Sunday, September 3, 2023

Are Swampy Political Consultants Mucking Up GOP Populism?

Furthermore, who are they?


There is one segment of the swamp which receives relatively little attention, especially given their ability to muck up the Republican-Populist movement: political consultants.

This can be seen in the failure of so many of Mr. Trump’s challengers to capture the attention, let alone the support of, a large swath of GOP populists. Even if one were oblivious and/or ignorant of the movement and its supporters’ aspirations and frustrations, a half-competent candidate could at least feign their solidarity with them. Instead, these candidates have proven tone deaf to the movement; and, rather than garner support, have managed to alienate the bulk of the GOP’s populist base.

It would be easy to write this off to a failure of the candidates, and deem the presidential primary a RINO hunt with an over-abundance of prey. But many of these candidates have political instincts and skills, and have been elected to important political offices and/or served in significant appointed positions. How could they have missed the mark so badly?

They had help.

If memory serves, I recall a news report of a Louisiana mayor who was arrested for taking a midnight stroll through downtown stark naked. Come morning, before a rapt gaggle of journalists, the mayor endeavored to excuse his actions: “I got some bad advice.”

It seems the (former?) mayor’s political consultants may be advising many of Mr. Trump’s GOP challengers. Yet, it is not necessarily a case of political consulting malpractice. Doubtless, a host of these political consultants realize the Republican-Populist movement is a threat to their cushy existence. Where else but the swamp can people who lose so often keep making piles of money?  (And don’t you dare say the Detroit Lions). The unaccountability is only matched by these political consultants’ insularity and hubris. They cozy up to political entities such as national committees, like the RNC, and “dark money” donors’ organizations. Then, regardless of their win-loss record, they are routinely hired by ambitious staffers who hope to one day become…?  Wealthy political consultants. Surveying the bios of many current political consultants, it is not a vain hope.

Such reptilian political consultants recognize how, sooner or later, the GOP populist movement will come to drain their lucrative corner of the swamp. These miserable consultants may love company, but they do not love the movement that seeks to put them out of business. Whatever these swamp critters lack, they do have a survival instinct. Consequently, while these self-anointed political “gurus” bilk their more gullible clients, they help turn their candidate cash cows against the movement (in the cases where this may be necessary). They persuade their candidates to seek distance, ignore, and/or bash the GOP populist movement.

Worse, during some campaigns, GOP political consultants – either deliberately or through ignorance – reach out for support to the most extreme right-wing elements and, thereby, falsely impute that they are part of the Republican-Populist movement. Such antisemitic and bigoted individuals are decidedly not part of the GOP populist movement. Rightly, the media is quick to point out such shameful approaches for support; wrongly, however, the media is quick to promote the misperception that such extremists are not only part, but the bulk of, the movement. It is a demonstrable lie; however, long before the lie can be refuted the electoral damage to the movement is done.

Still, let us not paint all political consultants with such a broad brush. Some do serve their candidates well, and I can personally attest to the GOP populist sensibilities of a Michiganian currently toiling away for a national Republican campaign committee. So, how can one gauge the GOP populist bona fides of a political consultant? The competent ones recognize their subordinate role, advising but not deciding; and never suggest their candidate be anything less than authentic. The Republican-Populist movement has an intuitive sense of who understands it and, equally, who does not. Therefore, over the course of a campaign, authenticity will reveal a candidate to be a friend or foe of the GOP populist movement, and will allow GOP populists to vote accordingly.

Yet, what if the candidate is a chameleon, spouting populist rhetoric just to get elected? What if, heaven forfend, such a charlatan deceives enough voters to win? Well, just remember the adage: fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Once again, GOP populists will vote accordingly.

Yes, this means of identification is not foolproof, for it is a roundabout method. It is based upon first sizing up a candidate; then, if one dares, peeking behind the curtain at their consultant. Even then, it may not be easy. In many instances the political consultant clings to the shadows, because it facilitates their unaccountability for failure and/or for their vicarious attacks upon the GOP populist movement. True, some of the more “successful” ones wind up pundits on cable shows, etc., while being even more handsomely remunerated for dumping on GOP populists.  Still, most prefer to stealthily keep the gravy train on the lucrative campaign track and do their mudslinging of the movement through others.

