Trump18 bak

7 25 ESTB BAK FAIL SO MADE DOC IN tb CAPT

TRUMP 18 47

YIKES 11 24 SEE FASCISM

MERRI OK

SEE NEG TAG LONG TERM SYSTEMIC DAMAGE

SEE FASCISM

SEE STATE OF EXCEPTION CRISIS EMERGENCY ~ RULE OF LAW

MARTIAL LAW MILITARIZATION POSSE COM

MASS DEPORT RACISM GREAT REPLACEMENT = CONSPIRACY EARTH2

SEE CRUEL (sado-populism)

SEE DOGE COUP // pjt 2025

SEE NAVARRO TARIFF FAIL fox pretzel rationale

SEE SYMPTOM SYSTEM DEGRADATION DISRUPT CRUEL

SEE TRUMP ADMIN 2

SEE TRUMP TRANS 2

SEE CORRUPT 3 CRYPTO-CURRENCY ARAB grift OIL TAX BRK DEREG

SEE PARDON CORP BITMEX ETC, DONORS SHERIFF

SEE XO TRUMP 1 25 PRIVACY DOGEBAGS

see lie 2 gaslight esp on jan 6 revision

SEE RETALIATION

SEE BOLSONARO TARIFF BS 7 25

see press suppress defam: BONDI

see legal suppression RETALIATION ABC CHENEY

SEE ACTIV SUPPRESS PPL LOSE CONST RTS

see klepto- kaki buy elections

see agno earth2 lie BIZARRO

SEE FOREIGN POLICY FAIL COLLAPSE ALL ANTI-RUSSIA EFFORTS PPL BEING RAPIDLY SHUT DOWN EG BONDI HASH GABBARD HEGSETH

see student suppression activist acad suppr harvard pound sand

see norms fail reveal taxes, divest biz COI:

SEE DEMONIZATION POLARIZATION ELIMINATIONALIST INSANE HATE USA

SEE CULTURE CAPTURE // FASCISM CRUEL PERFORMATIVE PSEUDO-EVENT

SEE CULT DEAR LEADER

BAK 7 25 FAIL

---

AN 7 25

// EPSTEIN FILES MADE BY DEMS

'Utterly false': Trump ripped for saying America is 'hottest' under his presidency

---

AN 7 25

President Donald Trump is now pushing for the Senate Republican in charge of the committee overseeing the federal courts to get rid of a longstanding tradition that would allow him to more easily prosecute his political opponents.

That's according to a Tuesday article in Courthouse News Service, which reported that Trump has now set his sights on Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). As chair of the powerful committee, Grassley is in a position to do away with the custom of "blue slips," in which senators from states under the jurisdiction of a presidential appointee to a federal judgeship or a U.S. attorney's office can effectively veto a nomination by refusing to turn in blue slips in agreement with the appointment.

One particular example is Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Andy Kim (D-N.J.) not submitting blue slips in favor of controversial acting U.S. attorney Alina Habba for the District of New Jersey, who the Trump administration has allowed to remain in her post by exploiting a loophole in the Federal Vacancies Reform Act. In a Truth Social post on Tuesday night, Trump raged against the blue slip system, and called on Grassley to end it so he can ram through a slew of far-right prosecutors in Democratic-run states.

"Democrats like Schumer, Warner, Kaine, Booker, Schiff, and others, SLEAZEBAGS ALL, have an ironclad stoppage of Great Republican Candidates," Trump wrote in his signature style of oddly placed capital letters. "Put simply, the President of the United States will never be permitted to appoint the person of his choice because of an ancient, and probably Unconstitutional, “CUSTOM,” that if you have, even one person in the opposite Party serving in the U.S. Senate, he/she must give consent, thereby completely stopping the opposite Party’s Nomination."

IFrame Content

"The only way to beat this Hoax is to appoint a Democrat or, a weak and ineffective Republican," he continued. "Therefore, I would never be able to appoint Great Judges or U.S. Attorneys in California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Virginia, and other places, where there is, coincidentally, the highest level of crime and corruption — The places where fantastic people are most needed! ... Chuck, I know you have the Courage to do this, DO IT!"

As Courthouse News Service's Benjamin S. Weiss wrote, Trump gave no evidence that the blue slip system was "probably Unconstitutional," and that the Constitution in fact gives the Senate the power of "advice and consent" regarding presidential nominees. Weiss also noted that Trump's claim that Democrats "openly broke" the blue slip tradition was unfounded.

Democrats have abided by the blue slip system even to their own detriment. In 2023, then-President Joe Biden withdrew the nomination of Scott Colom, whom he had nominated to serve as a U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of Mississippi. Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.) refused to return a blue slip for Colom's confirmation, and then-Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) refused to abolish the blue slip system to confirm Colom.

Click here to read Courthouse News Service's full report.

---

RWW 7 25

Global Project Against Hate And Extremism: Tulsi Gabbard’s “Claims” that the Obama Administration Staged a “Coup” Fuel Far Right’s Fantasies of Political Violence

On July 18, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard made a post on Twitter alleging “the most powerful people in the Obama administration,” including former President Barack Obama, were involved in a “years-long coup” and a “treasonous conspiracy” against Donald Trump. Her post quickly went viral, amassing over 13 million views over the weekend, and galvanized the online fringe to fantasize about violence against their political enemies. Trump fanned Gabbard’s flames, sharing a racist AI-generated video of Obama being arrested on Truth Social, which Trump owns.

---

rww

07/21/2025

Kyle Mantyla

Wayne Allyn Root tells MAGA to "get over" the Trump administration's refusal to release the Epstein files because it's distracting from "the long, superhuman list of achievements that Trump has accomplished to start his second term."

Michele Bachmann says that President Donald Trump is governing "in a way that is following one biblical pattern after another," which is why "Satan wants him dead."

Mark Meckler celebrates Republicans defunding NPR and PBS because they are "anti-American, anti-conservative, anti-religious, anti-traditional values propaganda."

Joshua Haymes claims that "the First amendment was designed to ensure that every American can be any kind of CHRISTIAN he wants": "It was not designed to ensure every American has the right to publicly worship demons. False religion should can and should be banned from public life."

Finally, Nick Fuentes encourages white men to aspire to greatness, like Ted Kaczynski, Adolf Hitler, and Joseph Stalin: "We are dangerous. We are fearsome. We are a martial race."

---

an 7 25

'Obsessed': Trump mocked for calling Ocasio-Cortez and Jasmine Crockett 'very low IQ'

---

AN 7 25 JOE CONASAN

Reacting with borderline hysteria to demands that the government open its files on Jeffrey Epstein — the deceased pedophile and financier who once described himself as Donald Trump's "best friend" — the president has aroused suspicion even among MAGA cultists. Few Americans believe the excuses Trump and his appointees in the Justice Department and FBI offer for pretending they have no relevant files about Epstein's depredations or that there is "nothing to see here." The Wall Street Journal's revelation of a racy scrawled message from Trump to Epstein on his 50th birthday underlined the appearance of a coverup.

In his latest gambit Trump is imitating a president he truly admires — the legendary crook Richard M. Nixon — by adopting what became known during the Watergate scandal as the "modified limited hangout." That's the best shorthand description of Trump's order to Attorney General Pamela Bondi to release grand jury testimony from the Epstein sex crimes prosecution (which ended in 2019 with his reported suicide in a federal detention facility).

It is a phrase originally uttered by John Ehrlichman, the late Nixon White House aide whose career ended with a federal conviction for obstruction of justice and conspiracy. On the afternoon of March 22, 1973, in an Oval Office meeting that included Nixon, Ehrlichman, White House counsel John Dean, Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman and Attorney General John Mitchell, the president and his advisers plotted how to extend their coverup of the Watergate burglary and an assortment of related felonies.

They decided to concoct a misleading official report on the White House role in the burglary, with "facts" designed to exculpate the president and his gang. Worried that even a phony report would provide too much information, Nixon asked whether "we want to ... go this route now? And let it hang out, so to speak?"

"It's a limited hangout," replied Haldeman.

IFrame Content

Dean agreed, and then Ehrlichman chimed in: "It's a modified limited hangout."

Fast-forward to Trump on the evening of July 17, 2025.

"Based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein, I have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval," he wrote in a post on Truth Social. "This SCAM, perpetuated by the Democrats, should end, right now!"

Trump has never explained — and will never explain — how the Epstein case, which he and his MAGA cohort have exploited for years, became a Democratic "scam." Many of the conspiracy theories involving Epstein, "perpetuated" by his favorite crackpots, supposedly implicate Democrats in the most terrible crimes imaginable. Yet it is Democrats, along with a few Republicans willing to stand up to Trump, who now clamor for transparency on Epstein.

They won't get much if anything from a grand jury transcript. Trump, as a convicted felon, and Bondi, as a career prosecutor, both know how very limited that document will prove to be, if a court ever approves its disclosure. The testimony and investigative evidence presented in Epstein's prosecution will implicate him — not the various friends, associates and public figures whose names and faces may appear in the gigabytes of text, video and financial data seized by the FBI.

No doubt Trump feels assured that his own name and image won't appear in the grand jury documents — because he was never questioned or investigated in the case that focused solely on Epstein. He feels safe in urging their release, hoping and praying that will quell the conspiracy-crazed mob that he created.

It won't.

NOW READ:Supreme Court lets Trump shred democracy in shocking agency takedown

:{:{--=}:

on phone only safe space?!

an 7 25

robt r

Anyone wanting to understand the brouhaha over Pam Bondi’s refusal to turnover (or even acknowledge) the Epstein files need look no further than what the Supreme Court just did.

In McMahon v. New York the Supremes gave Trump a simple way to revoke federal spending authorized by Congress: just fire everyone responsible for implementing that spending.

The high court is allowing Trump and Education Secretary Linda McMahon to fire over half the people who work for the Department of Education until there’s a full hearing on the constitutionality of their action. But by then it will be too late to save much of the department.

Note that the Supreme Court made this astounding decision on its so-called “shadow docket” where it doesn’t even have to explain itself (the only record we have is Justice Sotomayor’s dissent).

No matter that Congress created the Department of Education; apparently, Trump can effectively end it. No matter that Congress in the 1974 Impoundment Control Act prohibits a president from unilaterally refusing to spend money that has been authorized by Congress; apparently, Trump can disregard the Act.

IFrame Content

Trump now has unbridled power to repeal federal laws by the simple expedient of firing federal employees who implement them.

Why? How? On what basis? Who’s behind this? We don’t know. We may never know.

Which gets us to the brouhaha over Jeffrey Epstein.

For years, Trump has talked darkly of a “deep state” — a secret cabal intent on destroying America by harming the nation’s children.

Such as, perhaps, six justices who let him shut down the Education Department without even setting out their reasons?

Recall “Pizzagate,” the QAnon conspiracy theory that in 2016 allegedly linked Democrats to a ring of child sex-traffickers. It’s still around but has morphed into a less partisan conspiracy theory involving an alleged worldwide elite of child sex-traffickers.

Jeffrey Epstein and his death fit perfectly. Many right-wing media personalities have posited that the billionaire convict was murdered in prison as part of a cover-up of a sprawling sex-trafficking conspiracy.

Senior Trump administration officials built up great fanfare around the release of the supposed Epstein “client list.”

Even JD Vance accused the government of hiding the list. “If you’re a journalist and you’re not asking questions about this case,” Vance said, “you should be ashamed of yourself.”

But that was back in 2021, before Vance became part of the, um, conspiracy.

In February of this year, Attorney General Pam Bondi acknowledged the existence of Epstein’s client list. She said the client list is “sitting on my desk right now.”

Now the Trump-Vance administration says Epstein’s client list doesn’t exist.

The Epstein case illustrates Trump’s “deep state” no less than does an unsigned “shadow docket” Supreme Court decision allowing Trump to wipe out the Department of Education.

The phrase “Epstein didn’t kill himself” — a rebuttal to the official explanation of Epstein’s death — has taken on a cultural meaning way beyond the facts of the case. It means an unaccountable elite doing evil things in secret.

Trump built his political base on that premise. Once in office, he said time and again, he would expose that unaccountable, secret, evil elite.

No wonder 70 percent of voters believe “law enforcement is withholding information about powerful people connected to Epstein,” including 61 percent of Trump voters. And 58 percent of voters said Trump “maybe was or definitely was” involved in a cover-up.

Conspiracy theories thrive when elites act in secret. I have no idea whether Epstein killed himself or was murdered. But Wired Magazine’s metadata — showing that the FBI’s “raw” surveillance video from the night Epstein killed himself is seemingly missing 2 minutes and 53 seconds — got my attention.

As did the Supreme’s bonkers secret decision in McMahon.

And I’m no conspiracy theorist.

After hyping the promised release, a joint FBI and Department of Justice report last week said they had found no evidence of a list — or that Epstein, who died by suicide in his prison cell in 2019, had been murdered — prompting outcry from within MAGA circles.

As Bondi faces heightened scrutiny for her repeated attempts to dodge questions about the Epstein files, Loomer also teased that “there are people in the White House who agree with me that Pam [Bondi] spent too much time on Fox News and her statements were inconsistent and undermined what messaging is today about the Epstein files.”

Other prominent MAGA-aligned supporters of the president have also warned that Trump could see significant damage to his standing among his base if he does not change course.

Sixty-three percent of voters in a Quinnipiac University national poll released Wednesday said that they disapproved of Trump’s handling of the files. Republicans were also nearly split. Just 40 percent said they support how he’s handled the files, with 36 percent disapproving and another 20 percent not offering an opinion.

Mike Flynn — who briefly served as Trump’s national security adviser in his first term — wrote in a lengthy X post on Wednesday that Trump needed to “gather your team and figure out a way to move past this.”

“The roll out of this was terrible, no way around that,” Flynn wrote. “Americans want America to be successful, therefore, WE NEED YOU TO BE SUCCESSFUL.”

Elon Musk — with whom Trump had a blowup fight last month in which Musk accused Trump of being named in the Epstein files — criticized his former boss for trying to paint the whole situation as a hoax.

“He should just release the files and point out which part is the hoax,” Musk wrote on X Wednesday.

The MAGA meltdown over Epstein “could be his Afghanistan going into the fall,” Mark Mitchell, head of polling and operations at Rasmussen Reports, told Steve Bannon Tuesday on his “War Room” podcast.

“People are trying to say this isn’t a big deal,” Mitchell said. “People are trying to say nobody wants this Epstein information out. It’s an absolute misdirection. This is horrifying. And if it isn’t corrected, it threatens derailing Trump’s agenda, getting rid of his political capital.”

