Brain Buster #3 - Mensa Brain Twisters

 Mensa brain twisters.  

These have given some of the best brains in Mensa fits. There are no time limits and one or two may require computer programming skills. Readers can work out parts of each subset maybe a few each day, and see how they do.  If one at first seems too hard, come back to it.

1)

Arrange the 6 L-shaped pieces above into a 4 x 6 grid such that:

- Each row has the same number of stars

-  Each column has the same number of stars.

- No diagonal has 4 stars.

The pieces may be rotated but not reflected.

2) Prove all square numbers (1,4,9,16, 25...) are either divisible by three OR have a remainder of one when divided by three.

3) Find all solutions for positive integers a and b (a > 1):

(a + 2)! a! (a - 2)! = b!

Then prove there are no other solutions.

4) Given a rectangle of length  (Ö2) x  and height x, we have one circle and two semi-circles inscribed within it,  and all three intersect at two points, as shown below:

Find the area of either green crescent shape between the two arcs in terms of x. 

5) Replace the letters A-L in the equation below with the integers 0-11 so that the math is correct.

A^B + C^D = E ^F + G^H + I^J + K^L

Brain- Buster #2: Math 'MAULERS'

MATH MAULERS:  (Level:  High School)

  

1) (a) If (3x + 1)/3 - (x - 3)/2 = 2 + (2x - 3)/3

find the value of x

(b) Factorize completely:

(i) 15 x²y - 20 xy²

(ii) 3 - 12b²


(c) Given that: m = -3, n = 2, p = -1

find the value of:

m(p - n)²/ 3p + m

2) f and g are functions defined as follows:

f: x -> 3x - 5

g: x -> ½ x

a) Calculate the value of f(-3)

b) Write expressions for (i) f ^-1x  and (ii) g^-1x

c) Hence or otherwise, write an expression for (gf)^-1


3) (a) The coordinates of the points L and N are (5, 6) and (8, -2), respectively.
(i)State the coordinates of the midpoint M of the line, LN.

(ii) Calculate the gradient of the line LN

(iii) Determine the equation of the straight line which is perpendicular to LN and which passes through point M.

(b) An aircraft leaves Jamaica at 13:55 hrs. and travels to Barbados via Antigua. The average speed of the aircraft is 420 km/hr. It arrives in Antigua at 16:45 hrs. local time. Given Antigua is ONE hour AHEAD of Jamaica, compute the distance between Jamaica and Antigua.

(4) (a) Calculate the exact values of:

i) (2.8 + 1.36)/ 4 - 2.7

ii) (27/8)^1/3

(b) Calculate 9.72 x 12.05

i) Exactly

ii) Correct to two decimal places

iii) Correct to 2 significant figures
iv) in standard form


5)Using Fig. 1 and the information therein, calculate (giving reasons):
a) Angle MSQ

b)Angle RSP

c)Angle SPN


6) (a) Given that: U = {a, b, c, d, e, f, g} where U is the universal set

L = {a, b, c, d, e}

M= {a, c, e, g}

N = {b, e, f, g}

(i)Draw a Venn diagram showing the sets U, L, M, N and their elements

(ii)List the members of the set represented by the union of N with the intersection of L and M

b) If:

(a)
(b) =

(2...3)(-3)
(-1..2)(1)

determine the values of a and b


c) Given the vector:

A =

(4)
(7)

Calculate:

i) ‖A‖, the length of vector A

ii) the size of the angle made by the vector A and the x-axis.


7) This refers to Fig. 2. (Take the radius of the Earth to be 6400 km, and π = 3.14)

The diagram represents the Earth and shows the equator and the Greenwich meridian. Town I is located at (16 N, 30 W), and Town J is at (16 N, 45 W).

(i) Copy the diagram (or print it out) and show the positions of Towns I, J.

(ii) Calculate the radius of the circle of latitude on which Towns I and J are situated.

(iii) Calculate the shortest distance, measured along the Earth's surface, between the two towns.