Think about it: you know which GOP presidential primary contenders really dislike the Republican-Populist movement. Do you know who their political consultants are? Same thing applies for other national, state, and even local offices, and so does the difficulty in identifying the consultants. Thus, in many ways, then, the Republican-Populist movement’s most elusive quarry is the swamp’s unctuous consultants.

Challenge accepted.



X22, And we Know, and more- Sept 3rd

 



American Self-Government is Falling Apart

Be prepared for disorder, persecution and chaos in the months ahead


The American system does not require unanimity. In fact, its design presumes deep disagreement on matters of morality and policy.

This is why questions like religion are left to individual conscience, and why most policy is left to states or even smaller units, where the law’s touch will not be felt as harshly, because it reflects the more similar values of a smaller group. Finally, regardless of who has the reins of the federal government, the Constitution renders a great deal of substantive activity off limits, as exemplified by the Bill of Rights.

The theory is sensible. Sometimes one side wins, sometimes the other. Because one does not know if his side will be in power or on the receiving end of the power of others, government is limited. Parties agree to limit themselves when they are in power, in exchange for knowing their future opponents are also bound by the same limitations.

This system requires some minimal degree of national unity and national identity to function. One would not agree to share power with hostile strangers; this is why invasions are so feared throughout history. Until recently, our common culture and shared status as Americans limited the extent and depth of political disagreements.

Of course, there were still significant debates. The system broke apart during the Civil War, which arose from a massive contradiction in social systems and economics, but the patterns of American self-government were pieced together reasonably well thereafter.  After World War II, an era of consensus began, which permitted a relatively peaceful navigation of the civil rights’ social revolution.

Only with the end of the Cold War have things begun to fragment, once again.

A Fragmented Nation

Deep disagreements about economics, foreign policy, immigration, and national identity rose to the surface after the Cold War ended. Clinton and Bush both sought a more ambitious role in the world, but this received a cool reception from Americans in both parties.

President Obama egged on racial conflict and accelerated the radicalization of middle America. Donald Trump’s surprising victory was a direct consequence. This caused the bureaucracy and the people in charge of both parties to lose all sense of perspective. They hated him and they hated his supporters.  Whatever sense of national identity we once shared is almost completely fractured, and every limit on government has begun to dissipate.

The media and elites’ hostility to the old, unifying symbols of the nation, such as the flag and the founders, underscores the erosion of the cultural unity and mutual commitment to sharing power that self-government requires. The low point (to date, at least) can be found in the multiple criminal prosecutions of President Trump, which are taking place in the shadow of Biden’s open and unpunished corruption.

In a real sense, for Republicans at least, elections do not matter. A Republican president will not be able to govern if he aims to change business-as-usual in the slightest, even if he somehow wins. The military-industrial complex, the intelligence agencies, and the millions of federal workers, federal contractors, and beneficiaries will not let him make any meaningful changes. As repeatedly demonstrated in Russiagate and numerous other episodes during Trump’s presidency, the defiance of the permanent bureaucracy and its alignment with the narrow partisan ends of the Democrats visibly undermine the reality of self-government.

No hints of reconciliation have revealed themselves. While there are Quisling Republican Party members happy to see Trump being persecuted, these people do not have a real constituency, and are more properly deemed part of the uniparty, indistinguishable from Democratic partisans.

American Division Defined by Ideology

Unlike other nations’ internal conflicts, ours is chiefly an ideological conflict, which only secondarily includes differences of generations, ethnicity, and geography. In this way, it resembles the serious divisions that characterized Russia before the Bolshevik Revolution, Chile during the transition from the Allende to the Pinochet regimes, and, most saliently, France at the time of the Dreyfus Affair.

These three conflicts ended differently. Russia descended into a bloody and genocidal civil war in 1917 followed by the 75-year rule of the communists. Their persecutions of the Russian people rivaled that of their foreign enemies. This event is worth learning from because the good guys, who were brave and tough and motivated, still lost.

With the blessing of Chile’s conservative middle class and the Catholic Church, the Chilean Army disposed of the lawless Allende with a swift coup in 1973. Rule under Pincohet was harsh, but predictable; the government was mostly agnostic about the private realms of civil society, and its repressions narrowly fell upon the regime’s Marxist enemies. Chile emerged prosperous and orderly when the military regime left power in 1989.

