“Supreme Inequality” by Adam Cohen[2020] is subtitled “THe Supreme Court’s Fifty-Year Battle For A More Unjust America.” He is not alone in this accusation. Nor, is he alone in documenting the charge with much evidence – often using the very words of the Supreme Court Justices to prove the case.

It is very important that we have a set of valid premises to discuss this oft-made charge. Let us proceed from the standpoint of this: “What would a reasonable person, given the evidence conclude?” What principles should guide the investigation? Consider these: WE judge by basics such as: “All men are created equal;” from the Constitution’s Preamble “..to promote the general Welfare..” Decisions that fail these tests are “wrong.”

Page 306-07: “These dual totalitarian visions [“King” & “Strieff”] are a logical extension of where the Court has taken the nation in the past fifty years. Economic inequality has risen at a furious pace, the middle class has contracted..the status of the poor..ever more precarious. This..makes firmer methods of social control…oppressive…policing likely if not inevitable.”
Page 305: “Sotomayor, in her own dissent..delivered a personal warning to the American people…”The Court today [Strieff]] holds that the discovery of a warrant for an unpaid parking ticket will forgive a police officer’s violation of your Fourth Amendment rights. Do not be soothed by the opinion’s technical language. This case allows the police to stop you on the street, demand your identification, and check it for outstanding traffic warrants – even if you are doing nothing wrong.” As a result, anything the officer finds by “searching you” can be used in criminal prosecution.

SO – how does this effect ME? Check with any post-1933 dictatorship. The secret police had the RIGHT to stop you on the street, or invade your home. This is part of the overall 1969-2021 Supreme Court pattern. And – it is also part of the entire 1789-2021 pattern – excepting one era – of supporting the rich and powerful against the people.

In the name of “the law” much cruelty to people has been done. Cohen gives examples on pages 4l, 8l, 97, l03, 202, 288. Single Moms, Army vets with 3 kids, school kids, health care, older workers, innocent people pleading guilty, customers who were cheated, and on and on. Sometimes the Court said: “This isn’t our job,” etc. But corporations “needed” their help!!!

As many analysts have said: observe the PATTERN. Who are the consistent “winners” and “losers?” Who does the Court feel compelled to help, to not help? Are there rational bases for decisions, or, are they making stuff up? Is the Court following time-tested principles uniformly, or, are they “cherry-picking” parts of details? Is there any empathy for ordinary people caught up in crazy things beyond their control? Are the decisions reasonable – you can agree it was “fair.” Did they follow “All men are created equal?” Did the decision “promote the general Welfare?” Has the overall PATTERN made America more just, a better society, more humane?

Adam Cohen’s “Supreme Inequality” says “NO – the recent Courts have definitely NOT made America better. By international standards, America is worse off – and the Supreme Court is a big reason why. Cohen takes YOU through specific cases, explaining how and why chances to improve America were paths not taken.

Cohen is not alone. Listed below are others saying similar things. AND – all of this is the tip of the iceberg.

Adam Winkler – “WE The Corporations How American Businesses Won Their Civil Rights” [2018]. Much of it started with a lie in December, 1882, to the Supreme Court bout the “intent” of the 14th Amendment. From 1868 to 1912, the Supreme court decided 312 cases on 14th Amendment basis for corporations – and – 28 for African-Americans, for whom it was intended. There is NOTHING in the Constitution for corporations. Founders, including Madison, Jefferson, Wilson expressed fears for corporate power. George Mason refused to sign the Constitution because he felt it wasn’t strong enough against corporations

Laurence Tribe & Joshua Matz – “Uncertain Justice The Roberts Court and The Constitution {2014]. They note a Roberts Court pattern of attacking any Congressional effort to regulate, any regulation on anything [54,84]. They note that free speech is not necessarily good for regular people [139]. They say the Roberts court “has dealt critical legal rules a death of a thousand cuts – leaving many of our rights intact but making them effectively impossible to enforce in any court.” [284]
“The Roberts Court has issued a string of rulings that make it virtually impossible to escape arbitration agreements…..The result has been a rapid expansion of private arbitration as a parallel justice system…..With each passing day, public courts more permanently disappear as a real option for many Americans in their dealings with big business….”[295] “..the Roberts Court is determinedly proving ..it is..an anti-court Court.” [299]

Erwin Chemerinsky – “The Case Against The Supreme Court” [2014] “..the thesis of this book: The Court has frequently failed, throughout American history, at its most important tasks, at its most important moments.” [5] “..the Supreme Court usually sides with big business and government power and fails to protect people’s rights.” [6] “We should realize this is an emperor that truly has no clothes. For too long we have treated the Court as if they are the high priests of the law, or at least as if they are the smartest and best lawyers in society. We have pretended that the Court is a neutral body discovering the law and then mechanically applying it. None [of this is] correct.” [14]
Chapters 5, 6, 7 are about the many failings of the Roberts Court – to only 2014.

Ian Millhiser – “Injustices The Supreme Court’s History of Comforting the Comfortable and Afflicting the Afflicted” [2015] “..the justices frequently ignored rights that are explicitly protected by the text of the Constitution….The justices..have routinely committed two complementary sins against the Constitution. They’ve embraced extra-constitutional limits on the government’s ability to protect the most vulnerable Americans, while simultaneously refusing to enforce right s that are explicitly enshrined in the Constitution’s text….they paved a trail of misery as a result. Few institutions have inflicted greater suffering on more Americans than the Supreme Court..” [xiii-iv]

David A. Kaplan – “The Most Dangerous Branch Inside the Supreme Court’s Assault on the Constitution” [2018] “For much of its history, the Court stayed almost entirely out of the affairs of Congress. Before the 20th century, the justices declared federal laws unconstitutional only 5 times. By midcentury, they were doing so at a rate of about one a term. And by the 1990s, the Court was throwing out 3 or 4 federal laws each term. The numbers didn’t suddenly go up because legislation was written with less care – or because the justices had become wiser.” [17]
“When the votes of justices in controversial cases can be predicted at the outset, constitutional law simply becomes partisan politics by another name. If you usually know beforehand how justices will come out – and if it’s a function of the political party of the president who appointed them – what’s the point of having a Court? Did we really establish a system of self-government in which those life-tenured judges decide so much social policy? [19]

There are two other items to discuss: the preposterous theories of “originalism” and “textualism;” and a legal group known by the name of “The Federalist Society.”

