Hulk Hogan and the Lawsuit That Changed Journalism and America

I’ve argued at various points that TPM was ahead of the curve roughly during the Obama years because we paid a lot of attention to what was then sometimes called The Crazy — the subterranean world of GOP and far-right politics; the colorful, weird and almost-always super racist congressmen (and sometimes women) from obscure rural districts. That was portrayed as a sort of moving circus, cheap laughs, click-bait — not real politics. We were often criticized for giving it so much attention. I never thought that was right. And unfortunately the Trump presidency itself vindicated our read of that era. The Crazy was the reality of Republican politics. It was the John Boehners and Paul Ryans who were a kind of respectable veneer placed over its true engine of power and motive force. From the outside, it appeared that these leaders had to run the GOP while wrangling the far-right Freedom Caucus. In fact it was the Freedom Caucus that ran the GOP through a tacit collaboration with presentable and ultimately tractable figures like Boehner and Ryan. Trump’s intuitive political genius was to see that you could ditch the front man and run the GOP directly from the Freedom Caucus, which has been the story of the Trump Era.

That lawsuit [Hogan's Peter Thiel backed $140 million libel suit against Gawker over a sextape] was a critical event of our time, and Gawker’s destruction was a body blow to the First Amendment. Hogan’s lawyer, Charles Harder, wasn’t just any libel lawyer. He had whole new ways of going about it. After Harder’s victory for Hogan, his new approaches to attacking media companies were quickly folded into the Trump political movement, not just the strategies but Harder’s firm itself. You see them again and again in numerous Trump and MAGA world lawsuits.

Josh Marshall @ TPM (doing a fundraiser right now, journalism worthy of your support)

The Hogan/Thiel takedown of Gawker in 2016, dawn of the Trump era, does look now pivotal. 

Big Tech realizes it can buy control of the online social media space. As if the whole fake news hoax conspiracy politics of Trump was in some sense rooted in billionaires figuring out how to press manage Silicon Valley Babylon. I've always been partial to the image of Trump as the revenge of the repressed id of the republican party; the paranoid style in American politics in its most garish and grotesquely imperialist form. And there is some of that in there for sure but "front" for the Freedom Caucus is actually a far better historical detail. From the "birther" thing on of course he was going to be their guy. 

But it's the totality of the takeover of the republican party that still so astonishes me. It goes to show, again, the pursuit and defense of political power, as Walter Karp argued, Schumpeter, Machiavelli, etc, can so easily overwhelm whatever democratic values or ideological pieties or even burning current issues. 

Realpolitik, basically, is the pursuit and holding on to power to no end other than holding on to it at any cost. 

law and order and the rest of us

"I don't want to be too precious about the rule of law issues here. We all know who Trump is; we also all know the extensive flaws that have undermined faith in the rule of law and justice institutions over the past several years and decades. Though the trial showcased the ways in which Trump presents a unique threat to the rule of law, it’s still hard for me to contemplate the damage he has done without almost reflexively thinking of all of the police killings that led to Black Lives Matter protests, or the failure of the Obama administration to try to hold any Wall Street executive criminally accountable after the financial crisis. It's hard to imagine an American billionaire seriously being threatened by a prosecution at this point. Now, I recognize that these are all different problems stemming from different causes. But they each contribute to the impression of a justice system that seems to have one standard for elites, and another for everyone else. Trump may be a convicted felon, but he will face no punishment. In ten days, he’ll be President."

Josh Kovensky @ TPM  

Before the flood!

Political Violence and the Great Disinhibition

"Political violence is a curious and seductive thing. People routinely see aspects of intention and even valor in political violence notionally aimed at values they agree with, even when they don’t condone the violence itself. We can see this in the fanboying (and girling) around Luigi Mangione. And we can see it around the Jan 6th instigators. (No, I don’t think they’re comparable. You don’t see prominent elected officials cheering on Mangione.) My point here isn’t one of trying to figure out whose violence might be more justifiable. It’s that in cases of violence in the service of goals we might feel broadly aligned with we generally tend to see the violence in more linear and literal terms. The culprit believed very deeply in X or Y and was finally driven to violence because traditional means didn’t work. But it’s not necessarily like that. The train of causation and ideation can run in the opposite direction. You’re motivated toward violence and then you find an ideological framework to fit your hunger for violence into.

It’s this more general disinhibition that seems most relevant, a greater social hunger for violence that is worth taking stock of prior to the point it actualizes itself through one political narrative or another."

Josh Marshall @ TPM

Yeah, worth taking stock of the obvious "general disinhibition" towards violence promoted by Grump before electing him again. Anyway, been thinking something along these lines for awhile now. Civil war 2.0, or our national drift in that direction, will be less a territorial dispute, or regional bastions and frontlines, and more random violence and mass murders, where ideological or partisan motivation is an afterthought or twisted together in weird shapes. 