Finally, in France, after decades of conflict and the trial and later vindication of Alfred Dreyfus, the far-left finally got a secure hold of the government it 1905. At this point, it formally adopted secularism and began confiscating the wealth of the Catholic Church and shutting down religious schools. While no longer prone to street battles, the conservative and religious rural population remained hostile and did not accord the new regime much in the way of loyalty and respect.

The French nation became unified during the First World War, but, thereafter, opponents of the secular republic drifted towards extreme nationalist movements, such as Action Francaise. Many in this group would later rally to the collaborationist Vichy Regime. Only after the trauma of World War II, and under the influence of the immensely powerful and charismatic moderate, Charles DeGaulle, did the nation’s unbridgeable left-right divide begin to be healed.

There are no obvious lessons or predictions from these three examples, other than it does not seem likely that the American left and right will achieve a peaceful rapprochement on their own. The various possible paths involve greater and lesser degrees of departure from America’s historical traditions.

The Silent Majority Has Shrunk

To chart our way forward, it helps to eliminate first what not to do. Our own history provides some lessons. During the controversial Vietnam War, the leftist counterculture ran into resistance from what Nixon called the silent majority. While Nixon won a landslide in 1972, reliance on the “silent majority” does not seem realistic anymore. The economic conditions that fostered the large, inherently conservative middle class of the Nixon era are gone.

Family formation and total fertility are taking a nose-dive. Spiritual life and community involvement are at an all-time low. And these trends combine to enhance the relative importance of politics. Right now, neither the left nor the right are in the majority, and thus several close elections have fueled dueling narratives of election rigging and foul play.

We are also missing the types of figures who contributed to national unity in previous eras. While the Congress’s past dignity may be exaggerated, its degraded current state cannot be. The House and Senate have been occupied by geriatric blowhards like Charles Schumer and disreputable hacks like Mitch McConnell for years.  There are no “wise men” who can rally both sides of the aisle and command respect from the public. No one is listening to these people, because they are mere observers of what is happening on the outside, among the voters and within the Deep State.

There also does not seem any prospect for a consensus on the alleged crimes of Biden and Trump, regardless of how they are disposed. Both sides will view outcomes through a partisan lens. Biden may very well be the most corrupt president in American history, but even now, after he is caught red-handedheading up a family-grifting operation, his defenders shrug.

In the abstract, most Republicans seem willing to kick a criminal politician out of the party, but the tendentious prosecutions of Trump for contesting an election are simply too much to bear. They command no respect among anyone not already against Trump for partisan reasons.

The left believes its power is permanent, and they might be correct. But even if that is true, a plurality of angry conservatives will not accept their right to rule. Facing a widespread rejection of its legitimacy, the regime will lash out in desperate and unpredictable ways. This is what spectacles like the Biden inauguration’s Green Zone, the National Guard occupying the capitol for weeks, and the ongoing prosecution of January 6 trespassers are about. These actions stem not from confidence, but brittle insecurity.

The only way forward requires a serious shift of mindset. We must accept that the old rules have changed, and the old tactics will not work. We must hedge, because even election victories do not guarantee we acquire actual power.

Since the bureaucrat-run government purports to be Our Democracy™, it depends upon all of us accepting the fiction that the 2020 election was clean, that Biden and the Democrats have a mandate, and that Republicans’ lack of electoral success comes down to prosaic things like turnout and messaging. Trump in prison orange will send a very different message. And the only appropriate counter-message would be to reject the game entirely.

For starters, Republican voters should boycott the 2024 election if this happens. Let the final result be a ridiculous North Korean victory of 90% support for the senile Biden, so that everyone knows we do not consent to the process. Our enemies (and the Quislings) will say, “You should have voted, you could have won,” to which we should remind them, “No, you won’t let us win and put Trump in jail to make sure.”

Since states can still directly select their electors, Republican state legislatures should each change their laws, abandon popular votes for president, and select Trump as the candidate if he ends up unjustly imprisoned. This is the kind of outside-the-box thinking we need. We are nearing the point of no return.

No matter what political tactics make sense, all of us should be as prepared as possible for disorder, persecution, and chaos in the months ahead. Things are coming apart.




Here’s 5 Action Items Conservatives Should Focus On To Better Their Communities and Country

Enacting change doesn’t require a majority but a vocal 
and active minority devoted to the mission that’s at hand.