Originalism has already been dealt with on this site, but for a refresher, consult Samuel A. Marcosson”s “Original Sin…Clarence Thomas and the Failure of the Constitutional Conservatives” [2002} To be blunt and brief – Marcosson destroys “originalism” by throwing Thomas” and Scalia’s words back at them. The words “making it up” and “false statement” appear; so does “now you see it, now you don’t.” “…originalists have failed on their own terms>’ [13] “Originalism is a jurisprudence of deafness…” [25] Thomas’ judicial opinions and pre-Court political views have a “striking similarity.” [29]
“…Bush v. Gore is simply the latest example of the conservative majority’s inconsistency….also the most important example and the one most devastating to the Court’s legitimacy…..just the latest in a long line of constitutional decisions that are indefensible on the merits and comprehensible only through the prism of the political ideology of the justices. Rather than standing alone as evidence of the politicalization of the Court by its most conservative wing, it is the smoking gun… the one that cinches the case.” [106]

The Federalist Society was created in the early 1980s by three “conservative” partisans [some might say reactionary] on the belief the American Bar Association was “too liberal.” It was financed by a “conservative” billionaire who didn’t like the course America had followed. From modest beginnings it has mushroomed into a major American legal force. The Federalist Society has three announced principles: the state exists to preserve freedom; the separation of constitutional powers is central to our constitution; it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. As always, the devil is in the details. The real life mission of the Federalist Society is to push how American law is interpreted and used to the “right.” [some might say to ‘reactionary’ points].
The Federalist Society is perhaps THE major legal player for “the right.” In Republican administrations, many/most positions of legal nature have been manned by Society member. It is almost a requirement to be a Federalist Society member to obtain a Republican nomination for a judgeship. The society often does all the vetting. With the possible exception of one, all current Republican appointed Supreme court Justices have been Federalist Society members.A high-ranking society member has said the Federalist Society operates as a “check” on the Supreme Court.
The Federalist Society has inserted “Law and Economics” departments in most major U.S. law schools. One in a major university has “helped” by a $44 million donation to the school. Society members operate “training’ sessions for judges. Members also supply much “scholarship” to the legal community. Some has been quoted from the bench by Supreme court justices.

Amanda Hollis-Brusky’s “Ideas With Consequences The Federalist Society and the Conservative Counterrevolution” [2015] has diagrammed out how the Federalist Society works to push test cases up to the Supreme Court. Several major 21st century cases were near-100% Federalist Society operations, start to finish. The “counterrevolution” is changing American law to a much more “conservative,” especially “business-friendly” nature. Their definition of “freedom” is quite likely NOT to be what you think it is!!! Much of their definition of “freedom” is freedom to do whatever they want – free from any and all restraints by any government. This is a major reason why the Federalist society has received so much funding from “conservative” billionaires.

Michael Avery and Danielle McLaughlin’s “The Federalist Society How Conservatives Took Back The Law From Liberals” [2013] is another excellent work on the Society. Dahlia Lithwick, Senior Editor. Slate.com wrote this review: “A compelling intellectual history of the rise of the powerful Federalist Society, this is a thoughtful recounting of all the ways in which the group has impacted and influenced legal doctrine, and a roadmap of what’s to come should their ascendancy continue. Anyone who cares about the courts or the law will find “The Federalist Society” a stark reminder of the power of abstract ideas to effect real and lasting change for decades.”

Like other things, YOU should now have enough info to understand that the state of American law in 2021 is NOT an accident. Like many other crucial aspects of our country, the law has been deliberately changed and decisively pushed to the right, 1980-2021. Like the economy, this has not benefitted all Americans. Like the economy, it was intended to.

SO – at the beginning, your challenge was this: what would a “reasonable” person conclude? Has the forcibly changed American legal system met the test of principles: “all men are created equal,” and the government’s job is to “promote the general Welfare?” Hint: the goal of the “right” is that it wouldn’t. AND – another challenge for you: what has been the overall PATTERN? You should be able to figure out the winners and losers, right????? The use of the word “sabotage” was not an accident – because that’s what the PATTERN of evidence leads to, unfortunately.

Evil Geniuses is Kurt Andersen’s latest book. It reads like a crime novel. Unfortunately it isn’t a novel. But it IS a discussion of a crime. A crime largely inspired by monumental GREED, but also twisted, corrupted ideology.

Buy this book! Read it. Think about it. Discuss it. This is a sad story of how what was once the greatest human success story was deliberately dismantled. That was the American period of 1947 – 1975. You can read all the statistics proving this. Or talk to those fortunate to have lived it. I know. Because I was there.

1947-1975 America was the result of l900-l9l5 and 1933-65 reforms. The INTENT was to create a society in which ordinary people could and would thrive. They did. It wasn’t perfect. But it was America’s peak.
America was blessed by one of our greatest presidents, by one of the two greatest Supreme Court Chief Justices, and by “The Greatest Generation” of people. After World War II they were our neighbors, our teachers, our bosses.

This was “too good a deal” in the eyes of the “right,” especially the rich and corporations. They didn’t want to share the wealth America generated – so they decided to change the rules. They’ve been very successful – thus “Evil Geniuses.”

Some of you may not wish to accept Andersen’s indictment. First, consider he is NOT alone. Second, understand who he is talking about. From 1865 to 2021, the rich and corporations have attempted to sabotage ANY effort to restrain their greedy behaviors. Document by examining 1865-2021 labor history. Employers have done virtually anything, including murder to squash ANY labor resistance. Research WHY antitrust laws were written. Read Jules Archer’s book, “The Plot to Seize the White House” – the true story on the July-November, 1933 plot. Read Charles Higham’s “Trading With The Enemy” – “An Expose of the Nazi-American Money Plot 1933-1949. Read Edwin Black’s “IBM and The Holocaust” – how IBM greatly aided the most evil government of all time. Research how the “right” and Republicans have resisted 20th century social safety net reforms like Social Security, labor rights, civil rights, Medicare.

All of this is YOUR background to “Evil Geniuses.”

Start with this, from page 203: “the rules of our economy were rewritten as a high-stakes game of musical chairs….our economy since 1980 has been a particularly sadistic version of the game.” YES – YOU are playing this twisted form of “musical chairs” in real life. And, as in the game, there is only one winner: the top 1%

Next, we go to page 299. Conservative federal judge Richard Posner: As a member of Congress “you are a slave to the donors. They own you. That’s [the] real corruption, the ownership of Congress by the rich.”

The key chapters are: “Raw Deal: What Happened in the 1980s Didn’t Stay in the 1980s;” ‘The Rule of Law;” “How Wall Street Ate America;” ‘Ruthless Beats Reasonable;” ‘Winners and Losers in the Class War.”

