 This is a discussion show you're watching and it's on politics for the people. I'm your host, Stephanie Stoll Dalton, and we have a panel of guests to help with our discussion and I'd like to introduce them now. We have Jay Fidel, we have Tim Appichella and Winston Welch, and we also have Karen Buzzard. So welcome panel guests, appreciate you're being here for this discussion today. And our topic is about what basis it is that homegrown war crimes claim to have. So to get right into what we're gonna be talking about, let's ask Jay, do you hear war crimes war crimes war crimes and if you do through the media or otherwise, who's crying war? I couldn't tell what he's talking about war crimes or war crimes. What, yeah, when you say war crime means somebody calling for violence, but if you're talking about war crimes, well, that's, I guess that's violence, that's that offends the sensibilities more somehow. I see both. I see both. There were war crimes going on all over the world and they usually start with war crimes evolve into war crimes. Ordinarily? Yeah, yeah. Well, I mean, if Trump gets up there and calls for violence, there are a lot of people who respond to that. I mean, my favorite comment is by a newscaster this past week who said, he has the power to kill by a whisper. He can speak to his base, some of those many armed people and have a little sort of conspiratorial arrangement where this person goes out and kills somebody that Trump's whisper. And it's true, that's the way it would happen. Trump said that he had the power to kill somebody on Fifth Avenue without being accountable. But it wouldn't work that way. He wouldn't do it. He'd have somebody else do it and you wouldn't know. You wouldn't know. That's the way he sets things up. And that's one of the reasons the insurrection investigation is so interesting because he has his proxies, his acolytes do it for him. But if the question is whether he's calling for violence, he is calling for violence. And if the question is whether there are people out there who would abide by his call who would hear the dog whistle, there are. I don't know if I'd say millions but enough to really create chaos. And the other question is when would this happen? And I think about that because I believe it's gonna happen. And I think it's, and what you do is you wait for a provocation and then you strike. And like what he did in his attempts at the coup, he used the power of government agencies and he couldn't do that in 2022, but maybe later. In 2022, this year for the elections, if the Republicans have their way, they're gonna do outrageous things and the African-Americans and others will be mighty offended and will go out into the streets. I don't have to say that that's gonna get them anywhere but they'll go out into the streets and then you have the problem of one side in the streets and then whether the other side responds. If the other side does respond, the government responds or has to respond or if the liberals go out in the street and the racists meet them there in the street, what you have is street violence. And who exactly will stop it? So I think it's coming. Yeah, and who is gonna do it? So you mentioned all Republicans and you mentioned Trump is calling for it. So who is making these words shout, who's shouting out these words when, who are these people that are actually? They're the insurrectionists. They're the white supremacists. They're the second amendment people. That's what they do. And they're just waiting. They're still organized. They haven't gone away. I mean, the news seems clear that they're still out there and you remember Merrick Garland. Everybody remember Merrick Garland? Try hard to remember Merrick Garland. Yeah, you can do it. Merrick Garland, you know, his efforts at prosecuting them really haven't stopped them, haven't stopped, haven't really prosecuted seriously enough of them, haven't prosecuted the managers of that insurrection and in fact, they're growing. I think that's the real news. They're growing and when the time comes, they'll be out there. Well, you know, I see Tim is animated. He's always animated, Stephanie. The poor bugger can't help himself. Thank you for that, Jay. I appreciate it. Well, you know, I am reacting to what Jay's saying and he's mentioning who's starting the fire here. It's Donald Trump. And I also, Jay said, well, the minorities will go out in the street and then they'll be met with a white supremacist. I think it's the white supremacists go out in the street and not only the supremacists, but people who are agitated and why are they agitated? Well, on January 15th, Donald Trump, and I saw this video with my own eyes. He said, and I won't exactly quote it, but I'll summarize it. He said, if you're white, you're being withheld vital, life-saving COVID medicine. And if you're white, you're going back to the end of the line. And so what he was doing, he was basically telling his followers, his white followers, that if you're sick too bad, because you're white, you're not going to give a life-saving medicine. So what happened a week later? A group of Nazis went outside a hospital saying, you're killing white people. Now, that's Donald Trump, our former president of the United States doing this. If Charles Manson was alive, remember Charles Manson, the helter-skelter thing that he