“This is not about a guy who died in 2019, this is about a representation of two-tier justice and about unaccountable government,” Mitchell told Bannon.

On Wednesday, conservative political commentator John Solomon told Bannon that he had interviewed the president, and that Trump supported the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate elements of the Epstein case as part of a broader look into a supposed deep state conspiracy to punish the Republican Party.

“I think he’s frustrated by all the social media chatter by people who don’t really know what’s in the Epstein files,” Solomon said. “He was very pointed about that, let’s stay focused on the things that matter to the American people. ‘I want the answers to Epstein like everyone’, he said, so let the prosecutor do that.”

The Epstein fiasco also prompted Speaker Mike Johnson to split with Trump on Tuesday, calling for the Department of Justice to release all the information it has on the sex offender in the name of “transparency.”

“It’s a very delicate subject, but you should put everything out there, let the people decide it,” Johnson told conservative commentator Benny Johnson, adding that Bondi should explain her previous claims of having the elusive Epstein “client list.”

Just a day prior, the Louisiana Republican had defended Bondi, choosing to defer to the Trump administration instead of criticizing the attorney general.

But Trump appears to remain unmoved despite growing rebellion within his MAGA cohort.

In the Oval Office on Wednesday, Trump repeated his claims that the whole ordeal was a “hoax” peddled by Democrats and once again defended Bondi’s handling of the case.

“She’s done very good. She says ‘I gave you all the credible information,’ and if she finds any more credible information, she’ll give that too. What more can she do than that?” Trump said, adding that he had “lost a lot of faith in certain people” over their outcry on the administration’s approach to the issue.

---

MMA

Fox scrambles as Trump tariffs start to show up in prices and inflation accelerates

Written by Zachary Pleat

Published 07/15/25

Fox News is continuing its previous celebrations and defenses of President Donald Trump's destructive tariff impulses as evidence shows that prices are accelerating and a key inflation indicator jumped to its highest level in four months. Trump’s sycophants on Fox deny the tariffs have anything to do with the acceleration as his massive country-by-country tariffs are set to resume in just two weeks.

The June Consumer Price Index report, released July 15, showed that inflation increased at a monthly rate of 0.3% — well above the previous monthly rate of 0.1% in May — and increased at a 2.7% annual rate. According to CNBC, “the annual rate is the highest since February and still above the Federal Reserve’s 2% target.”

The report also noted that furniture and clothing prices increased last month, data points that economists have pointed out were likely impacted by Trump’s tariffs.

Ernie Tedeschi, the director of economics for Yale’s Budget Lab, explained: “The impact of tariffs is becoming more salient. Apparel, which had seen cool inflation the last 2 months, grew 0.4% in June. Household furnishings grew 1%. Video & audio electronics grew 1.1%.”

IFrame Content

Center for Economic and Policy Research senior economist Dean Baker wrote, “Trump's Big Beautiful tariffs are showing up in the data. The index for household furnishing and supplies (appliances and other household goods) rose 1.0 percent in June.”

Bloomberg’s chief U.S. economist Anna Wong stated, “Clear signs that tariffs pass through to CPI has picked up in June.”

Harvard University professor and former Council of Economic Advisers Chair Jason Furman wrote: “You can see signs of tariffs in these numbers and that is only likely to grow.”

Meanwhile, Fox Business is denying that Trump’s tariffs are having any impact on price increases in its coverage of the inflation report. On Mornings with Maria, anchor Maria Bartiromo said, “You’ve got to look at this report as another victory for President Trump, who has focused on reigning in inflation, and that’s what we’re seeing from this report.” Former Trump CEA acting Chair Tomas Philipson responded, “What’s happening in this CPI has very little to do with tariffed markets, tariffed goods.”

Video

Citation

From the July 15, 2025, edition of Fox Business' Mornings with Maria

On Varney & Co., right-wing economist Art Laffer said tariffs are having “almost zero” impact on prices, and insisted that tariffs cause prices to decline rather than increase, citing the impact of the Smoot-Hawley tariffs enacted during the Great Depression. Laffer also argued that news reports explaining that Trump’s tariffs are contributing to accelerating inflation are wrong.

Fox’s praise for Trump amid an acceleration in the inflation rate stands in stark contrast to how the MAGA network covered inflation under former President Joe Biden, having specifically attacked the president over inflation even as it declined or remained flat.

Experts have long predicted that Trump’s agenda of universal tariffs and mass deportation would be inflationary, with 16 Nobel Prize-winning economists previously signing a letter warning that Trump would “reignite” inflation if he won the 2024 election. Indeed, the inflationary effect of Trump's tariffs may worsen as he continues threatening massive tariff increases on products from dozens of countries beginning August 1.

// Fox’s Lara Trump credits the president for “miraculous” drop in prices — but prices are actually higher

06/04/25 4:35 PM EDT

### Fox claims Trump's tariffs will restore American manufacturing. Experts say they are hurting business.

04/17/25 3:54 PM EDT

### MAGA media knives are out for Trump’s tariff advisers

04/14/25

---

an 7 25

The Guardian reports even dedicated CIA critic Tim Weiner is sounding the alarm on the damage President Donald Trump is doing the agency.

Weiner — who wrote the CIA political take-down ‘Legacy of Ashes’ about decades of CIA mistakes and bad behavior — compares Trump’s second administration to watching the U.S. stand with Russia, Iran and North Korea by voting against a UN resolution condemning the invasion of Ukraine.

“You come to the realization, if you hadn’t already: ‘My God, the president of the United States has gone over to the other side. He has joined the authoritarian axis,’” Weiner said.

READ MORE: Stick a fork in him: Trump finally faces the threat of retribution—from MAGA

A chapter of Weiner’s new book "The Mission" addresses how the CIA was blindsided by Russia’s influence operation on behalf of Trump’s 2016 campaign. This was when Russian intelligence began releasing hacked Democratic National Committee emails, dealing a devastating blow to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

IFrame Content

“The Russians stole our f—————— election. How do we make sure this never happens again?” Weiner recalls CIA head Tom Rakusan demanding of his staff.

Following two impeachments, an insurrection and a second election, Trump is back in the White House and bent on revenge against the CIA. He’s also hired, according to Weiner, “a coterie of dangerously incompetent and servile acolytes to the highest positions of national security”.

“What keeps me up at night,” he told The Guardian, “is the fact that Trump has put the instruments of American national security in the hands of crackpots and fools, and that their incompetence and ideological blinkers will blind them to a coming attack. If the United States gets hit again under Trump, he will destroy what is left of our democracy.”

READ MORE:'This is his king complex': Republicans split as Trump threatens to 'takeover' a 'pigsty'

Weiner describes new CIA director, John Ratcliffe — a former personal injury attorney — as “a spineless person who will do whatever Trump tells him to do.”

Ratcliffe immediately fired hundreds of recently hired staffers and then sent their names to Elon Musk in an unclassified email that Weiner said was probably intercepted by the Russians and Chinese, who are now presumably working to recruit them as spies.

“All they need to do is to find people who are either deeply resentful or who might have a financial or a drug problem to be exploited,” Weiner said.

Trump’s anti-diversity crusade was another foolish mistake because “if you want to spy in a nation like Somalia or Pakistan or China, it might be wise to have a workforce that is not made up exclusively of white guys, and who speak languages other than English,” Weiner said. “Diversity was one of the CIA’s few superpowers, and the mindless abolition of the effort to diversify the CIA’s officers and analysts was one of the most stupid self-inflicted wounds that Radcliffe could have delivered.”

READ MORE:'Blatantly political': Outrage grows as Americans receive misleading email from Trump admin

Sadly, Weiner says no “Robert Mueller” or “Barack Obama” is going to save the nation. What that takes is a massive upheaval from Americans.

“[T]he other day, several million Americans marched in the street to protest the Mad King. And just as only we can defeat ourselves, I think only we can save ourselves,” Weiner said.

Read the full Guardian report at this link.

---

an 7 25 corrupt

'A tool for bribery': Critics warn 'there are no rules' on Trump’s presidential library

---

ABC

After an earlier setback for the Trump administration when House Republicans failed to advance a key procedural vote on a package of legislation including three crypto measures, President Donald Trump said late Tuesday he has made a deal with Republican members of Congress to advance the legislation on Wednesday.

Trump said in a post on his Truth Social platform that he met in the Oval Office with 11 of the 12 GOP members needed to pass the package.

"After a short discussion, they have all agreed to vote tomorrow morning in favor of the Rule," Trump said. "Speaker of the House Mike Johnson was at the meeting via telephone, and looks forward to taking the Vote as early as possible."

Trump did not provide specifics about the deal.

In a lengthy statement released later, Johnson thanked Trump for helping lock down the necessary votes to advance the crypto legislation.

"I'm thankful for President Trump getting involved tonight to ensure that we can pass the GENIUS Act tomorrow and agreeing again to help us advance additional crypto legislation in the coming days," Johnson said, referencing the name of one of the bills.

Earlier Tuesday, a dozen House Republicans bucked Trump and Johnson to prevent the legislation from advancing on the floor -- joining the entire Democratic caucus -- and, at least temporarily, freezing activity in the House. The final tally was 196-223.

Johnson had said earlier that while he anticipated that there may be enough opposition to defeat the effort, he felt that it was "important" to try to advance the bills. Republicans have a narrow majority in the House -- with 220 Republicans compared to 212 Democrats.

MORE: What to know about the GENIUS Act, a crypto regulation bill

Johnson said that he would attempt to work with Republican holdouts to answer questions.

The speaker explained that conservatives who voted against the rule want the crypto bills -- CLARITY, GENIUS and Anti CBDC Surveillance Act -- combined into one big package, rather than take separate standalone votes on each measure.

"This is the legislative process. We have some members who really, really want to emphasize the House's product," Johnson said. "They want to, want to push that and merge them together. We're trying to work with the White House and with our Senate partners on this. I think everybody is insistent that we're going to do all three, but some of these guys insist that it needs to be all in one package."

The intraparty rebellion comes after Trump strongly urged Republicans to vote in favor of advancing the crypto bills.

"The GENIUS Act is going to put our Great Nation lightyears ahead of China, Europe, and all others, who are trying endlessly to catch up, but they just can't do it," Trump posted on Truth Social Tuesday. "Digital Assets are the FUTURE, and we are leading by a lot! Get the first Vote done this afternoon (ALL REPUBLICANS SHOULD VOTE YES!)."

The no votes came from Reps. Andy Biggs, Tim Burchett, Michael Cloud, Andrew Clyde, Eli Crane, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Andy Harris, Anna Paulina Luna, Scott Perry, Chip Roy, Keith Self and Victoria Spartz. Majority Leader Steve Scalise also changed his vote to "no" to preserve the capability to call the measure back up for another attempted vote.

Luna, a Florida Republican, told ABC News that she is "pro-crypto," but voted against the procedural vote because she continues to have concerns about creating a "backdoor" to a Central Bank Digital Currency -- a worry echoed by Greene.

"I just voted NO on the Rule for the GENIUS Act because it does not include a ban on Central Bank Digital Currency and because Speaker Johnson did not allow us to submit amendments to the GENIUS Act," Greene, R-Ga., posted on X. "Americans do not want a government-controlled Central Bank Digital Currency. Republicans have a duty to ban CBDC. President Trump included a ban on CBDC in his January 23rd executive order and Congress must also include the ban on CBDC in the GENIUS Act."

MORE: Trump's sons distance themselves from new Trump-branded crypto venture

The vote came during what the White House is calling "Crypto Week" and marks a rare instance when House Republicans have defied Trump's direction.

Trump, who launched his own crypto meme coin earlier this year, recently said he is a "fan of crypto" and called it a "very powerful industry" that the U.S. has "dominated."

"I'm president. And what I did do there is build an industry that's very important," Trump said last month. "If we didn't have it, China would."

Once a crypto skeptic, Trump and his family have fully immersed themselves in the cryptocurrency marketplace, developing not only the $TRUMP meme coin, but also a bitcoin mining firm, a stablecoin firm and a crypto reserve.

---

PRESS SUPPRESS MAFIA DON SHAKEDOWN

AN 7 25

On July 1, CBS News' parent company, Paramount, agreed to pay $16 million to settle a lawsuit from President Donald Trump —who claimed that CBS edited a 2024 interview with Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris in a way that amount to election interference. Many Trump critics attacked the lawsuit as frivolous and baseless, arguing that Paramount was submitting to a shakedown just to be done with the matter.

Now, Fox News is drawing criticism for its editing of a 2024 interview with Trump, and critics argue that it was edited in a way to make Trump look good — not edited for journalistic purposes.

CNN's Andrew Kaczynski, in a July 14 post on X, formerly Twitter, tweeted video of the Fox News interview and noted their editing of comments on convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

READ MORE: 'You dress as a cowgirl?' Kristi Noem bashed at homestate fundraiser

Kaczynski posted, "I had not seen this Fox News extended interview with Trump from 2024 — where they deliberately edited his (Jeffrey) Epstein answer — where he won't commit to releasing the full files because of 'phony' stuff in it."

IFrame Content

Kaczynski, comparing the unedited interview to Fox News' edited version, tweeted, "Check out what Trump said vs what Fox edited."

In response to Kaczynski's tweets, Media Matters' Matthew Gertz — obviously mindful of Trump's CBS News lawsuit — posted, "My understanding based on the CBS News precedent is that this is an illegal interference with the 2024 election that should result in Fox News paying tens of millions of dollars to orgs chosen by Kamala Harris and facing an FCC probe. Quote Andrew Kaczynski @KFILE."

In a separate tweet, Gertz posted, "At least that's the result when the president is engaged in a corrupt abuse of power crying out for more scrutiny."

READ MORE:There's far more to Trump and Epstein's relationship: Trump biographer

Former Trump supporter turned Trump critic A.J. Delgado tweeted, "Yup, I was tweeting about this last October, as were others, and no one seemed to care. It's insane that Fox edited the answer (the only reason the full answer came out is, I believe, that Will Cain later absentmindedly shared the full answer on his own show. That's the only reason we even know.)"

The Trump War Room account on X posted Fox News' edited version of the interview in June 2024.

Observations from Kaczynski, Gertz and Delgado's tweets on Fox News' 2024 interview with Trump are drawing a lot of discussion on X.

Former Obama Administration official Tommy Vietor wrote, "Time for Kamala to sue Fox News???"