The key statistics are on: pages ll8-l22 “The Decade When Everything Changed and Our Present Was Created: 57 Data Points [what’s good for big business, Wall Street and the rich – and what’s bad for YOU; on pages 190 & 295 – how rigging the rules costs YOU $10,000 every year; on pages 292-295 “Nobody but the Rich [and nearly rich] Got Richer: 27 Ways the Pie Is Cut Differently Now”

The key events are: a speech [1970] and a famous memo [1971] by future Supreme Court Justice; Supreme Court decisions “Buckley-Valeo,” “Bellotti,” and “Citizens United” which increasingly allowed speech to be money [meaning the richer you were, the more “speech” you were entitled to!!!]; President Reagan’s crushing of the 1981 PATCO strike [the war is over]; the creation of numerous “conservative ” [many say reactionary] legal groups to provide “scholarship” [many say twisted reasoning] and judicial candidates; ending the “Fairness Doctrine” in 1987 which enabled the subsequent rabid truth twisting and lies on various media.

The key people are: 5 right-wing billionaires funding most of the groups that do the undermining; the Reagan Administration who began the governmental subversion; 1969-2021 Republican judicial appointees to federal courts who’ve often done the legal undermining; the various legal far right groups that bring “test cases” to the courts to undermine the 1789-1979 American system.

Some perspective for YOU on greed and comparative incomes: if Joe SixPack graduates high school and works 18-68 making $50,000 every year, his lifetime, TOTAL earnings would be $2.5 million. If Suzie Sorority graduates college and then works 22-68, her lifetime TOTAL earnings would be $4.6 million. The U.S. president makes bout $400,000 a year, as THE most important person in the world. SO
Why does ANYBODY make $5-10-20-30 million in one year??? Do you really believe that person “earned” this, “deserves” this – EVERY year???????

America has always had “rich” people. I worked for one. He treated people fairly. And when he died, it seemed like half the local community was there – the line to talk to his widow and kids was out the door. It was out the door when I left.
The difference, then and now – balance, restraint, norms, self-imposed limits and societal limits on what was acceptable. These “old fashioned” restraints are gone – replaced by endless, never-satisfied GREED.

In 2020, Stuart Stevens, a 25-year top Republican election operative said these words [pages 368-370]: “those of us in the Republican Party built this moment [the COVID-19 crisis],” because “the failures of the government’s response to the coronavirus can be traced directly to some of the toxic fantasies dear to the Republican Party…Government is bad. Establishment experts are overrated or just plain wrong. Science is suspect.”
Stuart Stevens wrote “It Was All A Lie How the Republican Party Became Donald Trump.” [2020]

If YOU want seriously to know why 2021 America doesn’t work for the lower 90% – Andersen’s “Evil Geniuses” STARTS your journey. Unfortunately, the plot to erase the 1947-1975 middle class “golden age” is all too real. The work gradually, deliberately unfolded during the infamous 1980-2020 period. The right and the rich have won – at least for now – if YOU allow it.

From pages 386-87, consider what the future COULD be: from the London “Financial Times,” April, 2020: headlines –
“VIRUS LAYS BARE THE FRAILTY OF THE SOCIAL CONTRACT”
‘RADICAL REFORMS ARE REQUIRED TO FORGE A SOCIETY THAT WILL WORK FOR ALL”
Then, some of what “these ultimate Establishment conservatives” wrote”
As western leaders learnt in the Great Depression, and after the second world war, to demand collective sacrifice you must offer a social contract that benefits everyone. Today’s crisis is laying bare how far many rich societies fall short of this ideal…We are not really all in this together…Better paid knowledge workers often face only the nuisance of working from home….Radical reforms – reversing the prevailing policy direction of the last four decades – will need to be put on the table….Redistribution will again be on the agenda…..Policies until recently considered eccentric, such as basic income and wealth taxes, will have to be in the mix.”

SO – my friends, my fellow Americans – what does it mean to be an “American?” What does it mean to be a “human being?” What does it mean for people to “live with dignity” in the internet age?

Kurt Andersen has told you what the greedy “top 1%” wants. Is this what YOU want – for yourself, for your children, for your grandchildren? If not, speak up!!! Get organized!!! Stop voting Republican [the party that can no longer nominate Lincoln, Teddy R, Eisenhower – their best}.

2016-2021 has been an embarrassment, an awful black stain. We’re better than that, aren’t WE? Prove it.

How would a reasonable person evaluate recent American history The place to start is observing PATTERNS of intent, policies, and results. What was the general plan for America, for the American people, the society, the government, the economy? How would the benefits of living and working in America be shared? Would they be shared? Would recent America be a continuation of 1789 forward intent and trends? Would things improve for the ENTIRE population?
The general consensus is there have been two different, distinct recent American periods: 1933-1980 and 1980 to present [2021]. There were two different visions of America.
Below are listed 10 books to start your search. Each of these is excellent themselves. BUT – to open them is also to open a window on one thread of what has happened to America, 1980-2021. As one follows these trails of evidence, it will soon become obvious a much bigger story exists. And also, that many of these trails will be connected. That is NOT an accident. What has happened to America, 1980-2021 is also NOT an accident.
Some people did NOT like what happened – it was too democratic. Too many people shared in the success, and some of them were “undeserving.” The 1933-1980 America was “too good a deal for too many.” A correction needed to be done. The radical American “right” – political, economic, religious, social – decided they had the “answers.” Below are some of the stories of their destructive, cruel, and antidemocratic efforts.

1] Kurt Andersen – “Evil Geniuses” [2020]. Andersen talks about how he slowly began to see “real plots in plain sight.” Various incidents and people crossed his path. He connected dots. “..Evil Geniuses” chronicles the quite deliberate reengineering of our economy and society since the 1960s by a highly rational confederacy of the rich, the right, and big business.” “..an egregiously revised American social contract has been put in place..”

2] Adam Cohen – “Supreme Inequality” [2020] Cohen is the latest to offer negative critiques of the Rehnquist and Roberts Courts. One earlier analyst suggested “conservative” Republican appointees had more in common with the 1996 Republican platform than The Federalist. Cohen mentions how “one academic study that examined the Court’s decisions from 1938 to 2010 concluded that 2010 was the most conservative year.” A conservative law professor: “These decisions are not the work of a conservative court.” The prevailing “conservative” philosophy, “originalism,’ was debunked in advance by the Founders, including Chief Justice Marshall. Cohen’s value is that he gives you the results and “logic” of specific cases. The Roberts Court revealed by this is not a benefit for America.