8)The matrix R =

(cos(Θ)......-sin(Θ))
(sin (Θ)......cos(Θ))

a) Determine the coordinates of the image (1, 2) under the transformation R when Θ = 90 degrees.

b) If the point (p, 3) is on the line (L)given by: x + 2y = 5, calculate the value of p.

c) Given the point (1,2)is on L, determine the image of L (L') of the line L under the transformation R.

d) Write the matrix equation to represent the pair of simultaneous equations given by L and L'.


9) This refers to Fig. 3. The diagram shows a rectangular sheet of metal ABCD supported by a vertical wall (shaded) at right angles to the level ground OX. AB measures 3 meters and AD measures 10 meters.

a) Calculate the size of the angle ODA.

b) Hence, calculate the size of the angle CDX.

c) If CX represents the length in meters of C above the ground, calculate CX.


10)This refers to the Venn diagram in Fig. 4 and the information therein. Assume the same number, x, play football only and tennis only.

(a) Calculate the number who play football.

(b) State the information represented by the shaded portion of the Venn diagram.

(c)State the relationship between the members of the sets C and F, and between the sets C and T

An Interlude: Brain -Buster Challenges - For Those Tired Of Reading Regular Brane Space Posts - Here Is #1

I get it.  As Robert Reich noted in a recent Substack blog, our scarcest resource - attention - is too often being squandered, given:

 "Our brains can take in only a limited amount of stimuli at one time. Sure, we can multitask. But there’s a limit."

In particular, people are exhausted by so much 'Sturm and drang':  Gaza, Hamas terror, Houthi attacks on shipping, Ukraine war stalemate,  citizens at each others' throats over free speech, nonstop threats from Trump and his MAGA minions, and the arrival of a political campaign season filling many with dread.

So many are getting numb to regular news if they haven't already.  On that note, the posting frequency (for regular topics) will now be reduced to no more than 12-14 a month.  Instead of blog posts-articles, brain busters and challenges will appear to encourage active participation and not just passive reading.   These will be designed for difficulty - so likely can't be raced through in one day and maybe not in several.

Here is the first of three- prepared for today - but designed to sustain Brane Space netizens' interest over the next 2 weeks. Answers will appear starting on Groundhog Day!  

LOGICAL LABYRINTH:

1. A object O is 2 degrees F. higher in temperature than body B which is 1.8 C higher than body C which is at 0 C. What is the temperature of O in Celsius degrees? (Hint: Every 1 C increase in temperature = 1.8 F)

A) 2.8 B) 1.8 C) 2.91 D)1.91

2) The equilateral triangle shown in Fig. 1(a) is rotated clockwise through 60 degrees, then 60 degrees counterclockwise, then through 360 degrees clockwise– what will the new orientation look like (Select option from Fig. 1b)

A)   B)    C)    D)

3) If proposition X is true, then Z is also true. If X is false, then Y is true. If X and W are false, then Z MAY be true or false. If it is found that proposition Z is false, then:

A) X is false B) Y is true C) W is false D) all the preceding may be true


4)Roger is Paul’s uncle. Deke is Roger’s brother. Gerald is Deke’s father. Carmela is Gerald’s niece. Beula is Carmela’s daughter. How is Beula related to Roger?

A) niece B) sister C) cousin D) 2nd cousin


5) Consider these operations:

Let addition by 1 be denoted by A
Let multiplication by 2 be denoted by S
Let division by 4 be denoted by F
Let subtraction by 1 be denoted by T

Then given the sequence of operations: 28 SFATS, the result one obtains is:

A) 14 B) 28 C) 56 D) 7

                                                                                     

6) Referencing the square shown in Fig. 2, one can apply the following operations, each of which can alter its orientation:

R1: Rotation clockwise by 90 degrees
R2: rotation clockwise by 180 degrees
R3: rotation clockwise by 270 degrees
M1: Mirrors corners exactly through the midline of the square
M2: Mirrors two opposing diagonal corners: from top left to bottom right
M3: Mirrors two opposing corners in the opposite sense to M2

If we apply the sequence of operations to the square (in the order identified):

R2 M1 M3

Then the result is (assuming the square in Fig. 2 is given by ABCD):

A) ABCD B) BCDA C) DABC D) CDAB

7) An experiment is performed in which the bacterium E. Coli, grown in a medium devoid of galactosides, so that its three available proteins (alpha, beta, gamma – or A, B, G) are synthesized at an exceedingly slow rate – about 1 molecule every five generations.