As a conservative, it’s hard to not get discouraged about the current state of our nation.

On an almost weekly basis, the federal government weaponizes its powers to persecute its political opponents and everyday conservatives. At the same time, this leftist leviathan goes out of its way to protect America’s corrupt First Family and allow street communists to go unpunished for breaking the law. It’s completely despotic.

While the situation may seem helpless, there are many ways in which everyday patriots can rally to save the country. As the left has routinely demonstrated, enacting change — whether in government or the culture — doesn’t require a majority but a vocal and active minority that’s devoted to the mission at hand.

To help advance the cause of liberty, I’ve compiled a list of five avenues that, if acted upon, could make a tremendous difference in stifling Democrats’ assault on the American experiment.

1. Remaining 2023 Elections

It’s no secret Democrats enjoy a structural and financial advantage over Republicans when it comes to elections. With left-wing nonprofits funded by leftist billionaires registering millions of likely Democrat voters in battleground states across the country, it remains critically important for conservatives to engage in similar efforts ahead of this year’s remaining elections.

Louisiana voters, for instance, will head to the polls on Oct. 18 to vote in elections for executive statewide offices (such as governor) and their state legislature, while states such as Pennsylvania, Mississippi, Kentucky, Virginia, and New Jersey will hold elections for a variety of statewide offices on Nov. 7.

If you want to help defeat Democrats in these states, check with national conservative groups to see if they’re involved in these states to turn out likely Republican voters and see if there’s a role for you in helping them do it. Similarly, if you live in any of the aforementioned states, become a campaign volunteer or reach out to your local or state Republican Party to see how your services can best be utilized.

The fact that Republicans don’t possess the same “get out the vote” capabilities and financial backing Democrats do is all the more reason to get involved in the grassroots activism needed to win at the ballot box.

2. Remaining 2023 Ballot Amendments

Equally as important to electing good candidates to office is ensuring state constitutions and laws are protected from leftist radicalism. According to Ballotpedia, citizens in six states will be voting on a variety of ballot amendments that alter their state constitution or laws, among them being Colorado, Ohio, Louisiana, New York, Maine, and Texas.

On Oct. 18, Louisianans will vote on a constitutional amendment proposal that seeks to prohibit the acceptance and use of private and foreign money in the conduction of elections. Meanwhile, pro-lifers will be put to the test on Nov. 7 in Ohio, where leftist groups such as Planned Parenthood and the ACLU are backing a ballot amendment that aims to enshrine baby-killing and “irreversible gender experiments” for minors into the state constitution.

Similar to campaigning for candidates, passing good (and defeating bad) ballot amendments requires the same type of groundwork. In Ohio, for example, reach out to your local or state pro-life organizations to see how you can get involved in door-knocking campaigns or related activities. Given the confusing language in some of these proposals, it remains equally important to remind conservative-minded voters of what it is the amendment would do and whether voting “yes” or “no” reflects their beliefs.

3. 2024 State Legislative Sessions

With Joe Biden occupying the White House until at least Jan. 20, 2025, state governments remain the best available tool to enact policies that halt federal infringement on our natural rights. To date, Republicans control 22 state trifectas, meaning many of the policies most GOPers talk about implementing but never do can actually become reality with a little push from “We the People.”

To get started, research your state representative and senator, including their voting record on significant subjects and what types of legislation they’ve previously sponsored. Find out where they stand on important issues, such as life and medical freedom.

As you’re vetting your district’s representatives, ask yourself what issues you find important and figure out whether your legislature’s acted on them. Your Republican governor, for example, may have signed a great law protecting unborn life last year, but what about bills addressing illegal immigration or ensuring the state’s elections are secure and transparent? It’s important to leave no issue on the table.

Equally significant to understanding the issues affecting your state is cultivating a relationship with your state reps. Regularly reach out to them in the months leading up to and during the 2024 legislative session to ensure your interests are being furthered and find like-minded patriots to join you in your cause. Never forget: There’s strength in numbers.

4. Your Local School Board Meetings

With neo-Marxist offshoots such as critical race theory and radical gender theory becoming ever-prevalent in public schools, it’s significant for parents to know what’s being taught in their child’s classroom.

