Tumgik
#michael anton
Text
Surveying the reactions of top Republicans after Donald Trump’s indictment on charges of mishandling classified information, you’d think the country was in the midst of a coup.
“It is unconscionable for a President to indict the leading candidate opposing him,” House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy tweeted. “The weaponization of federal law enforcement represents a mortal threat to a free society,” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis claimed. “There is no limit to what these people will do to protect their power & destroy those who threaten it, even if it means ripping our country apart,” Sen. Marco Rubio declared.
These are extraordinary claims — and all made on Thursday night before the indictment or the evidence behind it was made public. On Friday morning, we learned thanks to CNN that Trump is literally on tape in 2021 discussing having documents in his possession that he knew were still classified. “As president, I could have declassified, but now I can’t,” he reportedly said.
The tape may or may not prove dispositive in a court of law; there’s certainly room for good-faith disagreement on the strength of the case against Trump. But the tape is at least very strong evidence that these charges are not some kind of Biden-mandated witch hunt but instead based on very serious allegations of wrongdoing.
Yet top Republicans — including Trump’s leading rival for the 2024 election — have shown no signs of changing their tune, and instead are lining up behind Trump’s conspiracy theory that special counsel Jack Smith is leading Joe Biden’s personal Stasi.
This paranoid reaction to Trump’s indictment is not a surprise. Over the past several years, the political right has been captured by a worldview that sees the entirety of mainstream society arranged against it. According to this thinking, America’s “woke” power elite, including ostensibly neutral institutions of governance like the Justice Department, is determined to stamp out the conservative way of life. You are either with us or against us — and attempting to send Trump to jail, whatever the reason, puts you on the wrong side.
Such once-fringe thinking now dominates the Republican Party at the very highest levels. Whether people like McCarthy and DeSantis actually believe it is immaterial: The fact that they feel the need to say such wild things indicates just how central anti-institutional paranoia has become in Republican politics.
The dangers of this going forward, as Trump faces trial and America faces an election where he is the GOP’s most likely presidential candidate, should not be underestimated. A democracy whose basic institutional functions come under attack is a democracy in mortal peril.
THE PARANOID STYLE IN REPUBLICAN POLITICS
The entire Trump phenomenon was, from the very beginning, about conservative fear of losing America. Study after study after study has found that Trump voters in the GOP primary and electorate are motivated by a concern that the United States is becoming literally unrecognizable: populated by people who look different and think differently than they do.
The fears of the base were reflected in the language of the elite. In 2016, the most famous intellectual case for Trump in 2016 was Michael Anton’s “Flight 93” essay — which argued that these changes were transforming the government in ways that handed more and more control over American government to the left. Anton spoke of a “bipartisan junta” that controlled the centers of power and wielded it against conservative institutions, a kind of soft coup against ordinary Americans backstopped by demographic change.
“Our side has been losing consistently since 1988,” Anton wrote. “The ceaseless importation of Third World foreigners with no tradition of, taste for, or experience in liberty means that the electorate grows more left, more Democratic, less Republican, less republican, and less traditionally American with every cycle.”
Anton’s essay, seen as fringe at the time, captured an essential linkage of the Trump era: between the traditional conservative sense of alienation from mainstream American culture and growing hostility to its governing institutions. The general conservative sense that they were losing America demographically and spiritually could easily be translated into a case that the government itself was hostile to their interests.
So when Trump began facing legal trouble during his presidency, at first over his campaign’s ties to Russia, he ran a version of the Anton playbook (Anton was, at the time, serving in Trump’s White House). He argued, in now-familiar but then-novel terms, that the investigation was a “deep state” plot against Trump — that special counsel Robert Mueller and his investigators were Democrats who sought only to destroy his presidency.
Faced with this challenge, the rest of the Republican Party had a choice: They could defend the underlying integrity of the Justice Department, even while remaining skeptical of the merits of this specific investigation, or fully accede to the Trumpist “witch hunt” narrative. We know which one they chose, and we know why they chose it: Trump had built such a powerful following on the basis of his paranoid critique of America that any Republican who challenged it risked career suicide.