And this isn't to suggest that the urban vs rural/exurban conflict in America today isn't real. Coming from the burbs and then the sticks the divide has never appeared greater to me. But cities need rural agriculture and rural agriculture needs cities; cities are in fact the signal achievement of agricultural civilization. There's a realpolitiks in that that cannot easily be dismissed or broken up. 

Still think, though, Josh underplays in this post the way Grump has activated or accelerated the "general disinhibition" towards violence, or how much that violence skews towards conservative crackpots. There's lots of political violence in American history, sure, KKK, presidential assassinations, but is there any precedent for all the violent threats against public health officials, judges, election workers, and school board members we've seen since 2016, almost all of it republican leaning violent reaction? 

Certainly bigot hostility towards immigrants in US history is hardly new. There was a Red Scare after WWI. McCarthyism in the 1950s. All ugly episodes in American history with more than a whiff of political violence about them. But I'm not sure any of these fit the current situation very well. Today we live in a deeply polarized culture of ambient fascism where deep wells of anger seek outlets for pent up violence. "Because something is happening here and you don't know what it is/Do you Mr. Jones?" Only now Mr. Jones has reached a breaking point. Everything is out of whack. 

And along with fears of civil war people are often puzzling over whether the causes of the current crisis are cultural or economic, cultural divisions or economic inequality. How about it goes like this: the pursuit of economic inequality, Billionaires, monopoly, and generally and relentlessly financializing the economy, otherwise known today as corporate rule or the neoliberal order, has exacerbated cultural divisions, poverty, homelessness, and the othering of victims of the onslaught to a breaking point? And voters just elected a Frankenstein of this historical onslaught to double down on the violent pressures in society. Forgive me if I don't think this is going to go well. 

And, again, Keynes, one of my current intellectual touchstones, was comically imperious and overly ambitious and maybe quite naive about colonialism and definitely an overly complicated theoretician (there really is no "general theory," for instance) but he did call all this out a hundred years ago: i.e., the violence and social conflict that results from the predatory impacts of unfettered capitalism without the necessary stabilizing agency of government. 

 

 

"Trump has sewn himself into a sack with Elon Musk, a few billion dollars, a cat and a snake, and had the sack tossed into the Tiber. That’s the story here. And it will go on for a while."

Josh Marshall @ TPM

VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO TO SAVE AMERICA!!!

Grump Is To Blame

"As we careen toward Election Day in a week, the day’s news is replete with reminders that Donald Trump continues to be a singular threat to a free and fair elections. The complexity of the threat matrix – political violence, foreign interference, conspiracy theories, the Big Lie – can obscure that Trump plays a critical role in all of them as instigator, inciter, conspiracist, accelerant, and useful idiot.

For nearly a decade now, Trump has radicalized American politics and personally served as a catalyst for the worst impulses, extremism, and violence that have afflicted the public square. He has created, sustained, and nourished a crazed political atmosphere which pushes lone wolf actors over the edge. He has summoned and rallied a crowd of insurrectionists and turned them loose against the legislative branch in order to remain in power. He has dipped into Nazi rhetoric, dehumanized entire peoples and nationalities, trafficked in the most racist tropes, and treated women like trash. He has taken a sledgehammer to democratic institutions and the principles upon which they are based."

David Kurtz @ TPM

The Cowardice of the Elites 

"The Amazon king is not alone in this consequential abdication of responsibility. Numerous folks in the ruling class have cowardly ducked and covered in this election that could determine whether our imperfect democracy slides toward fascism. JP Morgan chief executive Jamie Dimon, who previously referred to Trump’s post-2020 election conduct as “treason,” privately supports Harris. But according to the New York Times, he won’t say so publicly “because he’s fearful that if Mr. Trump is victorious, he could retaliate against the people and companies who publicly opposed his run.” Billionaire Bill Gates has privately donated $50 million to a nonprofit that supports Harris, but he has not (as of this writing) publicly endorsed her. He won’t put his mouth where his money is. Billionaire investor Warren Buffett, who organized fundraisers for Barack Obama in 2012 and campaigned for Hillary Clinton in 2016 (denouncing Trump), announced he won’t take a position on the 2024 race.

Last week, Fortune looked at the 10 richest people in the United States and discovered that none of them had publicly expressed a preference between Trump and Harris, except for Elon Musk, the No. 1 on the list, who has become Trump’s top (and manic) cheerleader, pouring tens of millions of dollars—perhaps hundreds of millions—into efforts to elect Trump. (See my recent article on how Musk is essentially providing Trump $100 million worth of free advertising on X, the social media platform he owns.) This roster of chickens includes Buffet, Gates, Bezos, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison (a longtime GOP donor), former Google CEO Larry Page, former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, Google co-founder Sergey Brin, and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang.