Local school board meetings offer a great venue for parents and citizens to not only understand what curriculum is being taught to students on a daily basis but to voice their concerns about potential left-wing indoctrination. In recent years, parents in localities such as Loudoun County, Virginia, demonstrated the power parents have in exposing leftist curricula in public education and paved the way for parents across the country to do the same in their own communities.

And why go it alone? Make attending your local meeting a girl’s or guy’s night out where you all grab dinner or drinks afterwards. Nobody said self-governance had to be boring.

5. The Power of House Republicans

Despite controlling the power of the purse, few House Republicans advocate for the one federal solution that could stymie the DOJ’s political persecution of former President Donald Trump and conservatives: cuts in funding.

This month’s congressional budget fight presents the perfect opportunity to reign in the agency’s authoritarian behavior. But conservatives shouldn’t count on Republicans to stand firm in the face of Democrat lies and smears.

Call and email your Republican House representative relentlessly in the weeks leading up to and during this fight. Peacefully make them understand the urgency of the moment and ensure they don’t cower in the face of adversity. And while you’re at it, push them to secure the U.S.-Mexico border, gut “wokeness” from the military, and defund health agencies such as the CDC and FDA for lying to the public about Covid.



Murdoch Sad – WSJ/NYP Poll Shows Support for DeSantis Collapsing, Pre-Debate 24%, Post-Debate 13%


Rupert Murdoch has big sad as his Wall Street Journal outlet admits their poll looks terrible for Ron DeSantis.  [WSJ HERE] Currently with only 13% support, DeSantis’s position has collapsed since April, when WSJ showed 24% backed him.

Additionally, Chris Christie and Mike Pence are the two candidates with the highest unfavorable rating by Republican voters, -73% and -63% respectively.  Respondents show their opinion worsening mostly due to Christie and Pence position against frontrunner Donald Trump.

It looks like the Wall Street and RNC Big Club donors are now eyeing Nikki “test the wind” Haley, as the best option to try and stop Godzilla Trump. This shift likely explains why DeSantis’s campaign operative Jeff Roe was begging donors for another $50 million last week, as discovered in leaked audio from meetings with them during the high-brow events in Wisconsin.

Wall Street Journal – […] At 13% support, DeSantis’s position has collapsed since April, when 24% backed him in a slightly different field of candidates tested by the Journal.

GOP primary voters believe businessman Vivek Ramaswamy and former Gov. Nikki Haley of South Carolina, far more than any other candidates, exceeded expectations in the televised Aug. 23 GOP debate among eight of Trump’s rivals. But those impressions so far haven’t turned into significant ballot support, with Haley the first choice of 8% and Ramaswamy at 5%.

Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, who has cast himself as an affable warrior for conservative causes, has made little headway after three months of campaigning, drawing 2% support.

Republicans nationally are rejecting the candidates who most sharply criticize Trump: Former Govs. Chris Christie of New Jersey and Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas drew 3% and 1% support, respectively. Christie is the most unpopular GOP candidate tested, with 73% holding an unfavorable view of him.

The image of former Vice President Mike Pence, who turned aside Trump’s request to block Congress from certifying the 2020 vote, has tarnished among primary voters. In April, 54% viewed him favorably. Now, 30% view him favorably, and 63% have an unfavorable view. He’s the choice of 2% for the party nomination.

“DeSantis collapsed,” said Bocian. “The one candidate who back in April really seemed to be a potential contender, seemed to have a narrative to tell, has totally collapsed, and those votes went to Trump.” (read more)


Last point… Watch Noem👀

Originally the Sea Island group had a DeSantis/Noem ticket as their best outcome. Noem now looks to be positioning herself as the 2024 Mike Pence VP option.

Remember, whoever is VP in 2024 will likely be the nominee in 2028. The Big Club always plays the long game.

Stay elevated.

Stay unemotional.

Stay strategic in outlook.

McConnell will not last.  South Dakota Senator John Thune will replace him.

Thune and Noem, compatriots from South Dakota, would have a Koch inspired nudge-nudge/wink-wink outlook to undermine Trump policy agenda 2025 through 2029.

Accept things as they are, not as we would wish them to be. This is a generational battle. We didn’t get into this mess in one election cycle, and we are not going to get ourselves out of this mess in one election cycle.

This is what cozying up looks like:

.