The Russia investigation set a pattern that would endure for the entire Trump presidency. Again and again, when faced with credible allegations of wrongdoing, Republicans indulged Trump’s wildest fantasies out of either fear or genuine belief. The Anton worldview, once the province of cranks, evolved into the official narrative of the Republican Party — an evolution cemented when Trump attempted to overthrow the 2020 election and the party elite permitted him to do so.
In the Biden years, with Republicans out of power, the narrative of an entire government arranged against them only became more credible in the eyes of the base. Surveys consistently showed that a large majority of Republicans believed his claims of voter fraud; political scientists have shown that this belief is likely genuine and that Republican politicians who parrot Trump’s lies improve their standings in the eyes of the base.
The result is a party that has, in the past several years, grown increasingly radicalized against the core institutions of America. They believe that everything in America is turning against them: not just the traditional enemies like the media and Hollywood, but also the military, big business, and even the US Olympic team. If you express agreement with the left on anything from LGBTQ issues to Trump’s fitness for office, you are an enemy of the right.
The dangers of this shift cannot be overestimated. Republicans are already vowing to “bring accountability to the DOJ” (DeSantis) and “hold this brazen weaponization of power accountable” (McCarthy). If Republicans do win the White House in 2024, the chances of an attempt to turn the Justice Department into an actually political institution are very high. If Trump is their candidate, it’s basically a certainty.
And if they lose — well, January 6 showed us what could happen when Republicans believe they’ve lost illegitimately. And we’re already seeing paranoia about this indictment bleed over into paranoia about the upcoming election.
“Biden is attacking his most likely 2024 opponent. He’s using the justice system to preemptively steal the 2024 election. This is what’s happening, plain and simple,” writes Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH).
Democracy depends on both sides respecting the rules of the game. But one side has decided, without any real evidence, that the rules are rigged against them — and have demonstrated a willingness to disregard them as a result.
100 notes · View notes
Text
Katherine Stewart at TNR (08.10.2023):
Earlier this year, nearly 1,000 supporters of “National Conservatism” gathered at the semicircular auditorium of the Emmanuel Centre, an elegant London meeting hall a couple of blocks south of Westminster Abbey, to hear from a range of scholars, commentators, politicians, and public servants. NatCon conferences, as they are often called, have been held in Italy, Belgium, and Florida and are broadly associated with what is increasingly called the “New Right.” In London, speakers denounced “woke politics,” blamed immigration for the rising cost of housing, and said modern ills could be solved with more religion and more (nonimmigrant) babies. The break room was lined with booths from organizations such as the Viktor Orbán–affiliated Danube Institute, the U.K.-based conservative think tank the Bow Group, the Heritage Foundation, and the legal powerhouse Alliance Defending Freedom, which is headquartered in Arizona but has expanded to include offices in nearly a half-dozen European cities. When I attended NatCon London in May, I heard a number of American accents in the crowd, and I was not surprised to see Michael Anton, a former national security official in the Trump administration and a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute, a right-wing think tank, on the lineup. These days, Anton and other key representatives of the Claremont Institute seem to be everywhere: onstage at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC); at the epicenter of Ron DeSantis’s “war on woke”; and on speed-dial with GOP allies including Josh Hawley, J.D. Vance, and Donald Trump.
Most of us are familiar with the theocrats of the religious right and the anti-government extremists, groups that overlap a bit but remain distinct. The Claremont Institute folks aren’t quite either of those things, and yet they’re both and more. In embodying a kind of nihilistic yearning to destroy modernity, they have become an indispensable part of right-wing America’s evolution toward authoritarianism. Extremism of the right-wing variety has always figured on the sidelines of American culture, and it has enjoyed a renaissance with the rise of social media. But Claremont represents something new in modern American politics: a group of people, not internet conspiracy freaks but credentialed and influential leaders, who are openly contemptuous of democracy. And they stand a reasonable chance of being seated at the highest levels of government—at the right hand of a President Trump or a President DeSantis, for example.