If galactoside is introduced into the medium the rate of synthesis of all three proteins is increased a thousandfold. E.g. A/1000t = B/1000t = C/1000t.

If it is withdrawn, the synthesis rate returns to its original low form:

A/t = B/t = C/t

A chemical K is added in a new experiment, which increases the density of all 3 proteins by 100 times. If the galactoside is re-introduced but at half the concentration as before, then we can expect the new rate of synthesis for all three proteins, and for every five generations to be:

A) 5 molecules B) 500 molecules C) 25 molecules D) 250 molecules

                                                                  

           
8) Examine the sequence of steps in Fig. 3a and the possible next configuration in Fig..3b. The new configuration will most likely be that in:

A)   B)    C)     D)

9) A person (religious) makes the claim:

“Laws of nature are descriptive , whereas logical laws , like ethical laws are prescriptive . That is , laws of logic tell us how we ought to reason in order to conform our thought to how things really are A miracle is an exception to physical law . As such it does not contradict the general law . The comparison between physical laws and laws of thought is invalid .”


The logical error committed by the author is:

A) Making the claim both logical and ethical laws are “prescriptive”- since no absolute ethics exists.
B) Making the claim that the laws of logic tell us how to reason, since reason developed the laws in the first place.
C) Omitting the role of quantum logic, which supersedes Boolean 'Either-or' logic and hence represents the applicable laws of thought for quantum mechanics.
D) All of the above

10) Considering the author’s claim that a “miracle is an exception to physical law” and the simultaneous claim “it doesn’t contradict the general law”, the best question to ask this author would be:

A) What are the necessary and sufficient conditions for an “exception”?

B) How does one discriminate between ordinary exceptions associated with certain physical laws (i.e. For the 2nd law of thermodynamics, biological organisms are a temporary exception to increasing disorder) and “miracle exceptions”?

C) If thought is required to formulate physical laws, then how can comparison between them be ‘invalid’?

D) All of the above

11) Given the author's reference to "general law" - what would you conclude?

A) He has conflated "general law" with laws of thought, without defining the former.

B) He has committed the "one True Scotsman" fallacy, i.e. asserting a certain association always trumps any other associations by virtue of having some special dispensation or quality (usually an appeal to "authority" or an undefined God).

C) He has erred in extrapolating from the particular to the general.

D) He has committed all the above.

Solutions To Stellar Line Formation Problems (3)

  The Problems:

1) Enumerate the possible values of j and m _J for the states in which ℓ = 1 and s = 1/2 and draw the associated vector diagrams.

2) Consider an electron for which n = 4, ℓ = 3, and m _ℓ = 3. Calculate:

a) the numerical value of L, the total orbital angular momentum

b) the z-component of the orbital angular momentum.

3) A two-electron atom for which the orbital angular momentum quantum numbers are ℓ1 =3 and ℓ2 = 2 can have what values for the total orbital angular momentum number L?  Determine the possible values of the total angular momentum quantum number of single f  electron.

Solutions:

1) The vector solutions will show:

j = ℓ + s  = 1 + ½ = 3/2

The diagram for the vectors is shown below:

Then:

m _J  = -3/2, -½, ½, 3/2

2)  a) The numerical value of the total angular momentum is given by:

L = [ℓ (ℓ + 1)]^1/2 (ħ)

Where ℓ = 3, then:

L = [3 (3 + 1)]^1/2 (ħ)  =    [3 (4)]^1/2 (ħ)   =   3Ö2  ( ħ)

b) The z-component of the orbital angular momentum is given by:

L(z) = m _ℓ ħ

For this election,  m _ℓ  = 3, so that:   L(z) = 3 ħ

(3) We have ℓ1 =3 and ℓ2 = 2, then:

Therefore, the possible values of L will be found  from letting ℓ1 =3 and adding each next descending value of m _ℓ  from 2, to 1, to 0, to -1, to -2:

(3) + 1 =   4

(3) + 0 = 3

(3) + (-1) = 2

(3) +  (-2)  = 1

So the total angular momentum L can have the values:

5, 4, 3, 2 and 1.

The f electron has ℓ =3  so that the total angular momentum quantum number possibilities are:

j = ℓ + ½,   ℓ - ½

Then: j = 7/2,  5/2

Solar Superflares - A Threat We Ignore At Our Peril

                                                                         

                                        Ordinary flare and size of Earth (bottom left) 

                                                                                  

                            Prof. Shibata's graph for probabilities of monster flares

Superflares, monstrous explosions from our Sun that have occurred in the past, could wreak havoc on our little world - it technological infrastructure and life forms.  Habitually, they have been written off as "unlikely" but this may be premature. From the time of my original paper linking sunspots to solar flares, e.g.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1983SoPh...88..137A

It’s been known that solar flares are closely correlated with sunspot group evolution and that the intensity of solar flare eruptions is related to the size of sunspot groups, the number of sunspots in groups, and the complexity of the magnetic field. The more complex the structures and magnetic field polarities are, the more likely large solar flares will erupt (See e.g. Greatrix 1963; Zirin & Liggett 1987; Kilcik et al. 2011; Norquist 2011; McCloskey et al. 2016; Eren & Kilcik 2017).

More recently Sammis et al. (2000) found that βγδ  groups with an area larger than 1000 millionths of a solar hemisphere (msh) have a 40% probability of producing X1 or larger flares. (Recall βγ denotes a bipolar sunspot group but sufficiently complex that no distinction can be made between opposite polarities. A  δ group - magnetic class - indicates a group with umbrae separated by less than 2 degrees within one penumbra, with opposite polarity.)

 It  has also been found that for βγδ groups exceeding more than 1000 msh in area X4 or larger flares can occur within them.  Ternullo et al. (2006) found that spot groups with more than 15 sunspots accompanied by larger area (> 1000 msh), and more complex magnetic field structures (e.g., β, βγ, and βγδ) are more prone to larger M and X class flares. 

With larger area sunspots the buildup of vast stores of magnetic free energy (MFE) is also more likely, and Prof. Kazunari Shibata in his paper (‘From Jets to Superflares: Extraordinary Activity of Magnetized Plasmas in the Universe') presented in June of 2020 at the 236th meeting of the American Astronomical Society) showed the MFE can attain energies of 10 ³⁵ ergs  ( 10²⁸ J) and X100 on the x-ray scale (see lower graphic above).  This is applicable to Sun-like stars with effective (surface) temperatures of 5600K- 6000K.

The magnetic energy buildup preceding geo-effective solar flares, paving the way for a flare trigger was first postulated by me (Proceedings of the Second Caribbean Physics Conference, Ed. L.L. Moseley, pp. 1-11.) to account for release of magnetic free energy using: 

DE _mfe  =  ¶/ ¶ t  {ò_v  B²/2m  dV} 

= 1/m  ò_v div[(v  X B) X B] dV  - ò_v {h_an | J_ms |² }dV 

This also left open an evolutionary increase in spot complexity, spot area and acquisition of MFE via field twisting. In particular, I had noted the potential for vast magnitudes of free energy release if the sunspot area was sufficiently large (> 1500 msh), the magnetic configuration sufficiently complex (i.e. presence of  delta spots)  and anomalous resistivity  ( h_an ) coincident with marginal stability of current density ( J_ms).   We know that if anomalous resistivity and marginal stability are applicable there will be rapid, turbulent fluctuations with J_MS being driven by an external agent, in this case the rotary footpoint motions.  As J_MS approaches the critical threshold value for current density, J_c, associated with the drift velocity V_d  (1.2 km/s) a back reaction of the plasma brings J_c ® J_MS And so violent release of energy can occur especially for a large magnitude change in flux df/dt associated with rotary velocity V_q.  This will persist until a clear additional micro-instability (e.g. ion -acoustic)  pushes the system directly into the immediate trigger mode. 

Bear in mind solar flares are among the most explosive phenomena in the solar system.  They were discovered in 1859 during what's referred to as the landmark "Carrington event".  A mammoth solar flare which saw telegraphs catch fire, and auroras seen as far south as the Caribbean.  The disruptions proved solar events could impact Earth.

In our own current situation, we've become a more vulnerable society by virtue of  constructing mammoth, interlocked  power grids which can crash if the right combination of factors is imposed. While we do have high voltage transformers that connect directly to the ground (zero or earth potential) to neutralize power surges from lightning strikes, these don't afford any protection against powerful geo-magnetic currents that are induced in the earth and flow upward into the grid. Then one such mammoth event, say from and X10 flare, could spark calamity. Possibly no electric power for days, maybe longer, over vast swatches of North America.

In addition, if a monster flare hurls a super stream of charged particles along with the CME we could expect adverse effects on all GPS positioning satellites. Bear in mind that GPS, besides providing directions for road users, allows synchronized cell phone conversations, as well as orchestrates air traffic not to mention 'date stamping' most financial transactions and guiding the dynamic positioning of the majority of deep sea oil drilling and gas operations.

 The first indication that solar flares could be even more formidable came in 2012, with the arrival of a mega storm 10 to 100 times stronger than the Carrington event that occurred in 775 A.D. Now these phenomena appear to be even more common than we thought: researchers investigating the geochemical annals of Earth’s recent history have now found evidence for two more. One occurred in 7176 B.C., when nomadic hunter-gatherer societies were giving way to agrarian settlements. The other happened in 5259 B.C., as the planet emerged from the last ice age. Both events are thought to have been at least as strong as the one in A.D. 775, and for the past decade scientists have been searching for similarly extreme occurrences.

The Sun's magneto-physics hasn't radically changed over some billions of years. It still goes through a 22 -year polarity to polarity sunspot cycle and an 11 -year average spot maxima to maxima cycle.  Sunspots - especially in groups - appear, acquire powerful magnetic fields and have the potential to trigger solar flares.  Prof. Shibata's paper showed we cannot take for granted that we can always expect easy to deal with flares and their geo-effective events. Perhaps once in a 500 year or 1,000 year period we may get a superflare and total devastation to all our sophisticated infrastructure, including Elon Musk's Space link satellites.

The energy maximum erupting itself is still limited by the amount of magnetic free energy in the CME-releasing region. So this is comforting to know, but that knowledge doesn't release us from trying for forecast when such impacting events could affect us. Hence, the urgent need for accurate space weather forecasts.

For the “solar maximum,” which is estimated to occur in July next year (give or take 3 months), NASA and NOAA forecasters are anticipating about 115 sunspots per month. But a pair of researchers — Scott McIntosh, deputy director of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, and Bob Leamon, a researcher at the University of Maryland Baltimore County and NASA Goddard — predict twice as many.  No superflares are forecast but we have to see how active that new cycles is and how many very large and complex spots and spot groups occur. If any are detected with areas over 2,500 msh, and of the δ  magnetic class, watch out.  

See Also:

New Solar Research Confirms Why Delta Sunspots Are More Flare Worthy Than Other Magnetic Classes 

And:

A Threat To U.S. Power Grids? Solar X-Ray Flares Presage Active Solar Cycle 25 And Potential Earlier CMEs As Well As Aurora 

And:

Solar Max Peak Expected To Be Earlier & More Violent Than Originally Forecast

Trump's Lawyers' Claim He Can Order Anyone Assassinated: Will WSJ's Lance Morrow Finally Come To His Senses?

                                                                 

                                          Lance Morrow - Clueless as ever

Former TIME magazine essayist Lance Morrow, in a recent WSJ op-ed attacking the Maine Secretary of State for banning Trump from the ballot - may change his mind if he processes what happened yesterday. There in the D.C. Circuit Court Of Appeals Trump lawyer D. John Sauer claimed presidential immunity meant one could issue an order to have a political opponent assassinated.  The loopy lawyer was caught out by Judge Florence Pan who posed the hypothetical and Sauer - ass that he is -walked right into it. As LA Times legal specialist Harry Littman put it on ALL In last night:  

"Legally, historically and logically this is nonsense. Once Judge Pan asked that hypo Sauer was a dead man walking. And we can be sure that this vampire of a claim will now finally have a stake put in its heart."