These plutocrats amassed fortunes in America, yet they now will not publicly oppose a convicted felon and fraudster who was found liable for sexual assault, who attempted to subvert the constitutional order when he was last in office, who has expressed support and admiration for overseas dictators, and who has voiced fascistic sentiments, including proposing military tribunals and criminal prosecutions for his political foes, the suspension of the Constitution for his own benefit, and loyalty oaths (to him) for government workers."

David Corn @ Our Land/Mother Jones (I get an email newsletter but can't link it for some reason.) 

What strikes me here is another connection to the major media. CNN reports on the regular, I heard it again reported this way just today, and I imagine the nightly network news broadcasts more or less repeat the same, and that is "voters trust Harris more on women's issues and democracy and Trump more on immigration and economics." I've shared before that serious polling does not support the contention that the general public or electorate trusts Trump more on the economy. Significant majorities know Trump and the republicans favor rich corporations and stiff labor whenever they can. But as indicated above the rich people who own the major media do quite obviously trust Trump over Harris on the economy. Why? Because they don't want to pay more taxes or deal with more environmental regulations, same as it ever was. But, especially, they don't want to face four more years of Lina Khan's antitrust, which is to be clear good economics for small businesses and consumers but bad economics for monopolists and Billionaires.  

The Resistance Demands Respect, Too

"These liberals [including 200,000 that have canceled WaPo subscriptions] are signaling that they’ve reached their breaking point with institutions that coddle extremists; that fear holding enemies of democracy to any consistent standard; that would rather head off bad-faith attacks than do what’s right. They believe, quite rightly, that these impulses are the reason Trump is not currently in prison. They know Republicans won’t check him or hold him accountable, but they aren’t willing to underwrite a system where journalists and Democrats and prosecutors and judges and union and corporate leaders won’t either.

In other words, they want the Trump era to be well and truly over. For the moment that mostly means beating him next week. But in a longer-run sense it means changing incentives so that leaders stop tolerating or caving to the extortionate tactics that define Trump’s [and corporate rule's] authoritarianism."

Brian Buetler @ Off Message

VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! VOTE!

And beyond Trump, he couldn't do this all alone after all, who is most responsible for the US being on the precipice of a violent fascist catastrophe? Dishonor roll: 

Republican Party 

MAGA

SCOTUS and legal system 

Billionaires (aka Oligarchy)

Wall Street

Violent militias and police unions and gun nuts

Major media (Fox is a national security threat at this point but NY Times and WaPo and NPR have been "bothsidesing" mealy-mouthed terrible as well)

Social media (turns out it doesn't expand free speech so much as blow-up fake news and disinformation)

Sinclair Broadcast Group

Putin and Trump's other foreign dictator besties 

Legacy of paranoid style and violent bigotry in American history (Lost Cause, etc) 

Crooked business hustlers 

Special hell reserved for academic and activist lefties and Third Party morons rooting for Trump to hasten the revolution

People without college educations, which I hesitate to pick-on because this is my own family origins, and I generally root for populist movements in history, but Trump is a treasonous, hateful, and embarrassingly dumb low in the history of American populism, or in my life time at the very least.    

Again, VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! to save America!

Pro-Worker/Labor Rights vs Anti-Worker/Labor Rights

The Dems don't do enough for workers and labor, true. They signed on to the Republican economic model that has gutted living wage working class jobs over the past two generations, putting up little protest and in a few egregious instances aiding and abetting the class war destruction that has ensued since 1980; namely, Clinton deregulating financial markets and Obama picking Wall Streeters to fix the Great Recession. But Biden/Harris have been the most pro-worker/pro-labor government since Roosevelt. And as is documented in the attached story, only Harris/Walz stand on a record of consistently supporting worker's rights and promoting good jobs and living wages. While, as the record shows, Trump and his Republicans have consistently opposed worker's rights and labor organizing, perpetuating the exploitation of labor that is the bedrock of corporate rule in the neoliberal era. 

Only Harris/Walz Have the Labor Bona Fides, TPM 

Twenty-six former Officials Say Trump Unfit to be POTUS

"They’ve expressed their concerns about his character, his leadership, his impulsiveness, and his narcissism, among other traits. The opposition from so many former close aides is unprecedented in the annals of American politics."

Many Trump Alum Never Trumpers, TPM 

The Insurrectionists in Our Midst

 "So there you have it in a nutshell. From top to bottom, the Republican Party has become the insurrectionist party. It extends from the executive to the legislative to the judicial. It’s all encompassing and unapologetic. There is value in such clarity, if we choose to see it."

