With 95% of precincts reporting nationwide according to Wikipedia (as of 4am on Saturday, November 9), it’s safe to say that the US presidential election is decided.

Donald Trump will presumably swear the oath and assume the office on January 20, 2025, having received votes from about 22.5% of the population.

Kamala Harris, having received votes from only about 21% of the population, probably has a more enjoyable life awaiting her as she re-enters the “private sector” after 35 years in various government positions. Her vice-presidential pension, being based on her time in and as president of the US Senate, comes to less than $20,000 per year, but she and husband Doug Emhoff share a net worth of at least $8 million. She won’t be missing any meals and she’ll have all the free time she wants.

All other candidates combined received votes from about seven tenths of one percent of the population.

The real winner of the presidential election, as usual, was None Of The Above.

About 57% of the population didn’t vote for ANYONE for president. Some of them had no opinion. Some of them had an opinion but chose not to vote. Some may or may not have had an opinion but just  weren’t allowed to vote.

So if you hear someone claiming a “landslide” or “mandate” for anyone but NOTA, well, now you know better.

Fewer than one in four Americans voted for Donald Trump, while more than one in five voted for Harris and a solid majority voted for neither of them.

Yes, we will end up with a murderous authoritarian in the White House for the next four years, but that’s business as usual and was always going to happen. The only question was whether the murderous authoritarian would be a Republican or Democrat. US elections are heavily rigged to produce one of those two murderous, authoritarian results, every time, without exception.

If you strongly preferred Trump to Harris or vice versa, you’re probably either ecstatic or depressed right now. I’m not sure WHY you consider the choice between a Ted Bundy and a John Wayne Gacy so important, though. You wanted a murderous authoritarian and you got one. Don’t be a sore winner, OK?

My sympathies definitely lie with the majority who didn’t pick one of your crappy candidates but who nonetheless find ourselves stuck with four more years of this serial killer circus.

See you in four years, if we both survive.

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter:@thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY

Wait, what? We’re talking about Joe Biden? Why? He’s a “lame duck.”  No matter who wins the US presidential election on November 5, he’s going home to Delaware on January 20.  His chances of asking  for, and getting, much from Congress during that two-and-a-half month interregnum are negligible.

But as head of the US government’s executive branch, what he can do is follow the laws, no matter how loudly Congress howls, absent Supreme Court intervention in support of criminal behavior.

He won’t do it now for fear of harming Kamala Harris’s chances versus Donald Trump, but once the votes are in he’s free to follow his conscience … if he still has one after decades in politics, where a conscience is a liability.

The laws I’m speaking of are Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2378d), which applies to the Secretary of State, and its Department of Defense  analog,  10 U.S.C. 362, informally known as the “Leahy Laws.”

Those laws, according to the US State Department Fact Sheet on them,  prohibit “the U.S. Government from using funds for assistance to units of foreign security forces where there is credible information implicating that unit in the commission of gross violations of human rights.”

Evidence that Israeli units have committed, and continue to commit, gross violations of human rights in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon isn’t just credible, it’s overwhelming.

Israeli forces have killed at least tens of thousands, and more likely in the 200,000 range, in Gaza, the occupied West Bank, and Lebanon, since last October. Most of the dead are non-combatants, many of them children.

Israeli forces have been caught red-handed in numerous atrocities, from bombing hospitals and refugee camps to anally raping male prisoners with metal rods. Israeli politicians openly defend and encourage even that last one.

There’s no doubt whatsoever that Israeli forces are committing gross violations of human rights … and it is therefore illegal for the US government to provide one thin dime of military aid or assistance to those forces. Period.

Why hasn’t Biden already ordered the Secretaries of State and Defense to stop writing checks and shipping weapons to Israel?

Because Israel has a powerful political lobby in the US. Anything less than complete and unquestioning obedience to Benjamin Netanyahu’s every demand is a “third rail” … for politicians who face re-election.

Biden doesn’t face re-election.

And these days, the Israel lobby’s support goes mostly to Republicans. Its main intervention on behalf of Democrats is meddling in primaries to ensure “pro-Israel” Democrats get nominated in “safe” Democratic seats.

At some point, there’s going to have to be one of those “national conversations” over whether it’s really in the interests of the United States to unstintingly support a violent, atrocity-prone, ethno-supremacist regime.

That conversation is unlikely to go Israel’s way. But it has to be started by a figure of national stature who needn’t worry about re-election.

If Biden does possess a conscience, or even just desires a big “legacy” accomplishment, he’ll cut the Israeli regime off come November 6.

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter:@thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY

“The First and Second Amendments guarantee freedom of speech and the right to bear arms,” reads a petition circulated by Elon Musk’s America PAC. “By signing below, I am pledging my support for the First and Second Amendments.”

While pledging support for key elements of the US Constitution might seem non-controversial to most, Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner took Musk to court over the petition, claiming that awarding prizes of $1 million to randomly selected signers who are also registered voters constitutes an “illegal lottery scheme to influence voters.”

A judge put Krasner’s case on hold, on Halloween, when Musk’s attorneys attempted to move the matter to federal court. We’re probably not going to see any real movement on the legal aspects until after the election.

It’s true that Elon Musk supports a particular presidential candidate (Donald Trump).

It’s true that Musk’s PAC has been doing “ground game” canvassing work on behalf of Trump’s campaign in Pennsylvania and other swing states.

It’s clear that Musk hopes the giveaway and the attention it draws will help Trump.

But, let’s be clear here:

The million dollar prizes aren’t contingent on the recipient voting for Trump — or for that matter, voting at all.

The petition signature required for entry doesn’t mention Trump, It doesn’t mention the presidential election. It doesn’t even mention voting.

The process for entering the drawing, and potentially winning a prize, is a lot more like a “sweepstakes” than a “lottery.”

A lottery or raffle generally involves a material consideration: The participant must purchase something to have a chance of winning.

A sweepstakes only requires the participant to provide some information (mostly for determining eligibility, delivering prizes to the correct addresses, and facilitating future contact).

Yes, in THIS case, that information includes a pledge that participants support the First and Second Amendments. But there’s no deliverable consideration. No vote. No donation. No shift as a campaign door-knocker.

If I give lifetime supplies of ice cream to random members of a group who sign statements saying they like ice cream, am I running a lottery? They’re free to lie. I’m not making them buy, or eat, ice cream. I’m just giving away money to people who say they like ice cream.

If Musk’s scheme is an “illegal lottery,” so is every voter registration drive and “get out the vote” event that hands out random merch.

Krasner clearly doesn’t support the First Amendment.

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter:@thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY