US citizens: Call on the Supreme Court to affirm that the insurrectionist is not above the law.

A relative of Herbert Hoover rebuked Biden for comparing the wrecker to Hoover.

I have a different criticism: comparing the wrecker to Hoover is an understatement.

Herbert Hoover was a Republican president who worshiped the Invisible Hand and therefore refused to take effective action to get the US out of depression. The many people made homeless by his inaction built shanty towns that they called "Hoovervilles".

But Hoover did not try to overthrow democracy. He was a plutocratist, not a fascist. He ran again for president, lost to FDR, and accepted defeat. Then FDR instituted the New Deal.

The wrecker, by contrast, is a fascist and is trying to eliminate democracy and rule of law in the US by turning democracy and the constitution into a sham to disguise a dictatorship.

Although Hoover did not try to overthrow democracy, other plutocratists did try, and asked recently retired General Smedley Butler to lead the coup for them. Butler surprised them by upholding the Constitution and testifying about their plot.

El Salvador's president Bukele was reelected despite the constitution's prohibition on reelecting any president.

He made El Salvador crime-free, by means of putting 75,000 people in prison without charges. A trial is an imperfect way to judge a person's guilt, but a non-trial is much worse. Surely many of them are not criminals. Will they ever be released?

(satire) Ohio Begins Executing Random People In Hopes They're Criminals.

An activist threatens to destroy some prized works of art if the UK does not free Julian Assange.

I support that goal, but I think that method is misguided and harmful because it uses the art works as hostages.

How so? It is not a threat against the owners of those art works. They have given him permission to destroy them for his protest, and legally that may be sufficient for him to avoid criminal charges. But the permission of the owner is not morally sufficient. These paintings are part of the heritage of humanity, and humanity too has a right to protect them.

More deeply, it is an error to take the construct of property rights for the sole and total basis for judgment of right and wrong. It is useful to have a concept of property, and useful to legally protect property to some extent. But destroying art works would also do wrong to the rest of us who do not own them. Including those of us who advocate freeing Assange.

The importance of these paintings to humanity is not a direct consequence of their market value. Rather, their market value reflects the idea that they are important.