was so excited that he happened, which was a race war, he'd probably be pretty pleased with Donald Trump. So it's not just these splinter groups that are trying to fan the flames of potential war. It's our former president himself. Thank you. That's very interesting. I wanted to ask Winston, do you think that... What do you think is the basis then for these cries for war? What is the basis for it, Winston? What do you think? You're muted. You're muted. Honestly, I don't know that there's too many cries for war. I think really, like Jay has said, do you like going to the dentist? Do you like going to Costco? Do you like having rule of law? The overwhelming huge majority of people in the entire world like those types of things, including in this country. And while there may be some lunatics on the fringe calling for this, that, or the other, because they're in some insane... I'm going to call it just a news bubble. It's not even news, just an insane loop of where they're getting information and living in an alternate reality. That may exist, but our fellow countrymen and women, whether they're considered themselves to be Democrat or Republican or independent or none of the above, they're not crying out for war. They're crying out for sane government solutions, sane society, civic society. What they got to do is also step up because they're often saying, well, they need to do something about this or they need... But the they is the we. The they is the we. So when people say they need to do this or they need to do that, they don't need to look any further than their own face in the mirror and step up for civic change and get involved as I often preach on these shows. It's up to us individually, but I don't hear cries for war and I don't expect that we're going to devolve in any type of situation like that. And in fact, if there were any level of violence that was at any meaningful level, you would immediately have... I mean, you saw this in Portland a couple years ago, right? With the, this is so-called Antifa and then the white supremacist or whatever the version of their KKK that came in into town to fight those folks. If it weren't put down by the Oregon National Guard, it would be, or the city, it would be put down by federal troops, which is what Donald Trump threatened to do. And that's actually probably the more realistic and scenario here is that if there were some sort of violence on any level where you had two limited groups fighting each other with violence, then you would have a call for public order to be implemented. And then from there, who knows where that then backs down? How do you back out of those sorts of situations? And that's really where I see the main danger is that it gives a pretext for an increasing sort of fascism or takeover on a level that we don't understand or have in this country and haven't had, but that's where I see it. I don't see that our neighbors are gonna be going to violence because one of them voted for Hillary and the other one voted for the Donald. I just don't see, I would hope that it could never be an eventuality. Well, I'm hearing you say that if there is any such violent eruption, it would be something or more on the order of inter-communal violence that would be immediately sprouted to us, you know, sprayed with water and go away. Well, Karen, do you also see it that way? What are you thinking about those? I guess I agree more with Winston. I see it as having grown up in Missouri and knowing a lot of these people, I don't see them getting out their guns and marching around, whatever. I do think that there are extremist groups that are increased by Facebook and the other media, whose algorithms basically target them and then feed them conspiracy theories over and over and over again. So they get more and more, you know, incited. And I could see, you know, some white-winged supremacist groups, that kind of thing trying to stage something, but I don't really see the general populace at war. So I'm hearing you say that if there's anything it would be small scale, something small scale, not full blown civil war or maybe we're moving into cold war, okay? What do you think about that? Cold war. Well, I'm reminded of the panel program that Tim hosted, chaired a couple of days ago, where a very sophisticated political science guy who was the Dean of Political Science of UH Manoa for years, decades, Neil Miller, he began his comments by saying, it's inevitable that we will have a civil war. What he didn't, that's what he said. You can go look at it. There's a Tuesday show. It was what now America for a special super show. Anyway, Neil's comment was incomplete in a sense because he did not define what is a civil war, the civil war that he thinks is coming. And I think it's worth spending a little time on that. It could be pockets of violence, Hither and Yon, maybe in the cities, but not in the rural areas. It could be pockets of violence to turn into larger violence. It's probably not geographic, but it could turn into geographic. We don't have a Mason-Dixon line, but we do have the ability to go to other parts of the country to get away from what we don't like. So maybe a philosophical difference turns into a geopolitical difference. But I don't think there's really any doubt that the election in November is gonna be a mess in many, many states. And