3] John W. Dean – “Broken Government How Republican Rule Destroyed the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branches” [2007] Little, if anything, has changed from 2007. Dean concludes with a quote from “an old friend from the Nixon White House – a “life-long Republican” who knew Bush and Cheney personally: “People should not vote for ANY Republican, because they’re dangerous, dishonest, and self-serving….another four years, and heaven forbid not eight years, under the Republicans, and our grandchildren will have to build a new government, because the one we have will be unrecognizable and unworkable.” Unfortunately, we know how this worked out.

4] Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett – “The Spirit Level Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger” [2009] The “Spirit Level” looks at the 22 “Rich” nations and the 50 American states. Graphs of the 9 metrics show comparative “quality of life” status of each government unit. America does not do well. The “likely suspects” among American states do not do well, especially one particular historical-geographic area. The authors state the 1950s and 1960s were a high point of of equality and social connectedness; since 1975 there has been a reversal. Every American should read this book.

5] Jane Mayer – “Dark Money The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right” [2016]. “…a network of exceedingly wealthy people with extreme libertarian views bankrolled a systematic, step-by-step plan to fundamentally alter the American political system.” Inside the front cover is a spider’s web of “THE NETWORK – Political and Issue Spending [501c4s & 501c6s” – many having innocent names [“Americans for Job Security”]. In 1980, conservative icon William F. Buckley, Jr. characterized their views as “Anarcho-Totalitarianism.” Little, if anything, has changed.

6] Pulitzer Prize winner Hedrick Smith – “Who Stole the American Dream?” [2012] A Bloomberg News review includes: “The top 0.1 percent – about 3l5,000 people out of 315 million Americans – garner roughly half of all capital gains in the U.S.” “The 400-plus pages of drab, personality-free prose on all the ways the rich have been sticking it to the middle class since the late 1970s read like a Times investigative report from hell.” The I.D. of the Dream Stealers is clear.

7] Kristin Kobbes Du Mez – “Jesus and John Wayne How White Evangelicals Corrupted A Faith and Fractured A nation” [2020]. Here is the BIG QUESTION: Should a church YOU don’t attend have any control over your life? If YOUR answer is no, then you have much to worry about. Du Mez is the latest to examine this issue. It is documented beyond any doubt that the American religious right’s goal is an American theocracy – run by them. Given the events of 2016-2021, it should be obvious there are few limits to this “holy war.”

8] Allen Frances – “twilight of american sanity A Psychiatrist Analyzes The Age Of Trump” [2017] It is comforting to see President Donald Trump as a crazy man, a one-off, an exception – not a reflection on us or our democracy. But in ways I never anticipated, his rise was absolutely predictable and a mirror on our soul…What does it say about us, that we’ve elected someone so manifestly unfit and unprepared to determine America’s future? Trump is a symptom of a world in distress, not its sole cause. Blaming him for all our troubles misses the deeper, underlying societal sickness that made possible his unlikely ascent. Calling Trump crazy allows us to avoid confronting the craziness of our society – if we want to get sane, we must first gain insight about ourselves. Simply put: Trump isn’t crazy, but our society is.”

9] Michiko Kakutani – “The Death of Truth” [2018] Quoting Hannah Arendt: “The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction [i.e., the reality of experience] and the distinction between true and false [i.e., the standards of thought] no longer exist.” We are victims of “truth decay.” Former acting attorney general Sally Yates: truth is one of the things that separates us from an autocracy. If we don’t hold people in public life, government or media, accountable for the truth, than WE, US, normalize indifference to the truth. According to Jefferson, America was predicated on reason and truth.

10] David Brock and Ari Rabin-Havt – “The Fox Effect How Roger Ailes Turned a Network Into A Propaganda Machine” [2012] The authors relate how Fox “News” became “an active and unapologetic Republican Party mouthpiece.” They say: Fox isn’t a news organization. Numerous studies and polls show Fox viewers “among the most ignorant on a variety of issues.” The problem, of course, is that Fox viewers BELIEVE they are hearing TRUTH and FACTS. Because their trusted broadcasters said it was. The listeners to the “Fox News echo chamber” live in a 24/7 feedback loop of constant reinforcement. This gets us back to “The Death of Truth.” We are polarized largely because significant numbers are living in a different reality – and defiantly refuse to accept they aren’t.

This is only the beginning. Do YOU have the courage, the curiosity, to question? Not only analysis, but numerical documentation is available. To start your journey on the reasons behind the different America that has been deliberately created – start simple. Get unpsun I.R.S. data on America income distributions, say 1947-1979, then l980-2020. This has already been done for you. Check work done by Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, Jacob Hacker, Paul Pierson. Or – find the March/April, 2011 issue of “Mother Jones” magazine. Find out how much money YOU are being cheated out of each year!!!
And just as important – discover for yourself – how much damage has been done to America society, because of greed, because of religious zealotry. None of it was an accident.

After the events of January 6, 2021, in Washington, D.C., it may be necessary to reconsider , perhaps required, to reconsider the term “burning the flag.”

Among the most vivid events of the day was the parade of flags in the attack on the U.S. Capitol. There was the American flag, there were other flags, there was the Confederate flag. Since the same group of people carried both the American and Confederate flags in the attack – would a reasonable person conclude that in the minds of the attackers, the two flags had equal value? Would a person with no knowledge of American history reach the same conclusion?

The obvious question: did the 8,000 people who attacked the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, “burn the American flag?” – by their conduct [an insurrection], by having both the American flag and the Confederate flag with them?

Then, this question: did the rioter who beat a policeman with the American flag disgrace the flag? If the answer is “yes, he did,” is this, in effect, like “burning the flag?” If the answer is “no, he didn’t,” then what exactly does one have to do to disgrace, i.e., “burn the flag?”

While you are pondering that, consider this story. On December 19, 1967, there was a hockey game played at the “Metropolitan Sports Center,” in Bloomington, Minnesota. The opponents were the American National team and the Russian National team. The score is immaterial, for it is what happened BEFORE the game that is noteworthy.

