Sad Crass, Sag-Sacked Trump Gets Nobel Peace Prize – How to Steal Someone’s Lunch & "Why I Love Dictators and Not Greenland."

Yesterday, our crass, puerile, sad-sacked President was stupid enough to use American power not to actually advance democracy and peace, but to coerce Maria Karina Machado into giving him her Nobel Peace Prize. He described her doing so as a “wonderful gesture of mutual respect.” Pres. Trump is too dumb to understand when people are kissing your ass because they want something, as opposed to actual genuine love and mutual respect. He has never known in his entire life what it is to have either. This is because he doesn’t want love, he doesn’t want respect; he learned at an early age to relish getting what he wants by taking it—whether with promises of wealth, with threats to destroy you or just because he can.

He was too dumb to understand that the women he sexually assaulted that "let him," did so out of fear or hopes for something more than the pleasure of his groping hands. Or if he did realize this, he didn't care because he uses like a tool, everything he gets, including the presidency.  

Because of that, he is predictable, shallow, corrupt, and dangerous.

When you use U.S. taxpayer money to have the U.S. military pluck a fellow dictator out of his country for the purpose of plundering its wealth, and leave in power the fellow dictator’s repressive murder machine, and spurn the leader who obtained the most votes in a democratic process because you can’t play her like a marionette, you force that leader to lick your boots.

And that is what Maria Karina Machado displayed: a boot-licking ceremony in which she delivered up to His Royal Ego-Roided Highness the Nobel Peace Prize. I do not blame her. She is swallowing her pride, maybe her power, and doing what she has to do to try to foreclose Donald Trump and all his lackeys from plundering her country by allying itself with the regime that has the expertise in suppressing the asperations of its people and plundering its wealth. Because if that's what you want, who better than they?

History demonstrates that people like Donald Trump, in fact, follow that model with third world countries. They like authoritarian murder-machine regimes because those regimes do not have to answer to their populace, a legitimate duly elected legislature, nor their consciences—because they have none. If you actually pay attention and have watched what Donald Trump has done with his businesses and in his presidencies, he has engaged in corruption rackets around the world with the world’s most notorious dictators. It’s an easy way to fill his pockets and those of his extended family without any recourse.

Based on that, as I predicted, exactly what he’s doing now in Venezuela—and is attempting to do in Greenland, and most likely will without Republican resistance—is that he doesn’t care about the Venezuelan people. He won’t ever let Machado assume the reins of power in Venezuela unless she promises him a better deal than its current government, which means she will sell out her fellow citizens and her country. Short of that, she will have to find a way to obtain power, and when she does, she will have to betray her “loyalty” and “respect” for Donald Trump. At that time, Donald Trump—as he always does, because his entire MOS is transactional and coercive—will turn on her.

He doesn’t care about Venezuelans, he doesn’t care about you, he doesn’t care about the people of Greenland any more than he cared about Puerto Rico. Yet he may toss them a few paper towels for a Photo-op, but that’s the extent of his concern.

We would be so dense and stupid as a country to take Greenland by coercion or force, which would put us in line with every autocratic, totalitarian state that has ever existed in the world. Don’t fool yourself because of your soap-scrubbed faces, your pocket Bibles, and alleged Christian credentials into thinking that it somehow makes it right. It’s not right. Everything that Donald Trump allegedly wants from Greenland can be obtained without taking it over. And every excuse to do so is the amusing rantings of a narcissistic lunatic. Our country is being run by a bona fide abject lunatic. Why can’t you all recognize that? Are you that deep into your delusions?

Loren M. Lambert © 1/16/2026

 Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth’s Deployment of Maximum Lethality – The Drug of Every Authoritarian Regime

In almost every war, every conflict, every criminal gang, every insurrection, every group of drug dealers, every group of drug users, and every issue involving undocumented or illegal (if you prefer that word) immigration, one could theoretically create maximum deterrence by imposing indiscriminate lethality. That is not how a Judeo-Christian or liberal democracy governed by a Constitution is meant to exact justice.

This is party because, in all of these settings—wars, conflicts, criminal gangs, insurrections, drug networks—there are always individuals with varying degrees of complicity, including some who are nearly innocent. Also, the over-eager, like Sec. Hegseth who take joy in violence and killing, often are mistaken. They want as excuse to kill. 

Indiscriminate lethality inflicted on alleged drug dealers, alleged drug users, or similar actors is not justice. It is injustice. It is predatory. It inevitably murders the innocent. Anyone who has studied authoritarian regimes knows this. And they also know that the authoritarian’s family, friends, patrons, and benefactors are never subjected to such indiscriminate violence, no matter the alleged crimes.

So it is with our current authoritarian, Donald Trump. He pardons a convicted drug trafficker—the former president of Honduras who profited from importing tons of cocaine into the United States—while ordering the obliteration of petty alleged drug runners on the high seas. And when there are survivors, he commits war crimes—murders—by ensuring they are dispatched.