I think people are gonna be mighty offended by that. And I think whether you bring in the supremacists first or you bring in the people who are offended, racial minorities, the African-Americans first, it'll be in the streets. And once it's in the streets, it's like the genie. It's hard to contain it. It's hard to go back. And I think we are on here in Think Tech. We try to connect the dots. One thing about the dots is they keep on moving forward. It doesn't go back. It doesn't return to normalcy or a better time. There's nobody out there that's able to achieve that. We can only stave off the inevitable contention. And I think the contention is coming soon. And I think the contention will reflect in violence. And the right thinking people don't carry guns around with them. And the right thinking people are at risk. They're the victims of this. And they are not gonna have a lot to say when they face somebody in the street or at home who has a gun. And I think that, sorry, but I think that's where we're going. And I don't think this much we can do about it. I don't wanna be pessimistic, but I am. I don't think this much that the right thinking people can do about it. We have to rely on the government. The government doesn't seem to be able to actually address this. And so it's up to fate right now. Well, thank you, Jay. Well, Tim, our politics are toxic. The question is, are the positions of the side so intractable that the only problem-solving mechanism we have left is war? So in a way, having some speaking to the unlikelihood of war is very hopeful. Does this persuade you in your thinking about it? Well, I'm getting hung up. I'm sorry, I'm getting hung up on semantics here. And I don't see all out war. What I see is a slow strangulation of our democratic principles to the point where it won't be war in the streets. It'll be a vote here and there in the Senate that takes away the rights that you and I enjoy today. It's a slow moving, I think it's a slow moving erosion of our principles and it won't happen overnight, it'll take time. So that's war, then I guess that's war, but I don't see it quite in the same light as a sudden cataclysmic event. I see it a slow draining process. Okay, thanks for moving this along to be perhaps a different approach to for controversy to go. In other words, I was gonna suggest the examples of South Africa and Northern Ireland and the Middle East that they go towards these other categories as you say, the Cold War, the Civil War. Well, I think we'll have incidents of violence. We'll have pockets of violence. We won't have an exact January 6th insurrection of the Capitol, but we'll see as things get uglier and a little bit tougher, we'll see incidents of violence. And, but does that constitute a war in the streets? No, I don't think it does. Winston, are Americans ready for this to go this way? No, Americans are ready for the exact opposite. That's why they chose Joe Biden. He's baking soda. We need to be part of the baking soda. Look, this country is armed to the teeth. It has been for decades and it's interesting. I was just looking as we were talking on Gallup's poll of who owns a gun and who doesn't own a gun. Well, of course, men own it more than women. And more interesting, I thought was that the more money you make, the more likely you are to own a gun. Conservatives own guns more. Married people own guns more, which I find interesting. Those that identify as conservative may also do own guns more according to Gallup. And when we talk about war, I think we should, Tim mentioned semantics. I think we need to be a part of toning down the verbiage used here because if, and if you want to use that, then we'd say according to Miriam Webster's, our American Great Dictionary, the second definition is a state of hostility, conflict or antagonism, that's two A. Two B is a struggle or competition between opposing forces for a particular end. We're in that right now. So we could call it war. I don't think it's particularly useful. I think we can say that this nation has a history of hopefully a competition for the best ideas to percolate to the top. We aren't living up to our ideals right now. We're in some dangerous territories with some demagogues. All of that is true. But no, the huge majority, overwhelming majority of Americans have people in their families, their neighbors or friends or coworkers who cross political spectrums, who cross all kinds of spectrums. And that is not going to change and they're not going to start harming each other because one of them voted for the Donald. I just don't see it. And if it does happen, then God help us all. But I think we need to be part of that Joe Biden baking soda solution as much as we can be. But what about the insurrection at the Capitol? What about the other assaults and the other states on their capitals, Michigan? We are turning a dangerous blind eye to that right now. And that really, really needs to be addressed because who wants to run for public office or even a school board, given the lunatics that show up there and they are unpunished. I mean, my feeling as a person who believes in liberal democracy is those types of people, the enemies of an open public discourse where people feel the need to physically threaten each other with violence to elected officials need to be arrested and incarcerated and