X user Michael Serdikoff tweeted, "This is same (guy) suing CBS for editing Harris' remarks."

Another X user, Cindy Cooper commented, "So the Fox News network via Fox News Radio did air the entire answer. Thanks."

Watch the video belowor at this link.

---

AN 7 25

We all know and expect that a president’s top appointees are picked in large part because of their willingness to carry out a president’s agenda. But usually these are people with some experience in the areas that they are overseeing. Insofar as this is not the case, they can generally rely on the high-level career officials in the departments or agencies under their control to make sure that necessary tasks get accomplished.

Unfortunately, this is not the case now. The main and possibly only qualification for Trump’s top appointees is the ability to tell blatant lies with a straight face. He has picked people who not only have no background in the areas they oversee, they don’t even have the most basic understanding of their responsibilities. And in many cases they have fired or marginalized the career people with expertise.

Starting at the top, Trump picked a former Fox talk show host with a drinking problem, Pete Hegseth, to be his Secretary of Defense. Secretary Hegseth apparently didn’t know that he shouldn’t be making war plans on unsecured channels and without knowing who was included in the conversations. He apparently also didn’t know that his wife should not be included in the discussions.

Hundreds of people just died in Texas because of this failure, and we are virtually certain to see far worse in the future.

Trump has a Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, who claims he doesn’t know that tariffs (import taxes) are taxes. Since tariffs are among the oldest form of taxes, long predating the income tax, this is a pretty elementary point that a Treasury Secretary would be expected to know.

IFrame Content

Kristi Noem, Trump’s Homeland Security Secretary, didn’t know what habeas corpus is. Since that is basic right guaranteed by the Constitution, it would be rather important for the person controlling the largest federal police force to be familiar with the concept.

While knowledge of their areas may not be a strong point for top Trump officials, lying in front of TV cameras is an area of real expertise. We see this constantly.

We just saw Attorney General Pam Bondi tell us that there is no Jeffrey Epstein client list. This was after telling us back in February that the list was sitting on her desk and promising that it was soon to be released.

After Trump released his “Liberation Day” tariffs, which included a steep tariff on the uninhabited Heard and McDonald Islands, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick insisted this was not a mistake and an indication of a rushed job. Instead, he said the tariffs were necessary to prevent transshipment from other countries to escape the taxes Trump was imposing.

This is obviously an absurd claim since there were many uninhabited islands that escaped taxation. In addition, while the problem of transshipment to avoid tariffs is real, it is not one that can be solved by putting a tariff on imports from islands inhabited by penguins and seals.

China and other countries whose exports are subject to high tariffs can and will ship them through countries that face much lower import taxes. If our customs agents can’t recognize that we are not actually importing cars and television sets from uninhabited islands, they surely will not be able to detect that the goods coming from Thailand or Indonesia were actually manufactured in China.

Trump appointees do have a remarkable ability to lie. RFK Jr. can tell us that discouraging people from getting the measles vaccines has nothing to do with the largest measles outbreak in decades. They all tell us that we can reduce Medicaid spending by $800 billion over the decade (roughly 10 percent), without throwing anyone off the program. And former DOGE boss Elon Musk told us 20 million dead people were getting Social Security benefits.

But it seems that none of them can do their jobs, and since they have fired or sidelined most of the high- level civil servants with expertise, these jobs are not getting done. Hundreds of people just died in Texas because of this failure, and we are virtually certain to see far worse in the future. As much as Trump might insist otherwise, incompetence is not a virtue.

NOW READ:A cult leader shows how Trump is taking America to a very dark place

---

AN 7 25

'Make chickens miserable again': Trump's California feud taken to 'ridiculous new level'

Adam Lynch

---

NO LNX

A cult leader shows how Trump is taking America to a very dark place

Thom Hartmann July 13, 2025

Former FBI agent Michael Fienberg has gone public, pointing out that the agency, under the leadership of Dan Bongino and Kash Patel, is purging itself of people who are not members of the Trump cult (my phrase, not his).

Similar cult-like behavior is on vivid display with the White House press secretary, the head of DHS, and the head of the Department of Justice — among numerous other administration officials and elected Republicans — regularly spouting lies and half-truths that target women, immigrants, and Democrats.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) is implying that the children who died in the Texas floods were the victims of a nefarious plot — presumably by Democrats or Jews who operate space lasers — to modify the weather, completely ignoring the fact that Republican-aligned fossil fuel billionaires have been engaged in a half-century-long scheme to sabotage our atmosphere with their carbon dioxide emissions in exchange for trillions of dollars in profits. Some of which, no doubt, have been shared with Greene or her campaign.

Multiple administration officials, elected Republicans, and rightwing media cult leaders on platforms like Fox “News” have been amplifying the racist, antisemitic “Great Replacement Theory,” that wealthy Jews are paying to “replace” white people in America with Blacks, Mexicans, and other people of color. This has led to ICE becoming the largest police force in America, with a budget larger than that of the entire Russian military, soon to be sweeping a neighborhood near you in their never-ending hunt for brown-skinned people.

Donald Trump didn’t need to lure his followers into a remote jungle, like Jim Jones did in Guyana. He didn’t need to physically isolate them from the rest of the world. Instead, Trump built his Jonestown right here at home, within the boundaries of our republic, brick by brick. He did it using over 30,000 documented lies, fear, rage, and the intoxicating promise of belonging.

Today, tens of millions of Americans are trapped inside Trump’s reality-warping cult. And just as Jones’ followers drank poisoned Kool-Aid believing it was salvation, Trump’s followers have swallowed his Big Lies and are now willing to sacrifice our Constitution, our democracy, and our future on the altar of one man’s insatiable ego.

This is an old story in new packaging.

Jim Jones wasn’t always a madman. In the beginning, he offered something people desperately wanted: community, belonging, equality. He drew in the lonely, the marginalized, the disillusioned. He offered them meaning, dignity, and the hope of a better world. But slowly, he twisted that hope into a tool of control, weaponizing his followers’ trust for his own wealth, power, and self-aggrandizement.

Donald Trump followed a similar cult leader’s path.

He didn’t invent the grievances he exploited. For decades, America’s middle class was gutted by Reaganomics and neoliberal trade policies. Jobs were shipped overseas. Unions were crushed. Wages stagnated while billionaires like Trump amassed obscene wealth.

Trump didn’t cause that pain, but he channeled it. He told working-class Americans that he alone could restore their lost greatness. At the 2016 Republican National Convention, he bellowed: “I alone can fix it.”

That wasn’t a campaign promise. It was a cult leader’s declaration. Like Jones, Trump positioned himself not as a servant of the people, but as their savior, the one indispensable man without whom all hope would be lost.

All cults, whether religious or political, thrive on division and a sense of victimhood. Jim Jones taught his followers that outsiders were out to destroy them, that they were surrounded by enemies, traitors, and saboteurs. He warned that the CIA, the media, and shadowy conspirators would annihilate Jonestown unless his people followed him without question.

Trump operates from the same playbook.

His enemies list is long: immigrants, Black voters, Muslims, women, Democrats, journalists, scientists, the “deep state,” election officials, even members of his own party who dare to tell the truth. He has spent years feeding his followers a steady diet of paranoia, victimhood, and grievance, convincing them that the only thing standing between them and ruin is him.

And just as Jones’ followers were taught to see dissent as treason, Trump’s followers are conditioned to see any criticism of him as an attack on themselves. They’ve surrendered their own personal identities to him and his cult. When he tells them that an election they lost was stolen, they believe it; not because the evidence says so, but because Trump says so. And in a cult, the cult leader’s word is truth.

Jones kept his followers in a physical jungle, cut off from the outside world. Trump does the same psychologically with the help of billionaire-backed media. His repeated attacks on the press as “the enemy of the people” are no accident: they are a deliberate strategy to isolate his followers in an information silo, where only his voice matters.

Fox “News,” Truth Social, MAGA podcasts, and a network of social media influencers form the walls of this new Jonestown. Alternative facts replace real ones. And when reality intrudes — when courts reject Trump’s lawsuits, when audits confirm his losses — his followers simply double down. “That’s just what the enemy wants us to believe.”

It’s classic cult behavior. And it’s why millions remain convinced that Trump won in 2020, that the COVID vaccine was a hoax or a plot, that January 6th was “legitimate political discourse.” Like Jones, Trump has taught his followers to see the world not as it is, but as he tells them it is.

When Jones’ utopia began to crumble — when defections and investigations threatened his power and a congressional delegation arrived to expose his lies and manipulations — he led his followers into mass suicide. Over 900 men, women, and children perished, drinking poisoned Kool-Aid to prove their loyalty.

Trump, faced with the reality of defeat in 2020, incited his followers to violence rather than admit loss. January 6th was America’s political Jonestown: a desperate, delusional last stand to keep their messiah in power. Trump didn’t just sit back as the Capitol was attacked. He watched with satisfaction, refusing to act for hours, while the very heart of our democracy was desecrated in his name.

And to this day, he defends that insurrection, calling those convicted of violent crimes “hostages,” giving pardons, and encouraging more violence if he’s indicted or loses again. Jones destroyed his followers; Trump is willing to destroy our nation.

I wrote about this back in the summer of 2023 in an article titled, “Will America Face “Narcissistic Collapse” as Trump Descends into Legal Hell?” Narcissistic collapse is what happens when psychopathic narcissists face defeat and humiliation and strike out against the world around them.

Think Hitler in his bunker when my old friend Armin Lehmann, then a 16-year-old Hitler Youth, handed him the news that the war was lost. Armin wrote a book about his experience, In Hitler’s Bunker: A Boy Soldier’s Eyewitness Account of the Fuhrer’s Last Days, which we discussed extensively when he was writing it and during the three years we traveled the world together, lecturing mostly across Europe and the Far East.

Hitler, in those final weeks — Armin told me and the historical record verifies — actually welcomed the destruction of Germany by American and Soviet bombs and tanks.

He hadn’t failed: his narcissism and the cult he had created and surrounded himself with wouldn’t let him confront that.

Instead, in his mind, the German people had failed, his generals had failed, his soldiers had failed. They had failed Germany, but, more importantly they had failed him and his cult — and he wanted them punished for failing him.

When he was finally pushed into full-blown narcissistic collapse — those final days that Armin spent with him — he succumbed to the fate of many severe narcissists who experience a failure so undeniable that it provokes full-blown narcissistic collapse: he killed his wife and then turned the gun on himself.

In the final stages of narcissistic collapse, long before suicide becomes an option, first comes the blaming and the attempts to punish others.

We see this now with Trump blaming the media, the courts, and the Democrats he now openly brags that he “hates” and encourages his cult followers to hate as well.

Historians and political scientists have long warned us about men like Trump. In Strongmen and on her Lucid Substack newsletter, Ruth Ben-Ghiat traces the path of authoritarians like Mussolini, Putin, and Trump: they all consistently cultivate a cult of personality, demonize opponents, destroy the press, capture the courts, collaborate with oligarchs, and use violence as a political tool.

Trump has followed that playbook to the letter.

Jason Stanley, in How Fascism Works and on his Forward Substack, identifies Trump’s tactics: appeals to a mythic past, relentless lying, glorification of violence, and the creation of a “victim” identity for the dominant group. Steven Hassan, one of America’s foremost experts on cults, calls Trumpism a “destructive political cult” in his book The Cult of Trump and on his Substack newsletter Freedom of Mind.

These aren’t wild theories. They’re the sober assessments of professional scholars and historians who’ve studied how democracies fall and how cults rise.

It’s easy to see Jones’ Kool-Aid as the symbol of his evil, but let’s not forget: Trump’s lies have already cost real lives.

His downplaying of COVID, his undermining of vaccines and masks, his promotion of quack cures like hydroxychloroquine and bleach weren’t just irresponsible: they were deadly. Hundreds of thousands of Americans would be alive today if Trump hadn’t turned public health into a culture war battlefield.

And now, his Big Lies about the election and the “deep state” are poisoning faith in our democracy itself. In poll after poll, a majority of Republicans say they believe Trump won in 2020. They believe it so deeply that they’re passing laws to suppress votes, installing loyalists to oversee elections, and preparing to reject any future result that doesn’t favor their Dear Leader. The poison is spreading and fast.

So what comes next?

Jim Jones didn’t start out plotting mass suicide. He got there one lie, one power grab, one act of cruelty at a time. Trump’s path is no different. His first term tested the boundaries. His second is breaking them.

Already, Trump openly promised dictatorship “on day one.” He’s already pursuing “retribution,” purging the government, and rounding up immigrants into camps. He’s gutted the civil service, weaponized the justice department, and is today using the military for domestic crackdowns.

This isn’t hyperbole. It’s all on the record. And it’s what happens when a cult leader gains the reins of state power, as the world has seen repeatedly throughout history.

We don’t have to follow Trump into the abyss. We can refuse the poison. We can choose the hard work of repairing our democracy, telling the truth, and holding this would-be strongman accountable.

But time is short. The cult is deep, and its leader is relentless.

History tells us where this path ends. Jonestown. Berlin 1933. Rome in 1922. Moscow in 2020. The question is whether we have the courage to change course before it’s too late.

Trump may not have led us into a jungle, but he has led millions into a psychological wilderness, where lies are truth, enemies are everywhere, and only he can lead the way out. Jim Jones led his people to destruction, all in the name of salvation. Trump is leading America down the same road.

We must say no. We must tell the truth. And we must do it now.

NOW READ: The most dangerous guy at Fox News is probably not who you think

---

RWW

07/14/2025

Kyle Mantyla

Colby Hall @ Mediaite: Trump Gets Ratioed by His Own Truth Social Followers Over Epstein Post

President Donald Trump tried to shut down growing chatter about the Jeffrey Epstein files, but it didn’t just fall flat—it exploded in his face.

Media Matters: Charlie Kirk: “I'm done talking about Epstein for the time being. I'm gonna trust my friends in the administration.”

Kirk's remarks come after Trump reportedly called him over attacks on Attorney General Pam Bondi.

Steve Benen @ The Maddow Blog: In apparent desperation, AG Pam Bondi drops a closely watched criminal case

The attorney general intervened in a case important to the far-right fringe just as she was looking to improve her standing with the far-right fringe.

David Badash @ The New Civil Rights Movement: At Faith-Based Event Trump Courts Religious CEOs, Uses Expletive, Calls Dems ‘Evil’

During a White House Faith Office event focused on renewing America “spiritually and financially,” President Donald Trump lashed out at “evil” Democrats and used an expletive while venting about his indictments and impeachments.