When the opioid crisis unfolded in the United States, driven by pharmaceutical CEOs whose conduct approached that of narco-terrorists, what was the Trump administration’s response? Did they indiscriminately bomb their offices and homes? And while I assign the greatest culpability to the drug manufacturers and dealers, those who choose to use these products—including the wealthy—bear nearly equal culpability. Should they, too, be met with indiscriminate lethality?

In conversations with my own family about immigration, I offered a stark example to expose the injustice of the Trump administration’s family-separation policy and related actions. I explained that the immigration problem could be “solved” tomorrow simply by installing machine guns along the border and killing anyone who attempted to cross. Yes, that would drastically reduce unauthorized entry. But would it be right? No. Hell no.

No matter how justified your anger or how deep your hatred toward those who profit from manufacturing and selling illicit drugs—and toward those who use them—you must consider the consequences for those you love if this kind of vigilantism is applauded. It is not right, and it must stop.

Loren M. Lambert © December 4, 2025

 A “MAGA” Supporter Asked: Why Don’t People Protest Every Homicidal Death?

Let me explain.

There are psychopaths and severely mentally ill individuals among all peoples on Earth who have murdered others. They have carried every label ever applied to human beings, including—but not limited to—Republican, Democrat, Mormon, Muslim, Christian, atheist, White, Black, immigrant, U.S. citizen, soldier, and civilian.

The fact that someone assigns such a label to a murderer, or that the murderer self-identifies with a particular group, does not mean—and never has meant—that all individuals who carry or claim that label are murderers.

Most murderers do not hold positions of authority over organized groups such as the United States security forces, militaries, or other entities that may commit violence as part of their operations. As to those murderers who do not exercise public power, mass protests would serve little purpose.

Public protest becomes meaningful when individuals with homicidal tendencies are placed in positions of governmental authority—such as presidents, senators, police officers, or ICE officers—because public pressure can depose public officials or influence policy, training, and behavior. Many individuals who are prone to commit extrajudicial, cold-blooded killings while working for security forces or governments are capable of conforming their conduct to societal norms when they receive proper training, supervision, and rules of engagement.

The public has the right to determine what level of aggression and force its politicians and security forces may employ. Some countries run by murderous thugs exercise authority in a way that allows security forces to use unmitigated violence against their own citizens. We do not want that to become the norm in this country. This is analogous to mob violence: a mob, or a group of citizens who gather to engage in extrajudicial killings and violence, falls within the same moral category.

Consequently, those who disagree with President Trump and his administration’s militaristic and aggressive extrajudicial deployment of ICE, protest because they reject that approach, as I do. For clarity, I also oppose—and would protest—rioting, mob rule, and overly aggressive informal or formal policing tactics by any government or group, regardless of its label.

Does that help you understand?

I have some knowledge of police procedures and proper police training, and I can categorically state that the ICE officer was, at the very least, reckless in his positioning in this situation. At the same time, the woman who was killed appeared to have acted foolishly in attempting to drive away. 

However, I think her actions were relatable and understandable. In her defense, we do not know what was going through her mind, nor do we know what occurred before the video began. A vehicle was blocking her from proceeding down the street. Based on previously released videos showing ICE officers—often unidentified and masked—breaking into vehicles, pulling people out of their cars and beating them up, firing into vehicles, and arresting individuals with little or no provocation, and no probable cause, it is reasonable to conclude that her fear may have been so extreme that she reacted instinctively and reasonably to what she perceived as a threat to her life. So while I may have stayed put, I can’t fault her for her actions.

In support of the ICE officer, I could not see where he was positioned immediately before the vehicle began moving. We do know, however, from videotapes showing that some protesters are aggressive and not peaceful—and that some have echoed President Trump’s similar violent rhetoric against others, they too have urged violence against ICE officers—that he may have genuinely believed he was in danger.

Yet, if his body language was meaningful, and given that it did not appear he attempted to move out of the way but instead stepped forward toward the alleged danger to fire his weapon and continued firing, and given his detached demeanor—showing no apparent concern for the woman and walking away as he did—it could be concluded that he instigated the confrontation and may have harbored a premeditated desire to commit violence. But I do not know what was in his head or heart, and neither do you, because we cannot know that. Regardless, a thorough investigation is clearly warranted to prevent further such incidents both to protect the officers and the bystanders; and if warranted, to exact justice.

For my part, I am convinced that due to poor leadership, inadequate training, and improper rules of engagement and deployment, this death was a disheartening tragedy that was easily preventable by both our government and the ICE officer involved. For that reason, it should be protested. This is particularly important when the aggression and violence is perpetrated by a powerful entity with apparent unlimited resources like the federal government.

And most importantly, the officer was not run over. The woman’s actions were not a terrorist act. It is deeply troubling that those in power feel compelled to lie about what we can all plainly see occurred. As a further consequence of ICE’s improper deployment, it is also unfortunate that people on either side claim certainty about what was in the hearts and minds of both the officer and the victim. Nevertheless what is absolutely clear is that, if the Trump administration acted responsibly, it was a foreseeably, preventable death and it is a terrible tragedy.

Loren M. Lambert©

1/9/2026