stomped out like a fire that the dangerous fire that they are, they cannot be allowed to run rampant like they have been. And there's not a lot of stomach for it right now, unfortunately. Okay, Winston, what are they doing about that now? Is anybody taking care of that business of locking these people up or even just putting them through the judicial system? What? So you're saying this is what happens, has it happened? We're seeing slow begrudging moves by the Department of Justice. They say they'll cast a wide net and get everybody on January 6th. But what about what happened in Michigan at the State House there? This is these sorts of things they need, they are tracking these groups across, go to the Southern Poverty and Law Center, the FBI is tracking these extremist groups across the board, whether or not they're gonna do anything about it remains sort of an open question. But I think for the huge majority of Americans, they find this behavior, this ideology of extremism reprehensible. And they are more likely than not, if they found out something to call up on their friends, family or neighbors, if they found something like that. And I think we see evidence of that in the real world. As far as it being gotten away with on the fringes, it happens all the time, way too much. It leads to very bad outcomes and it inflames everything. So we need to have a much stronger response for these very anti-democratic and violence-prone people just because they're criminals, I mean, at that level. And that's the way that we need to view it. Okay, well, thank you. Karen, do you see that there's a huge proportion of Americans that feel the way Winston has described us as pursuing our democratic and constitutional principles? What is that huge proportion that's gonna come in and call 911 and also vote the right way? Is it? Well, as I see it, I think that there needs to be much more, a lot of this gearing up toward war is perpetrated by the media. And I think there need to be much tighter regulation also of the media, including Facebook needs to be broken up. And this would, I think go a lot and even Fox News, I think needs to be addressed. You can't just even know in the name of free speech, allow them to post and say incendiary things. So I think there needs to be a much tighter because we don't really speak to each other in person anymore. It's all through these mediated means that we get our information in that way as well. So for me, I think I saw where, for example, the FCC consists of five people and right now they have two Democrats, two Republicans, the Biden's nominee to break the tie, which would allow net neutrality to come back into place, which was dissolved under Trump. They won't let her nomination go forward. So it's that kind of thing that's I think holding things up because if the internet were regulated like a public utility rather than an information source, then it would fall under the guidelines of the FCC. And a lot, some of this could be content to be addressed. That's interesting. So all right, so since that nominee is held up, what is it that we can do? Where all of these safety nets gonna be thrown or put up? With that being the example of where we are now and does it look like it will be any better after the elections this year? Well, I did hear that Biden is getting more and more of his nominees through. In fact, they said in terms of like judges, he's gotten more judges through than any other president at this time. So he has been successful, but of course, this particular candidate, they definitely want to hold her up because they know that it would change the net neutrality role. She is an active proponent of net neutrality. So, but I think he's doing a good job, but this whole thing of holding up the nominees in their process, I think is an issue for, in her situation, and maybe more pressure should be put on the people who are holding up, which would be Congress. Thank you, thank you. I mean, Jay, this sounds like the eye of the needle is now there in the Senate. I mean, they're putting through some of these judges, I guess. I mean, Biden has done a wonderful job of getting so many in in his first year, but then there are these other positions that have to go through the Senate too. So are we up against, and they're making the eye of the needle not getting anybody through, and therefore not being able to have any safety provisions in place to keep us from getting more tense? Well, the answer is the government is not really working. I'm happy to hear that some confirmations have happened in the Senate, but a lot of them haven't happened. And then there's a lot of Trump appointees, like DeJoy, who are still in office doing their thing. And the government is riddled with blind spots and failure points that are still in existence from Trump. This is not a good thing. So the government is really dysfunctional, lest we forget. But that might be my piece is that we only have a certain amount of time to correct this and it's not moving fast enough. Certainly the Department of Justice is not moving fast enough. When we get to, I've said this before, September, October, when cap-sentee balloting ostensibly is supposed to start, there's gonna be a mess in the country. There's gonna be lawsuits and confusion. There's gonna be people who don't wanna vote, who have no confidence