[...]
Founded in 1979 in the city of Claremont, California (but not associated in an official way with any of the five colleges there), the Claremont Institute provided enthusiastic support for Donald Trump in 2016. Individuals associated with Claremont now fund and help run the National Conservativism gatherings; Claremont Institute chairman and funder Thomas D. Klingenstein also funds the Edmund Burke Foundation, which has held those National Conservatism conferences across the globe. Claremont is deeply involved in DeSantis’s effort to remake Florida’s state universities in the model of Hillsdale College—a private, right-wing, conservative Christian academy in Michigan whose president, Larry Arnn, happens to be one of the institute’s founders and former presidents. Claremont honored DeSantis at an annual gala with its 2021 “Statesmanship Award,” and the governor returned the favor by organizing a discussion with a “brain trust” that included figures associated with the Claremont Institute. If either Trump or DeSantis becomes president in 2024, Claremont and its associates are likely to be integral to the “brain trust” of the new administration. Indeed, some of them are certain to become appointees in the administrative state that they wish (or so they say) to destroy.
The Claremont Institute in the Trump era has become a clearinghouse for far-right and fascistic ideas.  
10 notes · View notes
orlaite · 5 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
THE RED SHOES (1948) | dir. Michael Powell & Emeric Pressburger
2K notes · View notes
arcticdementor · 2 years
Link
“The people who really run the United States of America have made it clear that they can’t, and won’t, if they can help it, allow Donald Trump to be president again,” wrote Michael Anton in Compact Magazine on July 28. “You don’t have to imagine. They tell you every day.”
Less than two weeks later, former President Donald Trump released a statement saying that Mar-a-Lago, the Florida club that functions as his primary residence, was “currently under siege, raided, and occupied by a large group of FBI agents."
CBS News first reported that the raid had nothing to do with January 6, as some speculated, but rather a warrant to search the premises as part of an investigation into documents allegedly mishandled by the former president that may have included confidential information. Quickly thereafter, the New York Times and Politico were able to confirm the same: that the root cause of the raid was a supposed violation of the Presidential Records Act, which requires all presidential documents and records pertaining to his duties to be handed over to the National Archives.
Previously, the National Archives claimed that Trump delayed returning 15 boxes of requested records that the former president took with him from the White House and potentially included classified information. The National Archives also claimed that Trump only cooperated under threat of more substantial action. Trump reportedly returned the 15 boxes in January, which contained mementos, gifts, letters, and documents subject to the Presidential Records Act—including documents that the National Archives claimed contained “classified national security information.”
Dr. John Eastman, the founding director of The Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, told The American Conservative via email that there is no lawful justification for this unprecedented raid on a former president's residence. "What I suspect is going on is a fishing expedition," Eastman claimed. "They can’t just get a warrant for all his records—that would be an unconstitutional 'general warrant' that the Fourth Amendment was specifically written to prohibit. But using the National Archives Act as a pretext, they now can rummage through and see what they can find."
"Hopefully the courts will soon put a stop to this egregiously unconstitutional conduct," Eastman said.
While violations of the Presidential Records Act do not carry their own harsh penalties, other criminal statutes could come into play. U.S. law forbids individuals from “willfully injur[ing] or commit[ting] any depredation against any property of the United States." Public office holders who, “willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates or destroys … any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited," could also be slapped with criminal charges. The former carries a fine and up to one year in prison, the latter, up to three.
The second aforementioned statute also includes a provision that says those convicted of mutilating or destroying these records are, “disqualified from holding any office under the United States.” But in the 1969 case of Powell v. McCormack, the Supreme Court found that Article I’s Qualifications of Members Clause include the only reasons why a member of the House of Representatives that has been duly-elected may be prevented from holding office. While Powell v. McCormack dealt with members of Congress and not the president, the same logic probably applies to Article II, Section I, and likely renders the statutes provision of disqualification for public office unconstitutional.