Isaac Arnsdorf @ The Washington Post: How the Trump shooting supercharged beliefs in a divine right of MAGA

Donald Trump and many of his followers have described the rally as a mass spiritual awakening, promoting the belief that Trump enacts God’s will.

Melissa Goldin @ The Associated Press: Trump says he wants to deport ‘the worst of the worst.’ Government data tells another story

President Donald Trump has pledged to deport “the worst of the worst.” He frequently speaks at public appearances about the countless “dangerous criminals” — among them murderers, rapists and child predators — from around the world he says entered the U.S. illegally under the Biden administration. He promises to expel millions of migrants in the largest deportation program in American history to protect law-abiding citizens from the violent threats he says they pose. But government data around ongoing detentions tells a different story.

---

AN 7 25

Back in 1992 — eight years before he first ran for president and 24 years before he finally won a presidential race — Donald Trump discussed his obsession with "revenge" during an interview with Charlie Rose . Trump made it clear that he would gladly take revenge against business associates who were disloyal to him, telling Rose, "I would have wiped the floor with the guys that weren't loyal, which I will now do…. I love getting even with people."

MSNBC's Katy Tur dug up that old 1992 interview during a Friday afternoon, July 11 panel , stressing that those comments from a younger Trump made 33 years ago perfectly capture the vengeful mentality he brings to his second administration. And Tur got no argument from her two guests: The New Yorker's Susan B. Glasser and The Atlantic's Tom Nichols, a Never Trump conservative.

Nichols told Tur and Glasser, "Look, the president's an emotionally disordered person. That's been clear for a long time. It was clear in his first term…. When he says things like, you know, 'I live for revenge,' you know he's telling you the truth. Take him seriously…. In his first term, he had the so-called adults in the room. This time, he's brought with him people who also are kind of oddball, disordered folks…. who don't have any interest in the actual mission of the institutions they are leading."

READ MORE: Trump's goal isn’t to restore American greatness — it's much more sinister

Nichols lamented that Trump's appointees — including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem — "don't see themselves as leading institutions" that "perform missions for the people of the United States."

IFrame Content

"They see themselves as part of a team of lib-owning trolls who are going to infuriate the president's enemies, and they, too, are going to get their ounce of revenge for the people who thought, who said they were unqualified or who snickered at them," Nichols told Tur and Glasser. "I mean, (FBI Director) Kash Patel is basically trying to figure out who's laughing at him at the water coolers at the FBI….. These are really petty, small people who don't seem to have any interest in doing the job that the Senate, for whatever reason, confirmed them to do….. That attitude flows from the top."

Nichols argued that Trump's obsession with loyalty recalls the Soviet Union.

"This isn't McCarthyism," Nichols told Tur and Glasser. "This is like KGB kind of level stuff. This is the-death-of-Stalin stuff where, you know, you have expected one of these people to run down the hallway saying, 'I have documents on all of you.' Because it's all about personal loyalty. And it does raise the question, well, while all this is going on, who's catching spies, who's chasing kidnappers?"

READ MORE:'It's a flat out lie': Former wrestlers say Jim Jordan knew about abuse in new HBO documentary

Glasser warned that the U.S. is suffering chaos "across many different federal agencies."

"Trump and his advisers have advanced a maximalist view of executive power," Glasser told Tur and Nichols.

READ MORE:'It didn’t end on friendly terms': FBI leader 'seriously thinking about resigning' after White House spat

*Watch the full video below or at this link.

---

ROBT

AN 7 25

I keep asking myself when Trump’s authoritarian fascism will become so intolerable to the vast majority of Americans that they rise up against it — not only massively protest but put enough pressure on Republicans in Congress that they join with Democrats in impeaching and convicting him.

In other words, what’s the tipping point for ridding us of this menace?

I thought we’d reached that tipping point when he went to war with Iran without congressional approval. Or when he sent active military troops into Los Angeles. Or when he imposed tariffs on all products imported to the United States, essentially raising taxes on Americans. Or when he forced out the president of the University of Virginia for insufficiently rooting out DEI. Or when he attacked major law firms for employing lawyers who once tried to hold him legally accountable.

Obviously, we haven’t reached the tipping point yet. So what will it take? Several possibilities come to mind:

He raises tariffs 25 percent on almost all products imported into the United States, resulting in substantial price increases across the economy.Americans who pay no attention to politics now find they’re struggling to pay the bills.

IFrame Content

He stations active military troops in every major American city to “protect” ICE agents who are going house to house, apartment to apartment, demanding proof of citizenship.Americans who haven’t before been affected by Trump’s police state are now aware of it, as many of their relatives or friends get caught up in the dragnet.

He builds a gulag of detention centers across America into which he sends Americans who criticize him, prior to revoking their citizenship and expelling them to prisons in foreign nations.Americans who haven’t been concerned about his actions against immigrants now find that he is silencing all criticism about him or his regime.

He announces that the Supreme Court is intruding on presidential powers and he is therefore not bound by the court.Americans who haven’t paid attention to his lawlessness are now forced to confront his constitutional coup.

Hence today’s Office Hours question: What actions by Trump and his lackeys do you believe will trigger such a massive upheaval in America that even Republican lawmakers who have supported him will join with Democrats to impeach and convict him? Where’s the tipping point?

---

Supreme Court hands 'huge' loss to Trump and DeSantis over illegal Florida law

an 7 25

---}:

an 7 25

Billionaire Tesla/SpaceX/X.com leader Elon Musk was one of the most generous donors to Donald Trump's 2024 campaign, and "War Room" host Steve Bannon argued that Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris would have won were it not for Musk's support of Trump.

Trump and Musk became so close that the president put him in charge of a new advisory committee called the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), but their alliance turned into a bitter, ugly feud when Musk expressed his vehement disdain for Trump's "big, beautiful bill."

Trump and Musk spent weeks exchanging insults, and Trump allies promoted allegations of drug use on Musk's part.

READ MORE: 'A low move in a free country': WSJ editorial board rips Trump for targeting press

Author Michael Wolff, during an early July appearance on The Daily Beast's podcast, alleged that Trump is claiming he planted a story about Musk allegedly using drugs in the New York Times. In late May, the Times reported that Musk, according to sources, was using ketamine, Adderall, ecstasy and psychedelic mushrooms during the 2024 presidential race — an allegation Musk vehemently denies.

IFrame Content

Wolff told Daily Beast podcast host Joanna Coles, "I was tracking some Trump phone calls on Monday night, (June 30). And it's sort of worth explaining here that over a long period of time, I've gotten to know and cultivated a lot of people who Trump regularly speaks to. Trump speaks to them, and then, they speak to other people…. Whoever he calls, he says the same thing to everybody. So you know exactly what is on his mind."

The journalist/author also told Coles, "In one of these phone calls — many of them — he was on about, you know, how many drugs he takes. 'He takes drugs all the time. You know that, don't you? You know, The New York Times wrote about it. They said, he takes drugs.'"

Trump, according to Wolff's sources, claimed, "Actually, we dropped a dime to The New York Times.... on Elon's drug taking."

READ MORE:Trump’s tax bill could be a major win for one group. Everyone else? Not so much.

*Watch the full video below or at this link. The video is also available on the Daily Beast's website (subscription required).

---

an 7 25 calls for 3rd party am

Political suicide': Musk promises to stop Trump's big bill 'if it's the last thing I do'...

---

AN 7 25

According to Forbes, President Donald Trump's net worth, as of July 2, 2025, is roughly $5.1 billion. Estimates of Trump's net worth vary, but one thing they have in common is showing Trump growing even richer during his second presidency.

In 2024, however, Trump had his share of financial problems — from huge legal bills to massive civil judgements against him.

The New York Times' Russ Buettner, in an article published on July 2, examines the financial challenges Trump faced last year and his ability to overcome them.

READ MORE:'Terrible' Trump White House 'Daddy’s Home' video draws widespread mockery: 'Lost the plot'

"Last spring, even as Donald J. Trump’s march back toward the White House dominated public attention, his finances, largely out of view, faced serious threats," Buettner reports. "His office building in Lower Manhattan generated too little cash to cover its mortgage, with the balance coming due. Many of his golf courses regularly lacked enough players to cover costs."

IFrame Content

Buettner continues, "The flow of millions of dollars a year from his stint as a television celebrity had mostly dried up. And a sudden wave of legal judgments threatened to devour all his cash. Then, with his clinching of the Republican nomination, everything began to change."

After he won the 2024 election, the Times journalist notes, his "family business," the Trump Organization, "announced numerous new deals that would financially benefit Mr. Trump directly." And critics view some of those deals as conflicts of interest.

"Most glaringly," Buettner reports. "Mr. Trump is now both a partner in several crypto ventures and, as president, crypto's chief policy regulator, and he has signaled that he wants his administration to have a hands-off approach to digital currencies."

"Today, those moves are seen by Mr. Trump's detractors as a money grab of historic proportions," Buettner continues. "But an analysis by The New York Times of thousands of pages of internal Trump Organization documents filed in one of the legal actions against him suggests a more urgent motivation for Mr. Trump's behavior: a need, rather than simply a desire, for easy money to keep his empire intact."

READ MORE:Trump says he'll 'take a look' at deporting Elon Musk: DOGE 'might have to go back and eat' him

Buettner's reporting is a topic of discussion on X, formerly Twitter.

Criminal defense attorney Scott Greenfield tweeted, "Trump was on the balls of his a—— financially until he was re-elected. Now he's making tons of money by selling access and favors and Trump-branded tchotchkes to fools."

X user Nino Brodin posted, "Contrary to the president’s assertions, records filed in a fraud case against him suggest that his riches were not the product of a steady and strong empire.

Another X user Photogater posted, "I'm hoping he sees prison time for all of this corrupt grift."

READ MORE:Senate Republicans' big ugly bill is even worse than the earlier cruelty passed by the House

*ReadRuss Buettner's full New York Times article at this link (subscription required).

---

an 725

President Donald Trump toured “Alligator Alcatraz” on Tuesday, the federal immigration detention facility in the Florida Everglades that boasts alligators as part of a natural escape barrier. Now, Trump is vowing to renovate the original Alcatraz, just off the coast of California, a former federal maximum security prison that he claims is, or will be, “surrounded by sharks.”

Before jetting off to Florida, Trump joked with reporters (video below) about detainees facing deportation who would have to navigate around the alligators in the Everglades should they try to escape.

Later in the day, Trump posted to his social media website about his new inspiration.

“Because of the Violence and Criminality I have seen due to the Open Border Policy of Sleepy Joe Biden, in particular allowing millions of people into our Country who shouldn’t be here, I wanted something representative to show how we fight back, and then, it happened,” the President wrote.

READ MORE: ‘This Is Fascism’: Trump Sparks Fury After Calling to Deport U.S. Citizens

IFrame Content

“I saw a picture of ALCATRAZ looking so foreboding, and I said, ‘We’re going to look into renovating and rebuilding the famous ALCATRAZ Prison sitting high on the Bay, surrounded by sharks. What a symbol it is, and will be!’ Conceptual work started six months ago, and various prison development firms are looking at doing it with us. Still a little early, but lots of promise!”

CNN’s Edward-Isaac Dovere remarked, “the president says he’s looking into spending federal money, in part, to put sharks into the San Francisco Bay.”

If Trump actually wants Alcatraz to be surrounded by truly dangerous sharks, as Dovere notes he may have to bring them there. The ones currently surrounding the tiny island reportedly may not be especially dangerous, according to the Pacific Open Water Swim Co.

Other critics blasted Trump’s remarks.

Investment banker Evaristus Odinikaeze remarked, “So we’re rebuilding Alcatraz based on… a vibe?”

“Trump saw a moody picture of a defunct prison and decided that’s the future of immigration policy, locking up desperate families on a shark-surrounded island like a Bond villain with zoning permits,” he added. “This cruel and reckless governance is nothing but a cinematic cosplay with real human lives at stake.”

READ MORE: Trump Pushes Census Do-Over to Exclude Non-Citizens — and to Immediately Redistrict House

Another social media user wrote: “Trump wants to bring back Alcatraz. Not to house mob bosses or war criminals, but to make a ‘symbol’ out of locking up desperate migrants. Sharks and spectacle. This isn’t immigration policy. It’s a twisted cruelty straight out of a 1930s Germany. You don’t rebuild a prison for the camera unless cruelty is the point. That’s not ‘fighting back’, that’s feeding fear and hatred to your base and calling it leadership. History already wrote this playbook, and it ends in concentration camps, not justice. We are better than this, no?”

Watch the video below or at this link.

---

Trump quietly dropped 'malicious' lawsuit against pollster — and got no settlement money

Ailia Zehra

---

tillis ~ BBB bailled

---

an 7 25

Although former President Barack Obama left office on January 20, 2017 — almost eight and one-half years ago — President Donald Trump continues to be obsessed with him. And he is furious with Sen. Chris Coons (D-Delaware) for comparing Trump's negotiations with Israel and Iran to Obama's Iran agreement.

Early Monday morning, June 30, Trump went to this Truth Social platform to let Coons know how vehemently he resents being compared to Obama in any way.

Trump ranted, "Tell phony Democrat Senator Chris Coons that I am not offering Iran ANYTHING, unlike Obama, who paid them $Billions under the stupid 'road to a Nuclear Weapon JCPOA (which would now be expired!), nor am I even talking to them since we totally OBLITERATED their Nuclear Facilities."

READ MORE:'The criminals are in charge': George Conway torches Trump DOJ

Trump's post is drawing plenty of mockery and ridicule on X, formerly Twitter.

IFrame Content

X user Khalissee tweeted, "TRUMP ON IRAN: 'I'm not offering Iran anything — unlike Obama, who gave them $ billions under the failed JCPOA. I'm not even talking to them since we OBLITERATED their nuclear facilities.' This man is an utter clown."

Another X user, Fearless, wrote, "Trump barking again: 'We obliterated Iran's nuclear facilities.' Reality check: You obliterated nothing but your own credibility. Iran never begged you, and never will. You were never open for diplomacy — only for Israel's script. Your 'maximum pressure' gave zero results, except strengthening Iran's resolve and humiliating your administration on the global stage. The harsh truth? You weren't feared — just ignored. History will remember your threats as noise, not strategy."

Logan 8094 mockingly posted, "Who in the world taught them this word 'OBLITERATED'?"

Owl-X wrote, "He violated a military standard by immediately suggesting success without waiting for intelligence level confirmation. He is truly unhinged."

READ MORE: 'Cruelty and criminality': Experts say Trump 'incapable of grasping how despised he is'

---

6 25 volatility index peak gt rec, covid, trump tariff 7/25 stock mkt dn 2 days

TARIFFS --> MOODY RATING

AN 5 25

'A lot of uncertainty': How Trump is aggravating a troubled housing market

---

PARDON WHITMER MILITIA?

---

AN 6 25

The White House slammed a fresh art installation critical of President Donald Trump on the National Mall this week, calling the anonymous creators “liberal activists masquerading as ‘artists.’”

The Washington Post reported that a golden, vintage television set was installed Thursday near Third Street NW, directly facing the U.S. Capitol. It loops a 15-second silent clip of Trump performing his signature slow-motion dance — featuring one scene alongside convicted child predator Jeffrey Epstein — while an ice‑cream truck jingle played nearby.

The TV’s exterior, ivy and decorative eagle are all spray-painted gold. A plaque at its base repeats the White House’s recent comment: “In the United States of America you have the freedom to display your so‑called ‘art,’ no matter how ugly it is.” — The Trump White House, June 2025.

READ MORE:(Opinion) Trump's reckless boast has just been thoroughly debunked

That quote was originally a response to the “Dictator Approved” statue — an earlier protest installation. It was an eight‑foot gold thumb crushing the Statue of Liberty’s crown, adorned with quotes from authoritarian leaders praising Trump.

IFrame Content

According to the National Park Service permit, the new exhibit aims “to demonstrate freedom of speech and artistic expression using political imagery.” It’s set to remain through Sunday evening.

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told The Post: “Wow, these liberal activists masquerading as ‘artists,’ are dumber than I thought!”

“I’ve tricked them into taking down their ugly sculpture and replacing it with a beautiful video of the President’s legendary dance moves that will bring joy and inspiration to all tourists traversing our National Mall," she added.

READ MORE:(Opinion) Republican could push us over the edge in a way that may well be irreversible

According to the report, the creators remain unknown, but these latest installations draw on the same aesthetic and materials seen in last fall’s protest art across Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, and Portland, Oregon.

No individual or organization has stepped forward to claim authorship of any of the pieces. The earlier works — like the tiki torch and desk — were reportedly placed anonymously as a tongue-in-cheek reference to political events.

---

'No apology will be forthcoming': New York Times smacks down Trump's demand for retraction

an 6 25

---

bb 6 25

no twts]

Donald Trump instructed his followers to turn against Republican Rep. Thomas Massie for refusing to join the MAGA cult.

"Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky is not MAGA, even though he likes to say he is. Actually, MAGA doesn't want him, doesn't know him, and doesn't respect him," Trump fumed yesterday after the Kentucky congressman criticized the president for bombing Iran without consulting Congress first.

"This is not Constitutional," the GOP lawmaker had posted on X.

But Massie's old-fashioned adherence to the nation's bygone laws did not sit well with Dear Leader, who, like an expert coder, went straight to Truth Social to program his followers. "He is a negative force who almost always Votes 'NO,' no matter how good something may be," the cult leader fed to the fertile MAGA-Mind in a long-winded post.

"He's a simple minded 'grandstander' …this 'lightweight' Congressman is against what was so brilliantly achieved last night in Iran… Massie is weak, ineffective, and votes 'NO' on virtually everything put before him… He is disrespectful to our great military, and all that they stand for…"

In the same brainwashing session, Trump then threatened to primary Massie. "MAGA should drop this pathetic LOSER, Tom Massie, like the plague!" he ordered. "The good news is that we will have a wonderful American Patriot running against him in the Republican Primary, and I'll be out in Kentucky campaigning really hard. MAGA is not about lazy, grandstanding, nonproductive politicians, of which Thomas Massie is definitely one."

To make sure his followers received their instructions loud and clear, Trump then grabbed his iPad this morning to refactor his message: "GET THIS "BUM" OUT OF OFFICE, ASAP!!!" And this is how Trump obliterates the last few remaining, old-school (or libertarian-leaning) Republicans who refuse to drink the powdered stuff.

---

:{:{---}:

AN 6? 25

'Unethical' and 'corrupt': Melania Trump slammed over 6-figure fee for political event - Alternet.org

---

ONLY NOT JRL FAIL

TV news barely covered Trump's Big Oil “quid pro quo” last year. Now that it's come to fruition, networks should give the scandal the attention it deserves.

Big Oil lands $1 billion tax break in Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” as EPA staff are to “pause” oil and gas enforcement

Special ProgramsClimate & Energy

Written by Allison Fisher

:{:{Published 06/20/25}:

Last May, The Washington Post published an exclusive story on a dinner at Mar-a-Lago in which Donald Trump promised to reverse then-President Joe Biden's actions on climate change as he asked Big Oil executives to fundraise $1 billion for his presidential campaign, assuring that they would be getting a “deal” due to the “taxation and regulation they would avoid thanks to him.” Reportedly, oil and gas executives did make “significant contributions to the Trump campaign.”

Over a four-day period, MSNBC was the only major TV network to cover the story, which All In host Chris Hayes described as “a political quid pro quo.”

Now, two new stories emerged this week that give more context to the promised “deal” the oil and gas industry is getting under Trump’s second term. National TV networks should inform their audience about how Big Oil is benefitting under Trump.

Bloomberg reported on June 17 that the Senate version of Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” now includes a tax break for the oil and gas industry “estimated to be worth more than $1 billion.”

The provision would allow energy companies subject to a 15% corporate alternative minimum tax to deduct certain drilling costs when calculating their taxable income. Companies including ConocoPhillips, Ovintiv Inc. and Civitas Resources, Inc. lobbied in favor of it.

The change was included in the legislation released Monday by Republicans on the Senate tax writing committee, which would slash tax credits for wind, solar, electric vehicles and hydrogen.

…

Other supporters of the measure, which wasn’t included in the House version of the bill, include the Domestic Energy Producers Alliance, founded by oil billionaire and Trump donor Harold Hamm.

The same legislation would repeal tax credits for the clean power industry, which would threaten more than 800,000 jobs and raise energy prices for consumers.

In fact, clean energy technologies constituted93% of new power generation capacity added to the grid last year alone, and the climate provisions in the Inflation Reduction Actwhich Trump wants repealed, “have spurred the highest levels of factory construction in American history, with more than 400,000 new jobs announced across the country.”

Meanwhile, CNN reported on June 16 that “the Environmental Protection Agency has told staff overseeing the country’s industrialized Midwest — a region plagued by a legacy of pollution — to stop enforcing violations against fossil fuel companies.”

Four sources with knowledge of the situation at the EPA’s Region 5 office, which oversees six Midwestern states, told CNN that enforcement officials were informed that “there is a pause on oil and gas enforcement” at staff meetings.

“That is how our regional management is interpreting signals from the president,” the EPA enforcement staffer said.

Officers stopped being able to issue notices of violation or send information requests to fossil fuel companies suspected of polluting, the sources told CNN. A violation notice is a prerequisite for taking a company to court for alleged violations of environmental laws.

These instructions are on top of other administration efforts to radically reduce safeguards that protect Americans from fossil fuel-related pollution and open up more land for oil and gas drilling.

Earlier this month, for example, the EPA announced plans to eliminate Biden-era regulations limiting the amount of carbon emissions and other pollution released into the atmosphere by fossil fuel-fired power plants. CBS reported the rule the EPA seeks to revoke “is projected to reduce 1.38 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere by 2047, as well as eliminate tens of thousands of tons of other harmful air pollutants that are dangerous to public health” — an amount of pollution “equivalent to driving more than 320 million gas-powered cars for a year, according to an EPA estimate.”

The new CNN report also notes:

An early snapshot of enforcement data from Trump’s start of his second term shows the overall number of EPA enforcement cases initiated or closed across sectors has dropped by 32% compared with the first three months of the Biden administration, according to publicly available EPA data analyzed for CNN by environmental watchdog Environmental Integrity Project. The same data shows nearly 60% fewer cases have been initiated or closed compared with the first three months of Trump’s first term.

Taken together, these reductions in taxes, regulations, and enforcement for the fossil fuel industry are essentially what Trump promised to deliver for Big Oil in exchange for backing his 2024 campaign.

At the time, The Atlantic’s David A. Graham described the proposition as “undeniably scandalous.” Now that these gifts to Big Oil are being delivered, TV networks should inform their audience about the dirty “deal” between Trump and Big Oil playing out at the expense of the booming clean energy industry, our health, and our climate.

### National TV news, with the exception of MSNBC, failed to cover Trump's scandalous Big Oil proposition

05/14/24 5:01 PM EDT

### Trump's corrupt offer to Big Oil executives almost entirely ignored in top local newspapers and TV markets in battleground states

05/17/24 2:58 PM EDT

### Alex Jones says he's “very, very sad” about Trump's “big, big mistake” in striking Iran

06/23/25

---

AN 6 25

In his 2022 book "The Next Civil War: Dispatches from the American Future," Canadian journalist/author Stephen Marche argued that the U.S. was on its way to becoming a far-right dictatorship. And his view of the United States' political environment hasn't grown any more optimistic since then.

Marche, in an op-ed published by The Guardian on June 16, points to the weekend of June 14-15 as a troubling demonstration of the "political violence" that is accelerating in the U.S. And he views President Donald Trump's military/birthday parade as an example of threatening imagery.

"Do not confuse Trump's debased parade with a joke or an innocent piece of entertainment," Marche warns. "The Trump parade took place in the immediate aftermath of the assassination of Melissa Hortman, a Minnesota state representative. While it was underway, security forces were firing teargas on protesters in Los Angeles. Violence is coming to define American political life — spectacular violence, including the parade and real violence like the assassination of Hortman."

READ MORE:'We held our ground: CA health clinic describes close encounter with Trump's agents

Marche continues, "Political destabilization is arriving far too quickly to be perceived in its entirety. So much is happening so fast that it’s impossible to keep track of the decline. Increasingly, the question is becoming: when are we going to start calling this what it is?"

IFrame Content

According to Marche, "American political life" is "moving away from discourse altogether."

"Don't like what the senators of the other party are saying? Handcuff them," Marche laments. "Don't like protestors? Send in the Marines. Don't like the makeup of the House of Representatives in Minnesota? Kill the top Democrat."

The Canadian journalist/author adds, "The political purpose of the parade, from Trump's point of view, was to demonstrate his mastery of the means of violence. He needed to show, to the military and to the American people both, that he can make the army do what he tells it, and established traditions and the rule of law will not alter his will. But the primary effect of the parade was to demonstrate an immense weakness, in Trump and in the American people."

READ MORE:Trump and the 2020 election: We’re witnessing the rewriting of history in the making

*Stephen Marche's full op-ed for The Guardian is available at this link.

---

AN 6 25

Just one day after a widely criticized, multimillion-dollar military parade marking both the U.S. Army’s birthday and his own—and amid millions attending thousands of nationwide “No Kings” protests—President Donald Trump announced on Sunday night a new crackdown targeting undocumented immigrants exclusively in Democratic-led strongholds, declaring that blue cities “are the core of the Democrat Power Center.”

Some critics also note that the move comes after a suspect, reportedly a Trump supporter, allegedly assassinated a Democratic Minnesota lawmaker and her spouse and gravely shot and wounded another Democratic lawmaker and his spouse on the same day as the anti-Trump rallies in all 50 states.

In a 400-word Sunday night “order” on social media, President Trump claimed that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents (ICE) every day face “threats from Radical Democrat Politicians,” as he announced “the single largest Mass Deportation Program in History,” before baselessly claiming voter fraud.

READ MORE:‘Coup’: What DHS Secretary’s ‘Liberate’ Comment Means, According to Experts

“Every day, the Brave Men and Women of ICE are subjected to violence, harassment, and even threats from Radical Democrat Politicians, but nothing will stop us from executing our mission, and fulfilling our Mandate to the American People. ICE Officers are herewith ordered, by notice of this TRUTH, to do all in their power to achieve the very important goal of delivering the single largest Mass Deportation Program in History,” the President wrote.

IFrame Content

“In order to achieve this, we must expand efforts to detain and deport Illegal Aliens in America’s largest Cities, such as Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York, where Millions upon Millions of Illegal Aliens reside,” Trump continued. “These, and other such Cities, are the core of the Democrat Power Center, where they use Illegal Aliens to expand their Voter Base, cheat in Elections, and grow the Welfare State, robbing good paying Jobs and Benefits from Hardworking American Citizens. These Radical Left Democrats are sick of mind, hate our Country, and actually want to destroy our Inner Cities — And they are doing a good job of it! There is something wrong with them. That is why they believe in Open Borders, Transgender for Everybody, and Men playing in Women’s Sports.”

Critics blasted the President and issued warnings.

“This is illegal on so many levels,” charged John Jackson, a former trial lawyer. “He’s declaring war on specific areas based entirely on their voter registration, which is a form of speech and protected political choice. It’s ‘vote Republican or I will punish you.’ Incredible. Out in the open. Lawless.”

“2 implications of Trump specifically targeting immigrants in Democratic cities: He’s NOT going after immigrants in places where they are least welcome,” observed former Washington Post editor Robert McCartney. “He IS doing what’s most likely to provoke backlash. We conclude that his goal is not to ‘solve’ the problem but to stir chaos.”

“This is the politicization of law enforcement. It’s not about ‘immigration,’ it’s about demonizing cities, harming political enemies and winning elections,” declared The Atlantic’s Anne Applebaum. “Also, those are the cities that had the biggest No Kings protests.”

RELATED: In Reversal, Trump Uses Term Tied to Ethnic Cleansing Amid Renewed Mass Deportation Demand

Pointing to Trump’s full screed, political strategist Rachel Bitecofer noted, “Please go study how the Nazis talked about the Jews to whip the public up into accepting restricting them from society, deporting them, and ultimately murdering them. It will sound a lot like this.”

“Trump is going after Blue cities based on nothing more than the crazy, conspiratorial voices in his head,” wrote Melanie D’Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health. “He’s already violating our 1st, 4th, 5th & 14th Amendments, and deploying the U.S. military against citizens in L.A. This is what authoritarianism looks like.”

