Mr Brown which anti-MIC champions before Ike he was referring to.
i'm curious, Glenn: Which of Eric Fromm's quotes would You recommend Bill replace his Ike poster with?
He's loaded with appropriate quotes. I will paraphrase. In a sick society the sickest amongst us are the most well-adjusted to the sickness. In a sick organization the sickest climb the ranks. Just as love for one individual which excludes the love for others is not love, love for one's country which is not part of one's love for humanity is not love, but idolatrous worship. Nowhere else is the Peter Principal on more full display than in the American Military-Opps that one was me. Martin Luther King studied Fromm as he studied Gandhi.
Knowing war himself, Eisenhower had some great ideas for how peace could be established, see his five points for international relations here: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-chance-for-peace-delivered-before-the-american-society-newspaper-editors - however, he was gradually captured by the MIC, and yes, Russophobia actually goes back about 200 years and amplified by the growing menace of U.S. imperialism. Every step in arms buildup in the Cold War was initiated by USA.