TPM's Morning Memo, May 17, 2024

Now that the internet and corporate rule have destroyed the local news and daily newspaper, a million morning newsletters have become a source of journalism trying to fill the void. (Including conservative tabloid trash, that need not be named, fanning the fascist flames.) For a dose of sanity with your morning coffee try TPM's Morning Memo with David Kurtz. 

Supreme Court Hearing on Grump's Criminal Immunity

About SCOTUS hearing Dump's ridiculous immunity claims for his failed coup and various other schemes to cheat our election system. If not a constitutional crisis, what could possibly be? He tried to violently overthrow the government. We all saw it. Repuglicans, in and out of office, would rather own the libs and hand the country over to this Reality TV dictator, financial fraudster and violent fascist than protect the constitution or American democracy or the rule of law or any of that patriotic bs. Why? Because many in congress and government (scotus, secret service, etc) are complicit in his crimes and probably some because they're afraid, not unreasonably, of MAGA's fascist violence, and when you get down to it there are undoubtably lots of Trumpers who will never face the humiliation of admitting they were wrong about the guy. 

Just for all the MAGA death threats against public officials, election workers, and members of the legal system alone the electorate ought to totally reject Cheetolini at the ballot box in November as a violent demagogue and not someone you'd buy a used car from let alone want running the country. Enough, already.  

People complain that we don't have a moderate center in politics anymore. What held that center together more or less forever was one issue in American politics: national security, matters of national self-determination, or opposition to foreign influence in our elections. Sure, Kissinger sabotaged a peace deal with Vietnam in the run-up to the 1968 election, and Reagan blocked the release of American hostages from Iran before 1980; both Republican and treasonous and covered up. So Trump didn't invent conservative corruption but come on he is vying for all-time most corrupt political figure in American history: election interference (aka, cheating), treason, massive amounts of financial fraud, a failed coup attempt, abusing immigrants and BIPOC Americans, Impeached twice (should have been three times), and there is a serious chance he's dealt top secret national security documents and information to Putin and the Saudis, maybe more. In general, Grump pals with the worst murderous tyrants around the world and gets hostile with NATO and our closest allies. And, by the way, turning against the world will not make us safer or richer; it'll make us poorer and more vulnerable to foreign threats. Trump and MAGA collude with Russia to attack our elections and Americans in the base wear t-shirts that say, "Better Russia than the Democrats." This is one big reason there is no moderate center in American politics anymore. Because one of the major parties, Republicans, the GOP, abandoned what bonds the moderate center, our shared values concerning American independence, and have done so for Trump and Putin and the like. Not the best but the absolute worst petty bigot dictators. 

That's why we no longer have a moderate center in our politics. Not because of Antifa, immigrants, progressives, or any radical left blamed by conservative media and melanin challenged Americans humiliating and embarrassing their own history, again. 

Anyway, whenever the news is so upside-down stupid and wrong I'm ranting and sputtering like this, too often in the Dump era, I turn to Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo for perspective. He's talked me off the is-this-fascist-America-takeover-thing-really-happening ledge, so to speak, many times:

Peering Into The Corrupt Court's Pretensions and Corruption

A Bigger Story Than You Can Possibly Imagine

Josh Marshall @ TPM

Refers to recent revelations that the primary source guy behind the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, the Twitter Files, and the GOP's effort to impeach Biden, etc, is, basically, a Russian intelligence operative, spreading disinformation to sabotage American democracy. Surprise, surprise! 

Media organizations at first wouldn’t touch the story because they’d spent the previous four years kicking themselves for allowing themselves to become the promoters of a Russian election interference and disinformation campaign with the purloined DNC emails back in 2016. Since the Hunter Biden laptop stories had all the hallmarks of exactly the same thing somehow happening to pop up in the final days of the 2020, of course they were suspicious.

 

At worst, that initial resistance was very reasonable, given the record for 2016, even if it had been the case that the story was entirely legitimate. But it wasn’t. Even though the Smirnov revelations themselves don’t speak directly to the laptop story, they tell us very clearly that Russian intelligence operations have continued to drive stories at the center of the American political debate right up until today. 

To sum up, for me: we know Dump and MAGA and conservative media (Fox et al) are Putin assets (if not active agents) and with them they have played the MSM, TV News, and NY Times/WaPo for treasonous fools going on a decade now, amplifying hostile foreign influences at a scale not seen since the Nazis in the 1930s and 1940s, if ever in American history. This is the "Big" part of the story. 

John Eastman Comes Clean: Hell Yes We Were Trying to Overthrow the Government

 Abraham Lincoln was doing no more than stating a commonplace when he said this on the eve of the Civil War in his first inaugural address (emphasis added): “This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it.”

In other words, yes, you have a revolutionary right to overthrow the government if you really think its abuses have gotten that intractable and grave. But the government has an equal right to stop you, to defend itself or, as we see today, put you on trial if you fail. 

Josh Marshall, Talking Points Memo, 8/5/2023