“He’s openly admitting that he’s politicizing law enforcement,” observed Chuck Todd, the former NBC News Chief Political Analyst and “Meet the Press” moderator. “This will not help ICE’s image because he’s asking them to perform a political task. Throw in the decision to shield the red states from law enforcement and he’s clearly hoping to provoke an angry response. At a moment when we need a president to de-escalate, he does the opposite.”

“Trump’s ugly plan is clear: Incite violence in blue cities & blue states only, and then put the military on the streets in those blue cities & blue states only,” warned former Tea Party GOP Congressman Joe Walsh, now a Democrat and political commentator. “Everything he does is meant to divide us. He is the absolute worst of us.”

“This sort of dehumanizing language about political opponents is exactly what leads to the horrific shootings we saw yesterday, wrote MeidasTouch News. “Disgraceful and dangerous.”

“One of his crazed supporters just assassinated a Democrat and he continues to instigate division and hatred, noted Arizona Democratic state Senator Analise Ortiz. “We need an adult in the White House, not a dictator hell bent on escalating tensions and political violence.”

Progressive media outlet The Tennessee Holler wrote that “the president posting that Dems are ‘sick of mind’ and ‘hate our country’ immediately after 2 Dem lawmakers and their spouses were shot in their homes is the opposite of leadership. Gas on the fire.”

“A US president is supposed to be the president of all the people,” wrote retired Professor of Law Anne Arbor. “This man instead foments hatred of his own political party against his political opponents. This statement verges on a declaration of civil war against half the country.”

READ MORE: ‘You Don’t Care’: Gay Congressman Blasts Defense Secretary Over LGBTQ Troops

---

note kim jung un, bibi and putin all disobey trump; ordered no strike iran; refused love ltr?

an 6 25

'Kremlin-owned puppet': Critics slam Trump for jetting off to Canada to defend Putin at G7

---

an guk 6 25

During his 2016 campaign, Donald Trump insisted that if he defeated Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, he would maintain a strict separation between his business activities and the White House. And one of MAGA Republicans' talking points is that Trump cares so deeply about the United States that he was willing to step away from his business, put his son Eric Trump in charge of the Trump Organization, and take a hit financially in order to be president and "make American great again."

But in fact, President Trump's net worth has increased substantially since 2016 and continues to increase. Trump, according to his critics, is monetizing his presidency in a wide range of ways,

In an article published on June 16, The Guardian's Ed Pilkington stresses that Trump has even more conflicts of interest during his second presidency than he did during his first.

READ MORE:Trump and the 2020 election: We’re witnessing the rewriting of history in the making

"Trump signaled that he would be a president like no other at the start of his first term, when he became the only occupant of the Oval Office in modern times to refuse to divest his assets by putting them into a blind trust," Pilkington explains. "Though presidents are not bound by conflict-of-interest laws applying to other elected officials, the norm has been for incumbents to set themselves high standards, the archetype being Jimmy Carter's sale of his peanut farm. Trump, by contrast, put his assets in a trust that remained under the control of his family, with him as its sole beneficiary."

IFrame Content

The Guardian reporter continues, "He incurred numerous accusations of first-term conflicts of interest, as foreign officials from 20 countries descended on his hotels, while Secret Service agents in Trump’s security detail were made to pay premium rates, pouring at least $10m into his bank account. Such unprecedented disregard for time-honored ethical boundaries was shocking at the time. Now, it looks merely quaint."

During his second term, Pilkington notes, Trump has monetized his presidency with everything from promoting Tesla vehicles to receiving a jet as a gift from the Qatari government.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Connecticut) told The Guardian that Trump is operating a "pay-for-play presidency." And Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis, laments that Trump and his allies "have mastered the technique of flooding the zone" by "doing so much so fast that they are overwhelming the ability of ethics groups and institutions to respond."

READ MORE:'We held our ground: CA health clinic describes close encounter with Trump's agents

Clark told The Guardian, "People talk about 'guardrails' and 'norms' and 'conflict of interest,' which is all very relevant. But this is theft and destruction. This is the looting of America."

READ MORE:'Might seem shocking': Analysis outlines how Trump agenda also targets Americans on Medicare

ReadEd Pilkington's full article for The Guardian at this link.}:

---

AN 625

Critics pounce as Trump turns 'official government website' into scheme for 'selling green cards'

---

trump mentioned? LA mayor (and newsome?) to troops who booed w/o prompt? call N attn seeker

---

SEN ALEX PADILLA FLOOR HANDCUFF AT PRESS CONF NOEM

NOEM SAID PURPOSE OF NG USMC WAS LIBERATE FROM SOCIALIST GOV

TRUMP FLA SHERIFF PROTEST MET W/ VIOLENCE 6 25

---

AN 6 25

On Thursday, June 12, many Democrats — and quite a few Never Trump conservatives as well — were horrified when Sen. Alex Padilla (D-California) was physically removed from a briefing by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Although Padilla was not threatening in any way, he was thrown to the ground and handcuffed. Padilla, however, was released and is not facing any charges.

After the incident, Padilla commented that if MAGA Republicans are willing to treat a U.S. senator that way, imagine the fear that farm workers are feeling as the Trump Administration carries out aggressive deportation raids.

The incident with Padilla comes during a time of considerable tension in the United States, from the ongoing protests in Downtown Los Angeles to the military/birthday parade President Donald Trump is planning in Washington, DC on Saturday, June 14. Countless "No Kings" demonstrations in opposition to the parade and Trump's policies will be held in cities all over the United States.

READ MORE:'I have to go through hell': Trump complains about 'No Kings' protests during his parade

During a Friday, une 13 appearance on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," presidential historian Jon Meacham pointed to the treatment of Padilla as a prime example of why so many Americans are feeling a sense of "menace' during Trump's second presidency.

[VID]

IFrame Content

Meacham told MSNBC's Willie Geist, his colleague Katty Kay and Never Trump conservative David French (who was also featured as a guest), "It is a real tactile sense of menace in the country…. The last time it was this bad — not to shake everybody's Friday morning even more than it's already shaken given what's going on — was the pre-Civil War period. You had an extraordinary amount of political violence. And we know how the 1850s turned out. And so, there are signs of a deeper condition within the country — which is a fraying, I believe, of a kind of consensus not about policy, but about politics not as total war, but as a mediation of differences."

The historian addressed fears of growing political unrest in the U.S.

Meacham told the panel, "That's what a democracy, that's what a constitutional system should be. And the prevalence of violence is politically useful for, in this case, the (Trump) Administration, and very dangerous."

READ MORE:'Scams, corruption and cover-ups': Republicans just declared 'open season for wealthy tax cheats'

*Watch the full video below or at this link.

---

ANY PROTESTER DC ARMY PARADE BIRTHDAY MET WITH BIG FORCE

AN 6 25

U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday threatened to respond with force to protesters who gather this coming weekend in opposition to his costly and authoritarian military parade in Washington, D.C., remarks that came amid growing fears that the administration is planning to mobilize troops across the country.

In his comments, Trump made no effort to distinguish between peaceful demonstrators and those who commit violence or property damage, telling reporters, "For those people that want to protest, they're going to be met with very big force."

"I haven't even heard about a protest, but you know, this is people that hate our country, but they will be met with very heavy force," the president continued.

Under the banner of "No Kings," roughly 2,000 rallies have been planned across the United States on June 14 to protest Trump's birthday military parade and grave abuses of power, including his deployment of National Guard troops and U.S. Marines to crush demonstrations in Los Angeles.

Organizers opted against holding a "No Kings" rally in the U.S., saying that "real power isn't staged in Washington."

IFrame Content

"Instead of allowing this birthday parade to be the center of gravity," they said, "we will make action everywhere else the story of America that day: people coming together in communities across the country to reject strongman politics and corruption."

Leaders of the rallies have stressed their commitment to nonviolence, saying in a statement this past weekend that "organizers are trained in de-escalation and are working closely with local partners to ensure peaceful and powerful actions nationwide."

Public Citizen, a "No Kings" partner organization, was among those responding with alarm to Trump's remarks on Tuesday.

"That's a dictator," the group wrote on social media.

MSNBC host Chris Hayes wrote that it's "worth stressing that he's not threatening rioters or people who are violent or lawless but literally just 'protesters' with 'very big force.'"

"My strong instinct is that Trump's threats against Americans' First Amendment right to peaceably assemble are going to massively juice attendance at Saturday's protests," Hayes added.

A map of rallies planned across the U.S. can be found here.

---

AN 6 25

Military and political experts, veterans, and journalists are condemning President Donald Trump’s political rally at Fort Bragg on Tuesday, warning he crossed a critical line by delivering overtly political and authoritarian-themed remarks before U.S. Army troops. They also expressed alarm that uniformed soldiers appeared at ease booing his political opponents—another troubling breach of military norms. Some now say the time has come for generals to publicly speak out.}:

The commander in chief entered the event to "Hail to the Chief," and as he took to the stage, his "MAGA anthem," "Proud to Be an American," played. For nearly one hour, in about 9,000 words, Trump delivered a political stump speech. He attacked his political opposition, Democrats, including President Joe Biden and his administration, California Governor Gavin Newsom ("Newscum") and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass. He attacked transgender Americans. He attacked the Democratic U.S. Senators who opposed the nomination of Pete Hegseth for Defense Secretary, calling them "a very hostile group of people that I think really don't want to see America be great again."

He got the soldiers to boo "the fake news" media, and President Joe Biden. He told them the 2020 election was "rigged and stolen."

READ MORE: ‘Show. Us. The. Plan.’: Pentagon Chief Ripped for Dodging Budget Details in Heated Hearing

He attacked the people in Los Angeles protesting his deportation policies, describing it as "anarchy," while telling the soldiers that defending their civil rights was not the reason Americans fought overseas:

IFrame Content

"Generations of army heroes did not shed their blood on distant shores only to watch our country be destroyed by invasion and third world lawlessness here at home like is happening in California. As Commander in chief, I will not let that happen. It's never going to happen. What you're witnessing in California is a full-blown assault on peace, on public order and on national sovereignty carried out by rioters bearing foreign flags with the aim of continuing a foreign invasion of our country."

He thanked the generals, and mentioned some by name. He talked about "the real generals," as opposed to the ones Americans see on television.

Critics are warning of grave consequences.

"This is the most unacceptable and egregious politicization of our troops we’ve ever seen," wrote veterans' activist Paul Rieckhoff, an Army combat veteran, responding to video of Trump getting the soldiers to boo the press, President Joe Biden, and the mayor of Los Angeles.

Trump goaded active duty troops at his Fort Bragg speech to boo:

The Media, Gov. Gavin Newsom, Mayor Karen Bass, and Joe Biden pic.twitter.com/1v9amsi7rv

— The Bulwark (@BulwarkOnline) June 10, 2025

"And it’s not a one off. It’s a strategy," added Rieckhoff, who is also the founder of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA). "And one we’ll see in full and dangerous display this weekend at his military birthday parade for himself. Trump wants the world to think our great military is HIS military. And wants to coerce and manipulate troops into making them think it is too. And driving down their public trust and approval by the minute. Trump has created America’s greatest civil-military relations crisis since the Civil War. And it’s just getting started."

Retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel Alexander Vindman, a former Director of European Affairs for the National Security Council (NSC), warned: "America’s Generals and Admirals are terrified. They are cowed. They seem unlikely to hold the line and live up to their oaths to serve the U.S. Constitution."

Lamenting that "the Generals stay silent," he added: "Our democracy is in great danger. This morning I wonder if we crossed a line and there’s no going back."

Army combat veteran Fred Wellman, a graduate of West Point and the Harvard Kennedy School who is now the host of the podcast “On Democracy.” responded to Vindman by saying, "The silence is deafening."

READ MORE: Trump Mixes Up World Wars, Days, Civil Rights in Latest Remarks

Retired U.S Army lieutenant general Russel L. Honoré, who served as the commander of Joint Task Force Katrina, blasted Trump's speech: "Damn @POTUS Speech At #FortBraggwas inappropriate, criticizing previous administration, and Generals while speaking to troops , I never witnessed that S..t like this in 37 years in Uniform."

Author and former Under Secretary of State Richard Stengel observed, "Unlike other militaries, American soldiers do not swear an oath to the state, or a person, or a monarch, but to the Constitution. Trump calls them 'his' military—but they are ours, and they swear to 'support and defend the Constitution,' not one man."

Tom Nichols, a retired U.S. Naval War College professor and Russia expert, at The Atlantic targeted the generals for staying silent.

He wrote, "senior officers of the United States military have an obligation to speak up and be leaders. Where is the Army chief of staff, General Randy George? Will he speak truth to the commander in chief and put a stop to the assault on the integrity of his troops? Where is the commander of the airborne troops, Lieutenant General Gregory Anderson, or even Colonel Chad Mixon, the base commander?"

"Where is the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Dan Caine? He was personally selected by Trump to be America’s most senior military officer. Will he tell the man who promoted him that what he did today was obscene?"

Retired U.S. Army General Barry McCaffrey, often seen on cable news, called Trump's speech "a disgraceful politicization of the active Armed Forces. He is the Commander in Chief. The only loyalty of the Armed Forces is to the Constitution. Their focus is on protecting America from foreign enemies. Grave danger."

Watch the video above or at this link.

RELATED: ‘Doesn’t Even Know Who He’s Talking to’: Newsom Scorches Trump Over Military Deployment

:{:{---}:

---

an 6 25

Despite President Donald Trump sanctioning ongoing immigration raids nationwide and deploying U.S. troops to the second-largest city in the United States, it still might not be enough to please his base, according to a recent analysis.

In a Tuesday article for anti-Trump conservative news outlet The Bulwark, journalist Will Sommer argued that there was a "vicious MAGA feedback loop" that is dictating the administration's latest actions, and that it's showing no sign of slowing down. In fact, Sommer suggested that even Trump circumventing California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) in calling up the California National Guard (the first time a president went around a governor to call National Guardsmen since 1965) and sending roughly 700 U.S. Marines to Los Angeles may still not be enough to give his MAGA supporters what they want.

"It is a thrilling way to show the Trump faithful that the administration is really doing something," Sommer wrote. "It also underscores one of the most underappreciated elements of what is currently happening in Los Angeles and elsewhere: Much of it is being driven by a feedback loop between the Trump administration and online MAGA-world, each urging the other on to more cruelty."

READ MORE:'Watch out': Republican senator warns GOP may lose Congress over this line in Trump's bill

Sommer pointed to a recent report showing that MAGA was turning on even the most vociferously pro-Trump officials within the administration. One recent example is FBI deputy director Dan Bongino, who faced MAGA's wrath after he conceded that convicted child predator Jeffrey Epstein did indeed take his own life in prison — shooting down a conspiracy theory he himself promoted in the recent past.