Before the game, the national anthems were played. I can assure you nothing was said in that audience, not a word between spectators about the “Star Spangled Banner.” Not one word. Nothing.
What then proceeded to occur is the most fervent, loudest, singing of the American national anthem that anyone in the crowd has heard, or will EVER hear. We didn’t really sing it, we SHOUTED IT, we SCREAMED IT, we YELLED IT. – at the Russian players.
As one looked around during the anthem, there was no mistaking what was happened. The looks on people’s faces – the absolute, often scary intensity. We weren’t just doing this at them, we were intent on SINGING – SCREAMING – SHOUTING – YELLING the “Star Spangled Banner” THROUGH them.
We intended to intimidate them with that song. We intended to send a message. Every American in that crowd had reached the same point, by themselves.
Most reasonable people would likely include this was “patriotism.”

Now – back to the events of January 6, 2021. And “burning the flag.” And “patriotism.”
What should a reasonable person conclude?

The following is “The Editor’s Letter” from “The Week” Magazine, January 22, 2021, by Theunis Bates, Managing Editor. Please reflect on his thoughts – who are we?

“This is not who we are.” That was the cry that went out from politicians of all stripes after last week’s deadly pro-Trump insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. The behavior of the 8,000-strong mob was “entirely un-American,” read a statement from a bipartisan group of lawmakers including Sens. Mitt Romney [R-Utah] and mark Warner [D-Va.], while House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy [R-Calif.] deemed the violence the antithesis of “the American way.” President-elect Joe Biden said the scenes said the scenes of the chaos in Washington “do not reflect the true America.”
“Yet the people who stormed Congress weren’t some alien other, but everyday Americans who – fed a diet of conspiracy theories – believed they were doing a patriotic thing. They included the CEO of a data analytics firm from suburban Chicago, a Florida firefighter, the son of a New York Supreme Court judge, two Virginia police officers, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel, and an Olympic gold-winning swimmer who wore his Team USA jacket to the riot.”
“Far from being un-American, such explosions of brutality and tribal violence have long been a part of this nation’s story. Up to 750,000 died during the fratricidal Civil War, and nearly 4,000 African-Americans were lynched by white mobs in the Jim Crow South from 1877 to 1950.”
“Today, violence remains a fact of American life. The U.S. has the highest rate of mass shootings in the Western world and a gun homicide rate 25 times higher than those of similarly developed countries. During the Capitol siege, young staffers for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi took cover in a conference room, barricaded the door, turned off the lights, and hid under a table in silence – survival tactics they had learned growing up with active-shooter drills in schools.”
“We will never be able to treat the sickness that led to last week’s insurrection unless we recognize this is part of who we are. It might be America at its ugliest, but it is America.”


SO – Who are we? Why are the things said above true? What has happened in America that has made all of this possible? Certainly HATE. Quite obviously, “MISINFORMATION,” LIES, RUMORS. Apparently, for some SUSPICION. Much social science evidence tells us: FEAR. Apparently, for some, PARANOIA.
There’s also something else. 8,000 angry people, mostly men, mostly white, did not gather in Washington on January 6, 2021 by “accident.”
There was definite, very deliberate planning by some. There, over months has been very deliberate, definite “encouragement” of these unhappy people. They were told that something “wrong” had been done, and it was their “job” as “patriots” to right that wrong – over months, over many channels.

BUT – why would these 8,000 unhappy people listen to those messages? WHY would they listen?

WHO are “we?” WHY would some of “US” think they had a “right” to “solve” a problem of this nature by attacking the U.S. Capitol? WHY would some be looking to hurt, kill some members of the U.S. government – including the Vice President and the House Speaker? What was the message of the noose hanging in front of the Capitol?

Historian William W. Freehling, in his “The Road to Disunion,”on pages 103-104, states:”Some 300 lynchings of whites transpired between 1830 and 1860…Lynchings abounded only in moments of hysteria, either during insurrection or secession scares…Victims were almost Northerners or newcomers or other outsiders.”
Freehling mentions something else – “the shudder.” One had to be careful not to say the “wrong thing” about slavery in the South.

Saying the “wrong thing?” Apparently, some members of the U.S. government were heard to say “the wrong thing” about the 2020 election. These villains persisted in believing “the wrong candidate” had won the 2020 election. Not only that, they insisted on going through the last stages of this “fraudulent” election – certifying the “wrong” result. The 8,000 angry “patriots” were told this “fraud” should not be allowed to happen – it must be stopped, at any cost – or they’d “lose THEIR country.” So they acted.

There have been disputed elections before. But, in 231 years, nobody stormed the Capitol, intent on capturing, hurting, killing government officials. WHY now? WHAT has happened?

WHO are “we?”

As of 12 Noon, February, 2021, this is the casualty list of police personnel from the attack on the U.S. Capitol Complex by supporters of “law and order” and other bumper sticker slogans from the 2016-2021 era:

1 policeman murdered;
2 law enforcement people have committed suicide;
140 law enforcement personnel injured:
l law enforcement person with brain trauma:
1 law enforcement person with crushed cervical disc;
1 law enforcement person lost 3 fingers;
1 law enforcement person lost an eye;
1 law enforcement stabbed with a metal stake;
police personnel beaten by rioters using American flags.

It’s a good thing the perps who did this were “patriots,” or it might have been worse.

What would an informed, reasonable person say to that question? On what basis would that person say Trump should be impeached? Is prosecuting him, now that he’s out of office “revenge” or “unconstitutional?” Or – is it holding him accountable for conduct while in office?

A dictionary definition of sedition: “incitement of public disorder or rebellion against a government; any action, especially in speech or writing promoting such disorder or rebellion.”

The Pentagon called the events of January 6, 2021, in Washington, D.C. an “insurrection.”

A dictionary definition of insurrection: “the act or an instance of rising in open rebellion against an established government or authority.

The U.S. Code, Title 18, Chapter 115 defines sedition in part as an attempt by two or more persons to: “prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States.”

The U.S. Constitution, Amendment XIV, Section 3: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President or hold any office, civil or military under the United States, or under any State, who having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

Wyoming Republican U.S. Representative Liz Cheney: “There never has been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution.”

U.S. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell directly blamed Mr. Trump for the January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot, saying: “The mob was fed lies. They were provoked by the president and other powerful people, and they tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government which they did not like.”

A January l8, 2021 Associated Press article [Lardner & Smith] states: “members of President Trump’s failed presidential campaign played key roles in orchestrating the Washington rally that spawned a deadly assault on the U. s. Capitol.
“A pro-Trump nonprofit group called Women For America First hosted the “Save America Rally” on Jan. 6 at the Ellipse….more than half a dozen people in staff positions for the event who just weeks earlier had been paid thousands of dollars by Trump’s 2020 reelection campaign. Other staff scheduled to be “on site” during the demonstration have close ties to the White House.
Since the siege, several of them have scrambled to distance themselves from the rally.”