Well, let us hope so! As there have been far too many dodges through the justice system for putting the orange ratfucker away - for keeps.  But even before this episode which ALL In host Chris Hayes called out as "an argument of such a breath taking vision of American dictatorship as we have ever seen"  Morrow was loopy and chagrined about knocking Trump out of eligibility for the office, by virtue of disqualification under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.  Thus Morrow began his hack piece by setting his sights on the Maine Secretary of State for following Colorado's example in disqualifying Trump, writing:

 "Invoking Section 3 of the post-Civil War 14th Amendment, Ms. Bellows claims Mr. Trump engaged in insurrection against the U.S. when he did whatever he did, or didn’t do, on Jan. 6, three years ago this week. "

Huh?  He incited a mob to storm the Capitol you clueless Babbit. As former DOJ Prosector Chuck Rosenberg noted the day after, in an episode of ALL In:

"The insurrection was the attempt by an armed mob to interfere with the electoral vote count, and to thwart that, to upset it, to stop it from happening.  And this is not something that sprang up organically on January 6th. 

This is something Trump has been talking about over and over an over again.  And that is why inciting this mob to insurrection and encouraging them -  telling them they were doing the right thing and fighting for his electoral victory is so troubling."

This take was supported by historian Michael Beschloss:

"An attempted overthrow of our government has never in American history included the president of the United States. We Americans have never before been in a situation when a president with all his awesome power tried to incite an attack on the Capitol and congress. "

Does this has -been and hack Morrow really believe he knows more than a former DOJ prosecutor and a presidential historian? I mean, this turkey in his previous forays actually cheered the Trumper MAGA insurrectionists as "freedom loving pirates", e.g.

• Lance Morrow Crashes Again - Comparing MAGAs To "Freedom Loving Pirates"...

Morrow, buried brain deep in cluelessness about Section 3 to the 14th amendment goes on to write:

"Recently, Colorado’s Supreme Court ordered Mr. Trump’s name deleted from that state’s Republican primary ballot for the same reason. Other states have been toying with the idea. It’s up to the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether the disqualifications are constitutional. The justices may decide the matter on narrow or legalistic grounds—by a close parsing of the 14th Amendment, and of the term “insurrection.” They must rule on whether Mr. Trump’s rhetoric, actions or failures to act on that day amounted to a violent uprising against the American government. "

But as Constitutional scholar and former 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge J. Michael Luttig pointed out in a 'Deadline White House' appearance on Dec. 20th, the threshold for insurrection does not necessitate actual incitement, but merely participation. Of that Trump is clearly guilty of as when he bellowed to the gathered MAGAs;

"You'll never take back our country with weakness!  You have to be strong!"

And yes, the effect did amount to a violent uprising against the American government, given the mob was intent on stopping the certification of electoral votes and getting Trump back into power. Oh and yeah we have the images that show the violence, 

                                                                          

Morrow next goes on to show an even deeper misunderstanding of Section 3:

"Two powerful lines of argument clash: 1. In such a dispute, a democracy must revert to its essential idea: the sovereignty of the people. It isn’t for unelected judges, or provincial officials, to make such a decision. The people themselves, in their millions, must render their verdict in the voting booth.

2.  A man who has so menaced democracy itself has disqualified himself from the privilege of democratic process. "

Morrow fails to grasp that indeed, by the letter of the original meaning of Section 3 of the 14th Trump has indeed disqualified himself. In much the same way that a man 34 years old disqualifies himself  because he lacks eligibility owing to the age threshold - at least 35. Or a foreign born individual disqualifies himself by not being a native born citizen.  In all these cases, the people's rendering of a "a verdict" is irrelevant because no verdict (as a vote) can be rendered for any person who isn't eligible to run ab initio.  This was also historian Michael Beschloss' point - as well as J. Michael Luttig's - in noting: the 14th amendment is “self-executing” meaning no prior criminal proceedings are necessary for the person to be so disqualified.   Just as no prior criminal proceedings are necessary for the person to be so disqualified if under the age of 35, or if not a native born citizen.