IFrame Content

"In a similar vein, Trump world figures like Noem and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller have spent years telling followers that the world around them was a horrifying hellhole — with millions of illegal immigrants terrorizing the country and threatening the very fabric of our civilization," Sommer wrote.

"But while Bongino can’t really cook up a fake Jeffrey Epstein murder plot to win back his fans, Noem and Miller definitely can ramp up deportations," he added. "And they can do so while bringing the MAGA media ecosystem along for the ride."

The Bulwark writer went on to observe that many on the far right were calling for the administration to follow through on its threat to arrest Gov. Newsom after Trump floated the idea earlier this week (Newsom has also dared Trump to arrest him). While Trump administration immigration advisor Tom Homan has said that Newsom hasn't done anything to merit arrest, Sommer posited that "law and due process seem to matter little to MAGA die-hards who want the blood, detentions, and incarcerations they were promised."

READ MORE:'Heated moment': MAGA activists now using a four-letter slur they hate against each other

Click here to read Sommer's full article in the Bulwark.

---

AN 6 25

Dems 'gaining some momentum' as Trump squeezes nearly $70 billion from US business owners

Adam Lynch

---

not sure this is b3

CNN’s Bill Weir highlights GOP tension as Trump’s clean energy rollbacks threaten 75,000 red state jobs

:{:{06/05/25 mma}:

---

TROLLING?

AN 6 25

President Donald Trump is being criticized for sharing a post containing a debunked conspiracy theory that former President Joe Biden died in 2020. Trump reposted a message on his Truth Social platform claiming that Biden was "executed" in 2020 and that a clone replaced him.

"There is no #JoeBiden - executed in 2020. #Biden clones doubles & robotic engineered soulless mindless entities are what you see. >#Democrats dont know the difference," read the post Trump shared on Saturday night.

Social media users reacted to the post, saying that the president's act of sharing it was concerning

Political scientist Norman Ornstein wrote on the social platform X: “Not to worry, Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson are on the case. Oh, wait……”

READ MORE:Signs the tide is turning on Trump

IFrame Content

Researcher Alex Kaplan noted: “Claims that Biden has been replaced by a clone have been a thing over the years in the QAnon community. This post Trump amplified was quoting a post from a QAnon group on Truth Social as well.”

“Donald Trump just shared a post on Truth Social that claims Joe Biden was executed in 2020 and replaced with a clone that is “robotic engineered.” Trump is absolutely out of his mind. He’s clearly unstable and unwell. This is very concerning,” said Democratic influencer Harry Sissonin a post on X.

“If Joe Biden posted something like this Hannity would be roused from his sleep to anchor special coverage. But Trump posts apes___ conspiracy theories and the mainstream press yawns. His craziness has been completely normalized,” said progressive influencer Aaron Rupar.

“It always gets worse with this guy. Always,” wrote another user.

READ MORE:Outrage grows over a single paragraph buried deep in Republicans' 'Big Beautiful Bill'

“So there was no cognitive decline?” tweeted another.

---

AN 6 25

Wall Street investors have found a new way to mock President Donald Trump: the term TACO, which stands for "Trump always chickens out." The term was created in response to his pattern of announcing steep new tariffs on the United States' trading partners but delaying them later.

During a Saturday, May 31 appearance on MSNBC , The Contrarian's Jennifer Rubin — an outspoken Never Trumper and former Washington Post columnist — cited the TACO meme as an example of the damage that Trump is inflicting on the United States' reputation.

In terms of the economy and foreign policy, Rubin warned, many U.S. allies are seriously worried about the country's wellbeing.

READ MORE:'Made a mistake': George Conway points out 'irony' in Trump's attack on Federalist Society

The 62-year old Rubin told MSNBC's Ali Velshi and former CNN host Jim Acosta (who was also featured as a guest), "Part of the problem with TACO is that if you're an investor, if you're an entrepreneur, why would you invest in the United States? Why would you build a new plant? Why would you plan a future down the road more than a day or two? You can't plan and grow an economy with such uncertainty."

IFrame Content

Rubin continued, "One of the problems, one of the reasons why (JPMorgan Chase CEO) Jamie Dimon was so freaked out is America has always been a financial refuge, because it's been stable. People want to park their money here, and if they don't — if they want to sell out on bonds on the market — suddenly, we're going to have a real debt crisis. Debt is going to become more expensive. Growth is going to slow. There's a whole cascade of issues that happen because Trump is making us into a lesser economic power."

Longtime U.S. allies around the world, Rubin warned, are worried about "all kinds of nuttery" coming from the Trump Administration, including tariffs, erratic foreign policy, and attacks on major universities.

"So in every way," Rubin told Velshi and Acosta, "he is weakening and undercutting the United States. And we're beginning to see the ramifications. These students who are being thrown out, foreign professors — they're going to go elsewhere. Research dollars will go overseas. Investors will find other places to put their money. Investors will find other bonds, other financial ways to expand. …. We have never had a president who has so damaged the American economy, the American international status…. The rest of the world looks at us and thinks we're nuts, and to some extent, we are….. The rest of the world says: Thanks but no thanks — we're going to park our money elsewhere."

READ MORE:'Part of you dies a little': MAGA-supporting FBI official admits he hates his job

*Watch the full video below or at this link.

---

---}:

an 6 25

Conservative Peter Wehner, now 64, was a speechwriter in the administrations of three Republican presidents: Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. But Wehner's relationship with the Republican Party started to go sour when, in January 2016, he wrote a New York Times op-ed headlined, "Why I Will Never Vote for Donald Trump." And unlike all the prominent Republicans who were major Trump critics in 2016 but went on to become strong supporters — a group that includes now-Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-New York) and now-Vice President JD Vance — Wehner has remained firmly in the Never Trump camp.

In a scathing article published by The Atlantic on May 31, Wehner describes Trump's second administration as a "thugocracy" that defies "constitutional conservatism."

"Not too long ago," Wehner explains, "many Republicans proudly referred to themselves as 'constitutional conservatives.' They believed in the rule of law; in limiting the power of government, especially the federal government; in protecting individual liberty; and in checks and balances and the separation of powers…. One of the reasons Roe v. Wade was viewed as a travesty by conservatives is that they believed the 1973 Supreme Court decision twisted the Constitution to invent a 'right to privacy' in order to legalize abortion. The decision, they felt, was driven by a desired outcome rather than a rigorous analysis of legal precedent or constitutional text, which is why it’s hard to think of a more anti-conservative figure than President Donald Trump or a more anti-conservative movement than MAGA."

READ MORE: 'Made a mistake': George Conway points out 'irony' in Trump's attack on Federalist Society

Wehner adds, "Trump and his supporters evince a disdain for laws, procedures, and the Constitution. They want to empower the federal government in order to turn it into an instrument of brute force that can be used to reward allies and destroy opponents."

IFrame Content

The Never Trump conservative cites a variety of ways in which Trump is rejecting "constitutional conservatism" during his second presidency.

"Trump and his administration have abolished agencies and imposed sweeping tariffs even when they don't have the legal authority to do so," Wehner observes. "They are deporting people without due process. Top aides are floating the idea of suspending the writ of habeas corpus, one of the most important constitutional protections against unlawful detention. Judges, who are the target of threats from the president, fear for their safety. So do the very few Republicans who are willing to assert their independence from Trump."

Wehner continues, "In one of his first official acts, Trump granted clemency to more than 1500 people charged in connection with the violent attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, including those convicted of seditious conspiracy. The president and his family are engaging in a level of corruption that was previously unfathomable. And he and his administration have shown no qualms about using the federal government to target private companies, law firms, and universities; suing news organizations for baseless reasons; and ordering criminal probes into former administration officials who criticized Trump. The Trump Administration is a thugocracy, and the Republican Party he controls supports him each step of the way. Almost every principle to which Republicans once professed fealty has been jettisoned. The party is now devoted to the abuse of power and to vengeance."

READ MORE:'Part of you dies a little': MAGA-supporting FBI official admits he hates his job

*Peter Wehner's full article is available at this link (subscription required).

---

AN 6 25

President Donald Trump’s push to slash federal spending could have devastating consequences for America’s national parks, with proposed budget cuts threatening to gut the Park Service and dismantle protections for the country’s most treasured landscapes, the New York Times reported Sunday.

In 2023, the latest year with available data, an estimated 325 million people visited national parks, monuments, and historic sites, spending around $26.4 billion in nearby communities. That number grew even higher the following year, with park visits reaching an all-time record of nearly 332 million, per the article by Ted Kerasote, a nature and wildlife writer.

Theresa Pierno, president of the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), an advocacy organization, cautioned last monththat the park system "would be completely decimated" if the proposed cuts go into effect.

READ MORE:Outrage grows over a single paragraph buried deep in Republicans' 'Big Beautiful Bill'

"Even before he took office, the Park Service was running lean, on a slim operating budget of about $3 billion. But since January, an estimated 13 percent of its staff has departed through pressured buyouts, early retirements and deferred resignations," the Times piece noted.

IFrame Content

According to the NPCA, the Trump administration’s proposed $900 million cut to the Park Service’s operating budget could force the closure of more than 80 percent of the 433 parks, monuments, historic sites, and other areas under its care.

Such a drastic move would mark the unraveling of a system that for over 100 years has safeguarded the nation’s most iconic natural and cultural treasures. Long seen as a global example of public land preservation, the national parks represent a legacy of conservation and shared heritage that could be severely compromised, Kerasote argued.

"Mr. Trump has proposed hacking the Park Service’s operating budget by roughly 30 percent, which would be catastrophic, and transferring less visited national parks and other Park Service locations to states and tribal governments," he said.

READ MORE:'What could possibly go wrong?': Trump rollback of banking rules is creating shockwaves

The writer said Trump "seems bent on eroding one of the country’s greatest achievements, a national park system open to all."

He continued: "As the Western writer Wallace Stegner once put it, the national parks are 'absolutely American' and 'the best idea we ever had.'

Will the millions of Americans who cherish their parks allow Mr. Trump to destroy them?"

---

an the conv 5 25

Trump doesn't just think of himself as the president

The Conversation

May 30, 2025

IFrame Content

The American Revolution was a result of the tyranny experienced by colonists under the British monarchy. Many Americans had fled from Europe where they had been persecuted under the rule of powerful monarchs. The government produced by the revolution was designed to ensure no such tyranny could be reproduced in the newly formed United States.

The framers of the constitution created a checks-and-balances system of government to ensure that no single branch of the federal government (executive, judicial or legislative) could dominate the others. Each branch has powers to curtail or empower the others.

However, some Americans are concerned about a return of absolute rule due to the steps taken by Donald Trump’s second administration. This has sparked around 100 “no kings” protests all over the US, organised to coincide with Trump’s birthday on June 15.

Increasing presidential power

The second Trump administration has made a determined effort to strengthen presidential power and reduce oversight of the executive branch (the presidency). Achieving this could mean the president acting in an arbitrary manner similar to absolute monarchs of the past, free of congressional or judicial interference.

Trump’s “big beautiful bill”, which has been passed in the House of Representatives and now must go to the Senate, contains certain provisions that strengthen the role of the president and undermine the checks-and-balances system.

Previous presidents, such as Franklin D. Roosevelt during the New Deal era of the 1930s, had many of their executive orders cancelled by Supreme Court rulings. Over the last five months, the judiciary has ruled on the constitutionality of Trump’s executive actions, putting at least 180 on hold.

As a consequence, the president has continually questioned the validity of the courts to act. At last week’s West Point graduation ceremony, Trump claimed that last November’s election result “gives us the right to do what we wanna do to make our country great again”.

As Robert Reich, the former US secretary of labor, wrote recently, this “big beautiful bill” will remove the courts’ ability to hold executive officials in contempt and undermine any efforts to stop the administration. Supreme Court rulings could be ignored by the executive branch, and Congress would be unable to enforce its subpoenas and laws. “Trump will have crowned himself king,” Reich concluded.

Just like the judicial branch, the legislative branch (Congress) also has the ability to check the executive branch. Congress can override the presidential veto if both the House and Senate pass legislation with a two-thirds majority. And the executive branch (the president) cannot fund any initiatives without the budget being approved by Congress first.

But Trump and his supporters have minimised the impact that Congress can have on this particular bill by including all of the provisions within a budget reconciliation bill. This is a special legislative procedure that is designed to pass bills through Congress quickly.

Bills usually require 60 votes to bypass a filibuster – a tactic used by senators to delay voting on the bill by refusing to end the debate and speaking for exceptionally long times without a break.

But because this is a budget reconciliation, it only requires a majority – 51 votes – to pass the Senate. And because the Republicans have 53 seats in the Senate, Trump is confident the bill will pass without any Democratic interference.

The House narrowly passed the bill, despite some opposition from Republicans. And some Republican senators have also expressed concerns. But this is the latest move to centralise greater power within the presidency.Trump makes the commencement speech at the West Point military academy.

Trump v the courts

Trump’s apparent belief that he is above the law has, in part, been supported by last year’s Supreme Court ruling which stated that former presidents had immunity from prosecution for official presidential acts. The Trump v United States decision decided such acts included command of the military, control of the executive branch, and execution of laws.

However, this week’s federal court ruling on the legality of Trump’s economic tariffs represents a setback to the administration’s efforts to strengthen presidential power. The Court of International Trade ruled that the White House’s use of emergency powers did not grant it the authority to impose tariffs on every country, and that the constitution states such power resides within Congress.

The Trump administration immediately said it would be appealing the decision. “It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency,” Kush Desai, the White House deputy press secretary, said on the ruling, and that Trump would use “every lever of executive power” to “restore American greatness”.

All of which has led Trump to quote another authoritarian leader, Napoleon, on social media. His post – “He who saves his Country does not violate any Law” – was a clear rebuke to those who have tried to limit executive authority while he has been in office, and echoes that of former president Richard Nixon who, in an interview with David Frost about the Watergate scandal, argued that the constitution allowed the president to break the law.

This is an extension of the notion that Article II of the constitution has granted the president the authority to act without checks and balances when dealing with the executive branch. It is a theory much touted within Project 2025, believed to be the blueprint for the Trump presidency.

There are other historical comparisons that could be made of Trump’s authoritarian actions, such as the rule of Charles I of England (1625-49), who believed he could govern without consulting parliament except when he needed to raise taxes to conduct overseas campaigns. Ultimately, this led to a period of civil wars and the execution of the king for treason.