France Will Soon Ban Disposable Vapes Under an Anti-Smoking Plan

 

France Will Soon Ban Disposable Vapes Under an Anti-Smoking Plan

 

French Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne said Sunday that disposable vapes will soon be banned in the country as part of a national anti-smoking plan.

Borne, speaking on RTL radio, did not say when the ban would enter into force.

She said the government would soon unveil its new plan to combat smoking, which she said is the cause of 75,000 deaths a year in the country.

It will include a ban on disposable vapes, which she said “are giving bad habits to young people.”

“It’s a reflex and a gesture that young people get used to. That’s how they get into smoking,” she added.  


Most of the disposable e-cigarettes, which are thrown away after they’re used up, come in sweet and fruity flavors like pink lemonade, gummy bear and watermelon that makes them attractive to teenagers. They are sold in France usually at a price of between 8 euros ($8.7) and 12 euros ($13).

An existing ban on the sale of electronic cigarette devices to those under 18 is not widely respected. Promoting or advertising such products is also banned.  


https://www.newsmax.com/world/globaltalk/france-ban-disposable-vapes/2023/09/03/id/1133057/   





5th Circuit Court of Appeals Revives Doctors Claim FDA Overstepped Its Authority on Ivermectin

Jim Thompson reporting for RedState 

As the nation got deeper into the COVID-19 pandemic, and the federal and local governments began restricting movement and rights there was a concerted effort on the part of the media, in conjunction with the government to shut down any discussion that ran counter to the accepted dogma. The FDA was consistently jumping into public discussion and overstepped its authority. 

Joe Rogan contracted COVID and famously made an appearance on video. Looking under the weather he said that, under the advice of his doctor, he would be taking Ivermectin. 

Scolds in the media mocked him for taking a “horse dewormer drug”, and mocked him as a fool listening to charlatans. Rogan made another appearance within days – looking healthy and asserting that he had recovered from COVID. He then turned the tables on the media which lied about his treatment.  

And, there were numerous doctors who defended Rogan and pointed out that ivermectin is a commonly prescribed medication for humans, and that Rogan had not taken the related animal de-worming drug. No matter – anyone who claimed the ivermectin was safe for humans (if not a COVID treatment) was mocked and silenced by the media. Rogan mocked them right back 

Doctors who made any mention that ivermectin could be, even a potential treatment for COVID were universally treated as heretics and candidates for the stake. Doctors were harassed by colleagues and, the FDA. Specifically, three doctors, Dr. Robert L. Apter, Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, and Dr. Paul E. Marik alleged that the FDA singled them out for punishment. They were fired, or silenced. 

They filed a federal lawsuit in Texas alleging the FDA overstepped its authority. As reported by RedState just two weeks ago:

 Drs. Paul MarikMary Bowden, and Robert Apter first brought the lawsuit in 2022 in the Southern District of Texas. Their contention was that the CDC and FDA are not allowed to give medical advice, and the public information campaign carried out by those agencies crossed the line from information to setting medical policy for doctors and pharmacies. 

In short, the doctors were asserting the FDA “are not doctors” and it should stay in its lane. The trial court agreed with the FDA on various grounds including standing, and dismissed the case. The 5th Circuit in New Orleans disagreed, reviving the case and sending it back to the trial court.  

As reported by the AP

The doctors can proceed with their lawsuit contending that the FDA’s campaign exceeded the agency’s authority under federal law, the ruling said. 

“FDA is not a physician. It has authority to inform, announce, and apprise—but not to endorse, denounce, or advise,” Judge Don Willett wrote for a panel that also included Jennifer Walker Elrod and Edith Brown Clement. “The Doctors have plausibly alleged that FDA’s Posts fell on the wrong side of the line between telling about and telling to.”

The lawsuit was dismissed in December by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Vincent Brown, who ruled that the complaints didn’t overcome the FDA’s “sovereign immunity,” a concept that protects government entities from many civil lawsuits regarding their responsibilities. The appellate panel said the FDA’s alleged overstepping of its authority opened the door for the lawsuit.

My colleague Streiff pointed out that the Justices on the 5th Circuit did not buy the government’s argument(s) and appeared, at oral arguments, to be inclined to reverse the dismissal. And on Friday, the panel did just that.

It will interesting to see how the FDA defends its draconian tactics at trial.