A January 23, 2021 Bloomberg News article [Allison] states: “Former President Donald Trump’s campaign paid more than $2.7 million to individuals and firms that organized the January 6 rally that led to violent rioters storming the U.S. Capitol…..
“The payments, which span Trump’s reelection campaign, show an ongoing financial relationship between the rally’s organizers and Trump’s political organization. They were all made through Nov. 23…..
“Eight paid Trump campaign officials were named on the permit issued….”

So – a reasonable person might fairly conclude that much legal and other data exists to conclude that the ex-president, and people around him, have provided for the case against themselves by their own actions.

Also of interest, Trump actions reported by the New York Times, January 23, 2021, in an article [Benner]: “Trump Plotted to Oust Acting AG to Throw Election.” It stated: “The Justice Department’s top leaders listened in stunned silence this month: One of their peers, they were told, had devised a plan with President Donald Trump to oust Jeffrey Rosen..and wield the department’s power to force Georgia state lawmakers to overturn its presidential election results.”

All of this – and we haven’t yet discussed Trump’s inciting words of January 6, 2021 to his crowd: “..take back our country. So let’s walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.”
Before the president’s words, Trump family members had spoken, son Eric: “..show some fight…..march on the Capitol today.” Donald Trump, Jr.: all “red-blooded, patriotic Americans..fight for Trump.”

We also know, from reports of people close to the president, or actually in the White House, Trump watched the rioting unfold on TV – and did nothing. A Washington Post article of January l3, 2021 “Trump Slow to Act as Riot Raged [Parker-Dawsey-Rucker] states” “The president himself was busy enjoying the spectacle. Trump watched with interest, buoyed to see his supporters fighting so hard on his behalf, one close advisor said.” The article states: “Several Republican members of Congress also called White House aides, begging them to get Trump’s attention and have him call for the violence to end…were now scared for their lives…”

The question has been frequently asked – if all this direct Trump action concerning the events isn’t an impeachable offense, then what is?

In a February 5, 2021 letter, 144 “leading First Amendment lawyers and constitutional scholars from across the political spectrum” declared the proposed Trump defense of exercising “free speech” was “legally frivolous.”
A subsequent New York Times article [Fandos-Schmidt-Haberman] reported the experts laid out three counterarguments to a “First Amendment” defense. The 144 experts said also “even if the First Amendment did apply to an impeachment trial, it would do nothing to bar conviction, which has to do with whether Trump violated his oath,” not his words.
The 144 experts stated: “No reasonable scholar or jurist could conclude that President Trump had a First Amendment right to incite a violent attack on the seat of the legislative branch, or then sit back and watch on television as Congress was terrorized and the Capitol sacked.”

In these misinformed, polarized times, we all have opinions – but we can’t all have our own facts. Fortunately, much of this was recorded, live, on numerous TV stations. What happened January 6, 2021 is clear, and beyond efforts to “reframe” or provide ‘alternative facts.” Can’t be done.

One big question: do we have a democratic republic or not? Do we honor the “rule of law” or not? Are people accountable for their actions or not? Does a defeated U.S. president have a “free pass” to do whatever he wants between election day and January 20th?

Donald Trump has broken many norms and rules, many expectations about how an American president should act. His actions HAVE given “aid and comfort” to our enemies, none more than January 6, 2021. Our enemies have used January 6, 2021 to savage America’s international reputation. We will have a difficult time trying to convince other nations and peoples that we are the best example of democracy.

Whether his devout, often misinformed, followers want to accept it or not – Donald Trump has left America a weaker nation, in many ways.

During the Founding period, Benjamin Franklin, commenting on impeachment, said it was either that or assassination. Donald Trump IS THE president the Founders feared. They knew all future presidents wouldn’t be George Washington, but they hoped it was possible.

Political reality may deny a conviction, but there is hope for a “censure” which could make another Trump presidency impossible. Both outcomes would contribute to that end result. The events of January 6, 2021 can NEVER be taken away. We are stuck with them. The very least we should do is make sure the #1 perpetrator can’t harm America again.

Gather around my children, two American visions to hear,
after such details, much clarity will appear!

The first vision of love, hope, charity believed “all men are created equal;”
but greed, hatred, austerity, bigotry, zealotry marred the sequel.

The first vision said “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself,”
the second built on encouraging fear, saying above all take care of yourself.

The first vision led to a generation of unprecedented prosperity and income equality,
the greedy, corrupt second created increasing great economic inequality.

The first vision believed government could solve the problem,
the second revolved around the false theory government was the problem.

The first vision used law as a genuine liberty enhancing tool,
the second abused law, and history, as if liberty to fool.

The first vision was built around taking care of the “Forgotten Man,”
the second built around favoring the richest man.

The first vision passed the “Wagner Act” guaranteeing labor union rights’
the second featured the “Janus” decision to weaken labor union rights.

The first vision enabled the “Greatest Generation,”
the second created the “debt generation.”

The first era featured DiMaggio, Williams, Robinson, Mantle, Mays, Aaron,
the second featured steroid cheaters and a false home run baron.

The first vision featured Glass-Steagall to restrain corruption and efforts to end the Great Depression;
the second featured “greed is good,” S & L bailouts, Wall Street bailouts and the Great Recession.

The first era had World War II and Nazi war crimes, America emerging as world hero;
the second the immoral Iraq War and American war crimes, America as world non-hero.

The first vision featured “Brown” and Civil Rights Acts correcting racism,
the second featured “Shelby County” and voter suppression to extend racism.

The first vision believed in science, environmental protection, a landing on the moon;
the second denied science and vaccine values, said global warming action too soon.

The first vision created an Education Department to extend and improve education,
the second featured efforts to subvert and weaken public education.

The first vision featured laws to prevent electoral corruption by the rich,
the second featured “Citizens United” throwing such precautions in the ditch.

The first vision featured a peaceful 1963 March on Washington and an IMMORTAL speech,
the second featured a violent 2021 insurrection and an impeachable screech.

The first vision featured religion as a private affair, efforts to better America;
the second saw zealots politicize religion, attempt to create theocratic America.

The first era saw three of America’s best presidents at its beginning;
the second saw three of the worst mired in multiple scandals, fears of fascism beginning.

The first era saw America’s national debt under $1 trillion for all its history,
the second saw national debt blown up by reverse Robin Hood tax cut mystery.