Eastman believes that the current regime will eventually try to indict Trump. "But even if he were to be indicted and then convicted on a felony charge (anything short of 'insurrection'), that would not be disqualifying. Neither the Congress nor the Executive (or the Judiciary, for that matter) can add to the limited qualifications for the office set out by the Constitution. As for 'insurrection,' section 3 of the 14th Amendment bars from office those who were engaged in an insurrection (namely, the civil war). It is an open question whether that even applies to the office of President, and it was also mostly eliminated by statute in the 1870s," Eastman said.
"And, of course, there was no 'insurrection,'" Eastman added.
The regime, the corporate media, and the liberal activist apparatus know that everything else: the Russia hoax, January 6, two impeachments, alleged viol­a­tions of the Emolu­ments Clauses, and social media banishment hasn’t stuck. If they weren’t before, our enemies just openly told us they’re all on the same page. They know this is likely their last chance to take Trump down before he declares his candidacy. They simply can’t afford to come up empty once again. If next time the feds make their way down to Mar-a-Lago it's to take the former president out in handcuffs, or the regime finds some other way to bar Trump from taking office come Jan. 20, 2025, and they get away with it, imagine what they can get away with doing to you. With 87,000 more IRS agents, a FBI that goes after conservative parents and presidents, an intelligence apparatus that can spy on American citizens with ease, an allied corporate media that won’t hesitate to destroy your life, and Silicon Valley tech giants that can erase you from digital communication and finance platforms with the push of a button when all else fails, surely its nothing good.
I'll leave you with a few last words from Anton:
“It’s safer, and generally more accurate, to assume that your adversaries mean what they say. If you doubt this, ask yourself: When was the last time they acted more moderately than they talk?”
0 notes
soupy-sez · 11 months
Text
Tumblr media
Wham! London, 1983, © Anton Corbijn
610 notes · View notes
idlesuperstar · 4 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
for @cinemaocd on the occasion of her birthday, some favourite swoonsters in jammies or robes or other glorious nightwear <3
123 notes · View notes
olafkardanadam · 2 months
Text
Sahilde küçük köpeğiyle dolaşan bir kadın. Kim olduğunu kimse bilmiyor. Ona “küçük köpekli kadın” diyorlar. Sahile yeni birisinin geldiği söylendi: küçük köpeği olan bir hanımefendi. İki haftadan beri Yalta’da olan ve orada evi olan Dimitri Dimitriç Gurov, yeni gelenlerle ilgilenmeye başlamıştı. Verney salonunda otururken, kumral saçlı, orta boylu, bere takmış ve peşinde beyaz bir Pomeranya cinsi köpeğin koştuğu bir kadın gördü...
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
59 notes · View notes
sargeantgp · 1 year
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
michael schumacher for max magazine | december 1995
375 notes · View notes
lefildariane · 5 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
The Red Shoes (Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, 1948).
72 notes · View notes
blacknarcissus · 1 year
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
This room though…
The Red Shoes (1948)
289 notes · View notes
hegodamask · 1 year
Photo
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
“I used the Imperial Emergency Act in the wake of Aldhani to gather data across multiple sectors without official sanction. But that is the wrong question.”
ANDOR - S01E07 Announcement
174 notes · View notes
joeinct · 9 months
Text
Tumblr media
Michael Stipe, Tevi, Rome, Photo by Anton Corbijn, 1995
90 notes · View notes
creativespark · 8 months
Text
Tumblr media
Anton Corbijn, Michael Stipe, Rome, 1995
91 notes · View notes
scenesandscreens · 7 days
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
The Iron Claw (2023)
Director - Sean Durkin, Cinematography - Mátyás Erdély
"I used to be a brother."
24 notes · View notes
arcticdementor · 2 years
Photo
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
(link)
0 notes
guy60660 · 10 months
Text
Tumblr media
Michael Stipe | Anton Corbijn | Fotograficamente
140 notes · View notes