Constitutional crisis constitutional crisis constitutional crisis constitutional cri

I saw a headline in an Australian regime news source that said something like, ‘Experts point to Trump constitutional crisis’.

I thought, looks like the memo went out to apparatchiks that this week’s talking point is ‘constitutional crisis.’

To test the theory, I Googled (yes Google, for maximum regime compliance): “constitutional crisis trump”.

This is what came up on on the first four pages. All recent:

The Atlantic: ‘Constitutional Crisis’ Is an Understatement

CBS: Are we heading toward a constitutional crisis?

Politico: Trump talks of a third term amid growing concerns about a constitutional crisis

NYT: Trump’s Actions Have Created a Constitutional Crisis, Scholars Say

Vox: What does it mean to be in a “constitutional crisis”? We don’t know yet how far Trump will go.

AP: Trump makes moves to expand his power, sparking chaos and a possible constitutional crisis

NPR: Are we in a constitutional crisis?

CNN: Analysis: As Trump team overhauls government, a constitutional crisis looms

ACLU: Donald Trump: A One-Man Constitutional Crisis

Brookings: How is civil society responding to the US constitutional crisis?

CNN: Taking on Trump: Is the US facing a constitutional crisis?

Newsweek: In Two Weeks, Trump Has Already Created a Constitutional Crisis | Opinion

For some reason The Guardian refuses to use the talking point verbatim, but has the same stories nonetheless.

The reasons given for the supposed constitutional crisis are multifarious, including threatening to ignore the eternal Hawaiian judge, joking about a third term, making cutbacks and denying the authority of government agencies.

How do these media organs coordinate so quickly?

We know that the regime left, if we can still call it that, has online groups that disseminate talking points to acolytes for broad publication across outlets.

Here are some notable examples:

JournoList got in trouble for coordinating pro-Obama and anti-conservative messages.

Media Matters for America campaigns for its preferred issues and facilitates quick responses to media narratives.

Gamechanger Salon helps to push progressive messaging.

Imagine you’re a time-poor journo. There’s a story bouncing around that Elon’s boy soldiers uncovered government waste. Instead of investigating for yourself, you can quickly consult a secretive online group where someone else has already generated a sloganistic response aimed at neutralizing this memetic assault.

Many journos doing the same thing leads to the aligned headlines we see above.

Those journos less in-the-loop can do the same thing in a time-delayed fashion by waiting to see what the NYT does and then copy them. This often happens with regional and international outlets.

It must be tough for the journos these days, with cutbacks to USAID starving their platforms and coordinating agencies of funds. In addition, they find that they can no longer shape reality with their words. They can shout ‘constitutional crisis’ (or whatever) until they’re blue in the face, but that doesn’t make it come to pass.

What about the thing itself? Is there a constitutional crisis? Are we all going to die from a global political meltdown before that asteroid has a chance to hit?

A sleight-of-hand among all the articles above, or at least the ones I bothered skimming, is that they are bereft of history. In the approved regime mind, after all, history started in 1938 and ended in 1945.

Andrew Jackson failed to enforce rulings to protect the Cherokee in Georgia.

Lincoln suspended habeas corpus without congressional approval, then ignored the ruling against its legality.

FDR ignored a court ruling that he couldn’t interfere with gold contracts.

One might argue that courts themselves undermine the constitution if they make rulings that don’t seem very in line with it, which happens a lot. Make too many creative interpretations of the law and an executive pushing back can seem like the more constitutionally compliant side.

As for the US congress, what do they do anymore? Remember when they were supposed to approve foreign wars? And what’s going on with that standing army?

While this is an American story, it applies across the US Empire, as we saw here with the Australian and UK headlines that played along with the directions from the imperial capital.

In addition, various Liberal World Order courts have had terrible fun over the last few decades with imaginative interpretations of constitutions and other laws.

You get a constitutional crisis when too many people ignore the words on the paper, and that has been happening across the west for far too long.

Action provokes reaction, eventually.