The first era saw a cruel, misguided anti-communist scare, zealots looking everywhere for red;
the second saw cruel, internet-enabled domestic terrorism looking for immigrants under every bed.

The first era saw a “Day of Infamy” that united America,
the second saw a “Day of Infamy” that further divided America.

The first vision saw TRUTH valued and speaking with tact,
the second saw speaking with insults and “alternative fact.”

The first vision saw America at its peak, greatly admired;
the second saw America sabotaged, liared, former respect retired.

The first vision built on the Founders’ revolutionary hopes and dreams,
the second on reactionary, destructive, anti-democratic moonbeams.

The great tragedy, Shakespeareian in scope, saddest to see;
a great many refuse to see, the second “vision” has changed America from “we” to “me.”

The mind wanders a little on a very cold winter day, adding more misery to the already COVID-19 stressed. Are these the best of days – worst of days? The old, retired fisherman remembers some more pleasant events witnessed.

It was the annual Big Ten rivalry game at the season’s close. A group of friends were sitting in their seats, the stands filled with snow. People were bundled up in parkas, big boots, big gloves, stocking caps, some no doubt in sleeping bags. COLD!!!
The score and details of the game are long since past, because the most memorable memory isn’t what happened on the field in the old stadium. The twice-replaced hallowed old stadium had been built shortly after World War I. We sat on long wooden planks. Like most stadiums in America, before the corporations paid hard-pressed towns and schools much-needed funding – it was called “Memorial” – in memory of soldiers who’d given their last for their country.
The memorable event was an incredible on-going performance by one man. He was seated below us a few rows, and to our left. He was a dedicated smoker. At first we didn’t notice him, then sat in wonder and watched him. In this frigid scene, among the shivering multitudes, every 10 minutes or so, it happened. Off would come the gloves, out would come the lighter and current cigarette. With freezing glove-less hands, the tobacco tube would be lit. After the requisite puffs, back would go the gloves. And so it went for the entire game.

There was a fellow, a 2nd-3rd line “hockey player” on a mediocre D-III team. He had one talent. He could shoot the puck, quite hard, where he wanted it to go. This mediocre team had a very good goalie. He had to be. At least one season the goalie was “All-Conference. He obviously kept this mediocre team in a lot of games.
There was one thing that bugged this star goalie no end. It seems the 2nd-3rd string “hockey player” could score on him at will. This went on for some time. The “player” didn’t think about it. He just did it, at virtually every practice.
Finally, the star goalie requested the “player” to help him exorcise the demon bedeviling him. The star goalie ‘requested” the “player’ attend a private practice – of two.
So, on another cold winter day, outside [who had indoor rinks?]. The two of them worked out. The “player” would make repeated rushes at the goalie and shoot the puck. They started slow, with the normal easy shots, working their way up to real attempts by the “player” to beat the goalie. Some of his confidence restored, the goalie eventually said it was time to quit.
So, they resumed their roles. The star goalie played regularly, starting every game. The “player” enjoyed fleeting moments when he played.

Two 30-ish devout baseball fans had been given free tickets by a very fine friend who worked for the home team. For this game, their tickets were behind home plate, just behind the pipes that outlined the high price tickets, at this time probably about $3.50.
The now twice-replaced stadium was a typical l950’s creation. All outdoors. No expensive boxes for the top 1%. Seating in the outfield bleachers was long wooden planks. On a nice summer day, the place of dreams. On a cold late season day during football season, one endured – hoping a neighbor didn’t need to visit the little boy’s room. Then, a row of grumbling fans would have to stand in their sleeping bags – and do it over again when the villain returned.
On this fine summer day, a high foul ball arched over the tall screen behind home plate. A major league ball!!! A giant scrum of nearly two dozen ball hawks franticly sought the prize missile. The two 30-ish devout fans sat, unmoving in their seats, watching events unfold, totally without any desire to become involved in the writhing pile of humanity.
Slowly, with some difficulty, because of numbers of of semi-sober people, because of the pipes outlining the box seats – the giant piggy pile began to unwind. People got up, without the ball. More people, mostly men, got up. Getting down close to concrete!!!
There was one last humanoid laying on the concrete, stretched over two levels of concrete amid the pipes above. It was a woman, laying face up, not moving much. It was quite apparent, that although not injured, she was not in the best shape to lift herself off the concrete. It was also quite apparent, she had most likely previously consumed some of the local breweries’ finest beverages.
The two 30-ish, non ball-hawking observers also noticed one other thing.
She didn’t have the ball.

The mediocre, 2nd-3rd string D-III “hockey player” had one moment of glory. it symbolized his “career.” It was the only goal he scored.
It seemed the coach was a friend of the coach of this school’s biggest rival. So they often scrimmaged. On this occasion it was inside a recently opened indoor hockey rink, which over time witnessed some very memorable contests. Not included in that list of memorable contest was this scrimmage.
The rival school usually won the official league games. But, the mediocre team often won the meaningless scrimmages.
In this scrimmage, the mediocre “player” was playing defense. The puck was passed to him at his offensive zone blue line. He fired a laser beam, wrist shot, into the lower right hand corner. GOAL!!!
After that, he turned around a set up for the face-off. No high-fives. Only lost, precious ice time while players reassembled. This ‘goal” would never be ‘official.”
After that, the puck was frequently passed to him for more shots. He never scored again. Thus, like his “career,” the ‘goal” didn’t count.

There was this baseball youth coach. He had a good team. They went to play an away game. When the team arrived, the players started yelling about the right field fence. It was close. VERY close. TOO close.
The coach gathered his players. Fearing the players would all try to hit home runs over this fence, a warning was issued. “Anybody that hits a ball over that fence is out of the game,” was the ultimatum. The coach was reassured. None of his players would screw up their swings trying for a cheap home run.
It was a well-intentioned plan, but unnecessary. His pitcher threw a no-hitter. The game was never close. Then came the unintended event.
The coach had forgotten that one of his outfielders was a natural left-handed batter. This young man had a very nice, fluid, sweet natural left-handed batting stroke,\.
Several innings into this one-sided game, the lefty came to bat. there were runners on base. The pitch came. So did that sweet swing. CRACK!!!!! A high-arching, long fly ball sailed far over that obscene fence – a no-doubter.
The runners came around. Then the ‘hero.” Tears were coming down his face. He looked at the coach, and said: “Am I out of the game?”
The coach, caught on his own petard, was forced to say “Yes.”