Hence, there is really no "clash", as when Morrow babbles:

"Argument No. 2 escalates; it conjures monstrous possibilities. Should a demagogue be permitted to use the rules of democracy (let the people decide) in such a way that, once he has been legally elected to office, he might turn dictator, declare an “emergency” and dismiss the democratic process that brought him to the White House? "

Failing to understand there can be no "democratic process" if his eligibility for that office is already terminated by not meeting the standards defined.   This is also why Justice Luttig observed: "The Colorado decision was not anti-democratic”, rather it was the conduct giving rise to the disqualification that was antidemocratic."  Again, Trump disqualified himself from contention by his own actions on January 6th, 2021.  This is as basic as a Sesame Street rhyme whether Morrow pretends to get it or not.   

Lastly, we see his actual claims as risible and egregious when he writes:

"In America in 2024, who, or what, is the real threat? Mr. Trump? Or the left? It’s a harder question than either side will admit. The faithful of the progressive left, every bit as cultish as Trumpians are alleged to be, consider themselves and their doctrines as the path to righteousness. The sane course is to let the people vote on it. "

This emanating from a guy who actually once insisted Trump's Nazis were not the actual fascists, but rather is was the "left". E.g.

WSJ Hack Lance Morrow Gets Fascism 'Backwards' -

Claiming ( (WSJ, Sept. 6, p. A17, 2022, 'The Left Gets Fascism Backward' ):

"Mr. Trump and his followers, believe it or not, are essentially antifascists: They want the state to stand aside,"

Anti-fascist? What mushrooms has he been ingesting?  Maybe this loser needs to learn more about "Agenda 47" that Trump and his minions have planned if they can sneak into power again,

Agenda 47: Donald Trump's and the GOP's Dystopian Nightmare Plan for America Revealed

by Thom Hartmann | December 22, 2023 - 8:33am | permalink

— from The Hartmann Report

"If Trump is re-elected, he’d be America’s 47th president, so he’s named the plans for his second term “Agenda 47.” At best, it’s a dystopian nightmare: at worst it means ending our current system of American government; aligning the US with Russia and other autocratic nations"

Morrow's also oblivious to the Neo-Nazi, White Supremacist 'Unite the Right' March that transpired in August, 2017, in Charlottesville, VA,

As well as multiple attacks on minority groups driven by Trump's rhetoric, such as at the Squirrel Hill Synagogue, by Robert Bowers -   the largest Jewish massacre in U.S. history.  As for the "sane course" being for the "people" to vote on it. Again, no, because you don't vote on anyone already disqualified from running in the first place. Moreover, as NY Times Jamelle Bouie pointed out on ALL In  last week, we know Trump will merely undermine the next election and try to overthrow the result again if not in his favor. So Morrow's "sane course" is simply doing the same thing again expecting a different result, the definition of insanity.

As  Bulwark contributor A.B. Stoddard writes.

“Without objective truth in a rules-based system, we will have anarchy and tyranny. Any Republicans who endorse Trump this year and lies about the 2020 election, or about January 6th, are not just complicit in spreading his falsehoods — they are also helping to perpetrate an ongoing attack on the rule of law and our constitutional system, because Trump will demand they lie about the next election also."

The latest wake up call for blasé Americans  (including Morrow) regarding Trump and his re-election plans was issued yesterday by none other than his lawyer D. John Sauer.  This was in the immunity appeal case before the D.C. Circuit Court.  When Judge Florence Pan asked Sauer whether immunity extended to the power of a president to order the assassination of a political opponent, Sauer hedged at first then answered in the affirmative.  In other words, if Trump were to be elected again he'd have the power to carry out any murders he wants, just like Adolf Hitler. As Chris Hayes put it on ALL IN:

"If Sauer is correct you just need to hold on to 35 votes in the Senate (in its current composition) and you can have your political opponents murdered, you can have anyone murdered. You can do whatever you want.  And there is nothing anyone can do about it anywhere in this country under the structure they claim. They are not trying to hide it.

Trump’s argument is of such a breath taking vision of American dictatorship as we have ever seen. And let’s be totally clear. The claim was not being made in a fundraising email or on a tarmac or blurted in a campaign rally. It was a considered argument of the lawyer for the man who wants to hold the office of the president again.”