in the voting system anymore. And the election, you can say the election has the logical prospect of solving some of this, but I doubt it. I doubt it will. I think the Republicans will take both houses. And if you think the Senate is stuck now, wait till then, that not only will the Republicans win a lot of seats, but there'll be confusion. Nobody will know who's who and what's what. And if they lose a lot of seats, which is not likely to happen, they will not exceed. They will not agree to the transfer of power in their respective elections. This is not going in a good direction. My feeling is, as I said before also, we're in a kind of constitutional convention where the whole country is evaluating its morality, evaluating its ethical approach to government, evaluating what it wants to do. Problem is there's no real leadership to govern that constitutional convention, which isn't really constitutional at all. And at the end of the day, you're looking for chaos and chaos is another way of saying the war cries have their effect. The other thing I wanted to mention is that, if you look in other countries and you take a sort of sampling of countries which wound up in horrible straits in Africa and Latin America, it's a certain pattern. And that pattern can be identified here. It's power. Power ultimately comes from the mouth of a gun. That's where it comes from physical force. That's how you maintain control and power at the end of the day. And the other example of it is that you can have governments that are in place but don't care. They don't care about the public. They care about retaining their ostensible power. They care about making money and becoming wealthy and staying in power forever and becoming increasingly wealthy. And when you have that, and when you have government that doesn't care about the people, the social condition or the rule of law that governs the country, then you have a complete breakdown. And I think we're headed to that. Thank you, Jay. Let's go around here to finish up as we're getting really close to out of time. So what would you like to comment on Tim regarding the predicament and its outcome? I'd actually like to tag a little bit onto what Jay was saying about potentially losing the House or the Senate. And I know the media is saying that's what's probably gonna happen most likely but I'm still not convinced. And why is that? Well, I think there's things in the air that could possibly happen. What are those things? Who knows what the select committee final report will look like? Will that motivate people and outrage people? So to the point where they get out of their chairs be it Democrat, independence, and non-Trump Republicans, will they be so outraged by the details of that report that they are actually motivated and make a difference in the voting booths? Does Build Back Better part two get done? Do they scrap the existing one and rebuild and get something passed that people say, okay, there's an accomplishment? Democracy is working. This administration is working for us. Does some kind of altered voting rights package get passed? And so maybe it's accomplishments and maybe it's the select committee's report that could make the difference come 2022 and 2024. All right, thank you. Winston, briefly, we're almost out of time. Okay, your comments, summation. Yeah, just if we're looking at who are what we're talking about. I think, well, Jay says, power may come from a gun. Yes, that's true in a blunt, gross way. But we have a great moral authority in this nation, ethical considerations that the huge majority of people follow, they want to be kind, they wanna be helpful, they wanna be part of this great experiment. And I have faith in my fellow country, men and women most of the time. And for the few fringe, we're talking a very tiny portion of people who are, it's a criminal element. We just have to recognize them for that, but it is, we need to separate that out and say this isn't enough to a free society. The rest of us, we're never gonna get what we want all the time. And that's part of what it is to be in America. And we're gonna continue to have this discussion. I don't know of a better system out there. So we gotta protect, promote and preserve what we got across the political spectrum. Okay, thank you. And Karen, yeah, there isn't a better system out there, but there are lots of systems to default to authoritarianism and dictatorships and that. So are you feeling good about our prospects going forward and that this is a small minority that we're worried about? Well, I think my closing thought would be about AmeriGarland. I think he is not being as active as he, I think he should be. And I would like Biden to keep an eye on replacing him. Maybe if he's doing more than what I'm seeing, I don't know, and not exposing what he's doing, but from what I've read about him in the past, he's one of these people that likes to say things but he's not big on action. So I guess that would be my closing thought. Well, that's a serious recommendation. We can't go around again because we're out of time folks, but I think that this has been a wonderful contribution of you all to this topic, which is a hard one to talk about. And this show is Politics for the People and I'm your host, Stephanie Stulldalton. Mahalo for your viewership and we'll see you next week.