There was this decent fast pitch softball player who could run. He knew the game, didn’t make mistakes. Not a great hitter, but he could bunt. In this game, he’d worked his way around to 3rd base. Less than two outs.
He noticed the pitcher and catcher were not paying any attention to him. The catcher was throwing “rainbows” back to the pitcher after every pitch. He decided to try a delayed steal of home.
After the next pitch, the “rainbow” throw, he was off. He had it beat, but slid instead of running through. The large catcher blocked the plate “out.”
Soon after, this same player is on 3rd base again. This time the pitcher and catcher know he’s there! Rockets back to the pitcher. The pitcher is looking at him at every pitch. In fact, as the pitcher winds up, he’s still looking toward the runner on 3rd base.
After a few pitches, the distracted pitcher throws a wild pitch on the ground through the catcher. The runner races home with a free run.

The moment of ‘glory” that wasn’t. The mediocre 2nd-3rd string “hockey player” was on the ice killing a penalty. Surprising in itself.
In his defensive zone, at the blue line, he intercepted an errant pass. Putting the best move on the opponent of his ‘career,’ the opponent’s jock strap was left hanging from the rafters of the indoor rink.
“Breakaway!!!” A “hockey player’s” dream. Off to the left is his penalty-killing teammate, slightly ahead. He has a big smile on his face. They’re off on the rush.
Memories fade, but at most there can be only one opponent between them and the opponents goal, and one of the true possible turning points in any hockey game – a short-handed goal. It was not to be.
Our “hockey player’ and his senior mate are skating, ever briefly alone up ice.
Then – the period ending horn. Out of playing time. There’d be no glory.
All the more frustrating, the game went into overtime. It ended tied.

Some memories, and events are much more meaningful then the actual event itself. This memory is one of those.
Our “decent’ softball player is on 3rd base. Less than two outs. A sharp ground ball is hit into the SS-3rd base “hole.” The shortstop ranged over, makes the good backhand stop. He straightens to fire the ball to first base, and does so.
Our “player” watches, as soon as the shortstop throws to 1st base – he’s off for home. He scores in a slide. All runs in fast pitch softball are big.
This one is special. As the ‘player” runs to the team sitting place on the grass, he noticed a special observer – his father.
The father had been a great college baseball player, and also the “player’s” first baseball coach.
The memory was special to the “player’ because, in front of his father, he’d played the game like it was meant to be played. Nothing else counted.

There was this mediocre golfer. His game deteriorated as he got closer to the hole. His best “talent” was driving off the tee.
On this particular occasion, he and 3 of his friends were playing on a private course, courtesy of one of them.
It was the mediocre golfer’s turn to drive. He took out a brand new ball, placed it on a tee. Got prepared to hit.
On this tee, there was a large oak tree off to the side. Our mediocre golfer wound up a swung, hit a mammoth shot off legendary, epic proportions.
This “moon shot” flew directly into one of the limbs of the great, at that point, unmarked, oak tree. In a millisecond, it flew directly into the pond opposite.
The resulting moments had 3 of the mediocre golfer’s friends laying on the tee, besides themselves in laughter. The fog of memory doesn’t record whether our mediocre golfer broke 100 on the round. But, his friends didn’t care.

NO steroid users should EVER be allowed into the Baseball Hall of Fame.

WHY? There is No good reason they should be admitted.

The Baseball Hall of Fame yearbook, under “Rules for Election by Members of the Baseball Writers Association, states:
“Candidates shall be chosen on the basis of playing ability
integrity, sportsmanship, character, their contributions to
the team or teams on which they played and to baseball
in general.”

Five criteria – ONE on playing ability, ALL others on “integrity, sportsmanship, character.. contributions to baseball in general.”
So – tell me, just how does cheating by using steroids pass the tests of “integrity, sportsmanship, character?” In what realm of “ethics” is this even remotely possible? What dictionary definitions would allow cheating un ‘integrity, sportsmanship?”
Steroid use “contributed” to baseball by nearly ruining it.

The use of steroids without a real doctor’s prescription was illegal under American law. At least one baseball Commissioner explicitly ruled against their use. Are baseball players “above the law?”

The premise of any athletic contest is a player, using his God-given metal and physical abilities, can defeat his opponents because of those natural talents. If he cheats with steroids, he is violating the basic tenet of sports.
Fans in the stands AREN’T on the field because they aren’t physically and mentally equipped to compete [without cheating].

To my knowledge, no Hall of Fame member has EVER accepted steroids use. Some of said, publicly, adamantly, they oppose admitting such players. Some said if it was done, they were through with the Hall.
Many former players have also spoken against it. Some saying the steroid user’ performance, often at advanced ages, were not credibly possible without cheating>

The Olympics take away medals. The NCAA voids seasonal records.

The all-time major league hits record holder is banned for breaking the gambling rule. One of the greatest all time hitters is banned for his KNOWLEDGE of the 1919 Black Sox plot to throw the World Series. [7-8 games, not an entire career]

Teammates of steroids users noticed physical differences in a prominent abusers’ body from fall to spring. His hat size also went up. A comparison of player photos and physical data from “rookie” season to end of career reveal some remarkable differences.

Then – there’s the issue of fairness. Many honest players complained that not using steroids caused them a disadvantage. There are numerous minor league players recorded saying they faced a choice – to use or not. If they didn’t, maybe they don’t get to the major leagues, and the big money. WHY should they face this choice?

In baseball culture and history, the essence of the game itself is in the statistics – who is “the best?” Who has “the numbers?” A steroids user violates the “INTEGRITY” of this. “His” numbers aren’t his, not honestly.
Babe Ruth is ” the Babe” because of what he did, especially compared to his fellow players – many of whom, decades later were still incredulous at what they’d seen him PERSONALLY do. The Babe trained on hot dogs and beer. Ted Williams, .482, is still the greatest offensive force. Bill James’ statistical comparisons show Walter Johnson still the greatest pitcher. Rickey Henderson shattered stolen base records.

To my knowledge, NO player was ever falsely accused by the “Mitchell Report” of illegal substance abuse [Canseco has a chapter on it]. They’ve disputed it, but has any steroids user been falsely accused by documentation?

Books written by Howard Bryant [“Juicing the Game”], Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams [“Game of the Shadows”], Jeff Pearlman {“The Rocket That Fell to Earth”], Kirk Radomski [“Bases Loaded”], and Jose Canseco [“Juiced,” “Vindicated”] name names, provide data. Have any of them been sued for slander or mistruth? GUILTY!!!!!!!!

There are NO “good,” plausible, reasons for steroid users to be rewarded for their actions. In criminal law, a person cannot benefit from breaking the law.