 The time to climb out of sleepwalking mode is now, my friends, before the Iowa caucuses and months before the Nov. 5 general election.

See Also:

Donald Trump

What Trump’s Lawyer Was Really Advocating

by Robert Reich | January 11, 2024 - 7:29am | permalink

— from Robert Reich's Substack

Excerpt:

Trump’s lawyer, John Sauer, argued on Tuesday (before the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit) that a precondition for a president to face criminal trial is impeachment by Congress.

As Doug Gilbert noted in the comments to yesterday’s substack letter, a rogue president could avoid impeachment by simply imprisoning members of Congress who’d otherwise vote to impeach him.

In effect, John Sauer was arguing for the equivalent of the 1933 Enabling Law in Germany.

And:

Judges appear skeptical that Trump is immune from Jan. 6 prosecution

And: 

Donald Trump

Why Trump Is Making His Lawyers Look Like Fools in Court

by Heather Digby Parton | January 11, 2024 - 8:15am | permalink

— from Salon

Excerpt:

The idea that former President Donald Trump was performing his official duties when he told his supporters to march to the Capitol and "fight like hell" and then sat in his dining room as they stormed the building and he refused to do anything to quell the riot has always seemed to be a stretch. After he lost 60 of 61 court cases in which he tried to overturn the results of the election and continued to exhort the top officials in the Justice Department to lie and say they had evidence of fraud hardly seems like a presidential duty either. And all the calls to local officials asking them to "find" enough votes to change the outcome of their election wouldn't normally be considered the job of a president. American elections, for better or worse, are processed by state and local authorities.

Nonetheless, Donald Trump's lawyers filed an appeal in a U.S. District court arguing that everything he did in the post-election period was part of Trump's official duties as president and therefore he should be given immunity for all of it, which is ridiculous. But even more ridiculous: His lawyers didn't really end up addressing that claim in oral arguments before the court on Tuesday, instead focusing on a truly fatuous assertion that unless a president has been impeached and convicted by Congress, he cannot be prosecuted for anything that happened during his term in office. This naturally led to some very unusual questioning by the judges:

And: 

In Watershed Decision Colorado Supreme Court Merits Kudos For Disqualifying A Traitor From Ballot 

And:

2024 Elections | Constitution, Civil Rights, Civil Liberties | Donald Trump | Supreme Court

Booting Trump off the Ballot Isn’t Just Legally Correct — It’s the Smart Move for the Supreme Court

by Amanda Marcotte | December 22, 2023 - 8:04am | permalink

— from Salon

Let's just get this out the way up front: If Donald Trump is removed from enough state ballots that one of the also-rans vying for the Republican nomination gets to run for president instead, there's a risk that President Joe Biden loses in November. All of those never-Trumpers we thought were our buddies will abandon the #Resistance so fast it will make Democratic heads spin. And the MAGA types could be so angry about losing Dear Leader they will rush the polls to vote as hard against Biden as possible.

Or maybe the opposite will happen: Trump will whine, cry and blame whoever gets the nomination, convincing enough MAGA types to sit the election out in protest, thus handing Biden an easy victory next fall.

The reality is we're facing a situation never seen before in the United States. A shameless insurrectionist is running for president while under 91 felony indictments. To add to this historic situation, the Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday banned Trump from appearing on the state's Republican presidential primary ballot. The 4-3 decision follows the clear language of the Constitution's 14th Amendment barring those who "have engaged in insurrection" from running for office. Yet anyone who thinks they know how this will play out over the next 11 months is kidding themselves. The one thing that is dead certain, however, is that the Supreme Court justices would be fools not to uphold this decision.

And:

2024 Elections | Donald Trump | Joe Biden

The Jan. 6 Election Is Coming — And It’s Time for America To Choose a Path

by Heather Digby Parton | January 9, 2024 - 8:39am | permalink

— from Salon

Groundhog Day isn't until next month. But if you were watching cable news over the past few days you certainly got a feeling of déjà vu watching all the footage of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection again and being reminded of the violence and horror of that day. It is still as shocking as it was three years ago. And yet: We are evidently about to embark on a replay of the election that brought us to that awful moment and it feels as if nothing has changed in our politics at all.