While none of these consequences are likely to be replicated, it is clear the US is currently in a constitutional crisis. The Supreme Court has a number of rulings to make on the judicial challenges to Trump’s executive authority. These will have generational consequences – but it is unclear in which way the court, where conservative judges have a 6-3 majority, will lean.

While Trump may not be seeking a crown for his head, he is certainly arguing that he has the right to control the executive branch in the way he sees fit, without any interference from Congress or the judiciary. This is not the separation of powers as prescribed by the framers of the US constitution, but more like the absolutism of medieval monarchs.

Dafydd Townley, Teaching Fellow in US politics and international security, *University of Portsmouth

:{:{This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.}:

---

an 5 25

IFrame Content

Politico Magazine reporter Michael Kruse says President Donald Trump has always “seen himself as special, and he has always, of course, been notably self-aggrandizing,” but the president is now moving into a new phase.

“His rhetoric has gone from borderline nihilistic to messianic,” writes Kruse.

Many of Trump’s followers have described him as “chosen,” or “anointed,” or a “savior,” or “the second coming” or “the Christ for this age.” Only now Kruse says Trump is in on it and his “narcissism and grandiosity has metastasized into notions of omnipotence, invincibility and infallibility.”

READ MORE:No administration has ever been this corrupt – and you just can't look away anymore

And that matters, says Kruse, “because it offers a window into how he is approaching his second term — even more emboldened, even more unilaterally oriented, even more apparently uncheckable and untouchable than the first.”

IFrame Content

“I run the country and the world,” Trump last month.

“I have no reason to doubt that he would … prefer to believe he was saved [from assassination] by a supreme being because he himself is special rather than the would-be assassin was a lousy shot or he got lucky,” said former Trump consultant and publicist Alan Marcus to Kruse in an interview. “… His world is fantasy, scripted like a movie — not biblical unless, of course, that helps bring a particular scene or chapter to life.”

Marie Griffith, the director of the John C. Danforth Center on Religion and Politics tells Kruse it is likely a combination of “opportunism and genuine belief” driving the president’s evolving self-view, while author Stephen Mansfield (‘Choosing Donald Trump: God, Anger, Hope, and Why Christian Conservatives Supported Him’, 2018, by Baker Publishing) said Trump probably believes “he is a tool of God.”

READ MORE:Today marks the beginning of the end of Donald Trump's bonkers 2nd regime

And now, four months into his term, Kruse says “Trump is on a spree of a show of supremacy.”

“He’s pledged a ‘Golden Age.’ He’s punished Trump and MAGA unbelievers. He’s exacted or attempted to exact subservience and acquiescence from media execs and tech titans and major law firms and top universities and both chambers of Congress that he and his party control,” Kruse writes. “He’s tried to command the global economy and crack intractable issues of war and peace as if he were wielding a scepter over subjects far and wide.”

Kruse notes a point from journalist Ezra Klein that a big difference between Trump’s first and second terms is the willingness of his staff to buy into the belief, too. The first group was “perfectly comfortable thinking: President Donald Trump is very wrong about this. His judgment is bad. His impulses need to be foiled. We are the resistance inside the Trump administration,” said Klein. “In Trump 2.0 … there is both a sense that they’re there to serve him but also a sense there is something in Trump … that exists beyond argumentation,” Klein said.

READ MORE:'How long have you been in Congress?' Fox host puzzled by Republican's evasive comments

One late Wednesday post from Trump on Truth Social features a meme of the president walking confidently down a dark city street.

“HE’S ON A MISSION FROM GOD,” read the words. “NOTHING CAN STOP WHAT IS COMING.”

“Does the president mean with the post of this meme,” Kruse says he asked White House communications director Steven Cheung, “that he’s literally on a mission from God?”

“As people of faith, we are all on missions from God,” Cheung responded. “The President has the biggest mission — to Make America Great Again and to help bring peace across the world. And he’s doing just that.”

Read the full Politico Magazine report here.

---}:

an 5 25

During President Donald Trump's four months back in the White House, tech CEOs who were critical of him in the past — including Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg and Amazon's Jeff Bezos — have been trying to make peace with him. And Tesla/SpaceX/X.com CEO Elon Musk is among Trump's close allies.

Trump clearly views the tech world as an opportunity to make money. And in an article published by The Guardian on May 30, Brisbane, Australia-based journalist Matt Shea describes one of Trump's ways to fleece "gullible young men" via "fake money."

Trump, according to the article, is pushing a "get-rich-quick scheme."

READ MORE:QAnon follower gets 3 years for threatening to ‘execute’ AZ governor Katie Hobbs

Trump, in 2025, is much more bullish on cryptocurrencies, include memecoins, than he was in the past. Shea, in his article, makes it clear that he has a low opinion of the technology — and argues that Trump-related memecoins will be profitable for Trump himself more than those who buy them.

IFrame Content

Describing cryptocurrencies as nonsense and memecoins as "consciously" nonsense, Shea writes, "In their essence, memecoins distill the attention economy into a tradable asset, monetizing the ebb and flow of viral internet hype. This has created a system in which the biggest attention-seekers on the planet — Logan Paul, Andrew Tate, Elon Musk, Donald Trump — can bleed their followers for profit. The more controversial they are, the more viral they are; and the more viral they are, the more their memecoins increase in value."

"Most memecoins," according to Shea, "end up making money for the person who makes them as a 'rug pull' or a 'pump and dump'" — although in the long run, they aren't a good investment for those who buy them.

David Gerard, author of the book "Attack of the 50 Foot Blockchain," described memecoins as "fake money," telling The Guardian, "They own the fake money, but they can't sell it until it's unlocked in tranches. Note that the limits are artificial. I mean, they could just 'print' more."

READ MORE:Inside Ron Johnson's barrage of baffling lies

Journalist Sander Lutz describes memecoins as a "scam," arguing that some people are willing be scammed.

Lutz told The Guardian, "Another way of defining a memecoin is a cryptocurrency token that has an acknowledged inherent lack of value. The crypto world, outside of memecoins, is full of so many people who are trying to pitch you on tokens that are 'actually really profound' or 'represent a stake' in some kind of 'useful network,' but are equally worthless. What makes memecoins different is that there's none of that noise…. Crypto has been an ever-escalating series of get-rich-quick schemes, where a whole bunch of people think that they're smarter operators than the previous operator — and generally, they're not….. They think they'll hear about these scams before the rug is pulled — but actually, they're the suckers."

Lutz added, "Crypto is full of people who think they're the scammer, not the sucker."

READ MORE:Behind the half-baked arguments flailing bully Trump uses to attack public media

*Read Matt Shea's full article for The Guardian at this link.

---

AN 5 25

'Threat to glory of the dictator': Fascism expert explains why Trump wants to 'smash' US 'crown jewel' HARVARD?

---

an 5 25

People in the tornadoes' path wonder if Trump cuts contributed to death and destruction in KY

---

an 5 25

told off by vet,

Fed chair calls out Trump’s Harvard attacks during bombshell Princeton speech

---

no lnx

Republicans and the biggest political con of the last century

Thom Hartmann May 24, 2025

Neal deGrasse Tyson makes a very relevant point this week:

“If a foreign adversary snuck into our Federal budget and cut science research and education the way we’re cutting it ourselves — strategically undermining America’s long-term health, wealth, and security — we would likely consider it an act of war.”

Donald Trump’s administration just said you can’t get the Covid vaccine unless you’re over 65 or sick, setting up America for more death and disease. As Noah Berlatsky notes in his great Substack newsletter:

“This is the latest effort by Trump to try to kick start a major US pandemic and degrade the health and welfare of the country. Trump as also rolled back food testing, including testing for bacteria in infant formula. He’s made major cuts at the FAA, leading to fears for airline safety—and a number of dramatic airline safety failures already may be related to the destruction of capacity. Cuts at the NOAA may diminish the ability to warn about dangerous weather events. The Republican proposals for Medicaid cuts are likely to lead to tens of thousands of deaths. And of course Trump’s senseless tariffs are increasing inflation, destroying jobs, and could still easily end us in a recession.“

But why? What the hell is going on here?

Almost two-thirds of us Americans can’t afford the basic necessities of life, according to a new report from the Ludwig Institute for Shared Economic Prosperity (LISEP) reported by CBS News. They point out that if unemployment numbers included the underemployed and those stuck in “poverty-wage jobs,” it would be around 24%, not the 4.2% recently reported, leading to an acknowledgement of a widespread misery that’s largely hidden by the way we currently calculate unemployment.

Income for the bottom 60% of Americans, for example, actually declined by 4% in the years 2001 to 2023 while costs — particularly for healthcare, housing, food, and education (college tuition, for example, is up 122% since 2001) — have exploded.

Before the pandemic, half of all homes on the market were affordable to a family earning $75,000 a year; today it’s only one out of five houses that such a family could afford to purchase.

The initial result of this post-Reagan Revolution economy was to kneecap the middle class and working class; now Republicans are using the same strategy they employed to destroy our middle class to dismantle our nation’s government and its core functions to leave us vulnerable to the predation of foreign nations, vulture capitalists, and the morbidly rich.

And nobody’s sure why.

The history of how we got here is shocking. And the place it’s taking us — gutting government functions while handing our role in the world over to China and Russia — is downright scandalous.

At first, it was simply a political strategy to claim the mantle of Santa Claus from the Democrats by “gifting” America with tax breaks. Then it became a program to force Dems to kill off their own social programs by driving up the national debt. And now it’s being used to disassemble the American government itself, abandoning what’s left of the middle class while handing America’s dominant role in the world to China and Russia.

You could call it treason, except that it’s become so normalized and institutionalized that most Americans wouldn’t even understand the reason for the label.

Republican policy weirdness that brought us to this moment began around the national debt in 1981.

The U.S. was significantly in debt following our Revolutionary War, the Civil War, World War I, and World War II. Following the philosophy that a large national debt should only exist during a time of national emergency, in each case, after the end of each war, we began a serious effort to pay down that debt.

Andrew Jackson finished paying off the entire debt from the Revolutionary War in the 1830s. We’d largely paid off the debt from the Civil War by the end of the 19th century, and, as the Treasury Department notes on its debt history site, our “government ended the century with its finances in very good order.”

We paid the national debt for WWI down to a mere $17 billion by the time the Republican Great Depression hit, but between the cost of the New Deal and World War II, we entered the post-WWII era in 1946 with a debt equal to 106% of GDP, a ratio we hit again in 2015.

Republicans and Democrats quickly united around the idea of paying off our national debt in the post-war years, driving it down to a mere $800 billion ($0.8 trillion) between 1945 and 1981 when Reagan came into office.

And then, following Jude Wanniski’s “Two Santas” plan, the GOP embarked on an experiment that had never been intentionally tried in the U.S. or any other developed country in world history: drive up the national debt as high as possible with massive tax breaks for the very richest among us.

Reagan did this for two reasons:

— First, deficit spending with trillions in borrowed money (he ran the debt up to $2.4 trillion in a mere 8 years) stimulates the economy, so people thought Reagan had produced good times. (Give me a $2 trillion credit card, and I’ll show you what it looks like to live large, too!)

— Second, the rising debt gave Republicans the perfect excuse to follow Wanniski’s advice to force the Democrats to “shoot their Santa [of programs like Social Security and Medicaid] in the face.” Whenever a Republican is in the White House, Wanniski argued, Republicans should run up the debt as hard and fast as possible, so when a Democrat is in the White House they can squeal about “the debt our children will inherit! Oh, the humanity!”

The GOP has stuck to this strategy for 44 years now, running up $36 trillion in debt (and our entire Gross Domestic Product was a mere $27.7 trillion last year) and now, finally, we’ve reached the point where this unsustainable debt is not only costing us a trillion dollars a year in debt service (interest payments) but has led to a downgrade of our nation’s credit score.

At first, the main effect of the Two Santas strategy was merely to make the morbidly rich among us fabulously richer, while extracting much of that wealth from the homes, retirement plans, and savings of the middle class. It was, quite simply, a planned and successful transfer of roughly $50 trillion into the money bins of the rich, almost all of it coming out of the hides and lives of the rest of us.

When Reagan came into office in 1981, about two-thirds of Americans were solidly middle class with a single paycheck being able to buy a home, a car, raise a family, put the kids through school, and provide for a decent retirement.

Today, that same standard of living requires a bit more than two full-time jobs, and only about 47% of us are in the middle class (with two wage earners instead of just one in 1981).

“‘The middle class has been declining — we just haven't recognized it fully,’ LISEP Chairman Gene Ludwig told CBS MoneyWatch. ‘It’s really dangerous because it’s the kind of thing that leads to social unrest, and it’s not fair. The American dream is not that it’s given to you — it’s that if you work hard, you have a chance to get ahead and achieve the things in life that you want to achieve. It’s not living in a tent, not having to steal.”

But now Trump, Musk, Vance, and congressional Republicans — having first crushed the American middle class — are doing everything they can to destroy America’s preeminent position in the world along with our social safety net.

— Instead of investing in education and science, they’re making it harder for students to get an education.

— Instead of promoting democracy around the world, they’re embracing murderous dictators while broadcasting rightwing neofascist propaganda on Voice of America.

— Instead of lifting up Americans by helping our veterans and providing food, healthcare, and shelter to the poor and disabled, they’re gutting the VA and the social safety net.

As a result, today nearly half of American children (45% or 34 million kids) rely on food and medical programs that are now targeted by “Christian” Mike Johnson’s House Republicans in their Big Brutal Bill providing trillions in tax breaks to billionaires. The proposed cuts to SNAP (food stamps) and Medicaid, for example, would be the largest in the history of the U.S.

Reagan’s Two Santas strategy has done serious harm to America, collapsing the economic futures of two entire generations.

And now they’re going after our government itself.

But, why? Nobody’s sure.

— Did Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, or both tell Trump and/or Elon Musk to destroy America?

— Are our country’s billionaires so psychopathically greedy that they’re willing to sell us all out for another few billion dollars in tax breaks?

— Do Trump’s allies believe that if they can impoverish Americans we’ll be more willing to go along with their authoritarian agenda the way Germans did after being immiserated by the Republican Great Depression of the 1930s?

— Are they following the “Dark Enlightenment” philosophers of Silicon Valley who argue that democracy is outdated and “we need to get over our dictator phobia” and let the tech giants run the country?

Nobody knows for sure. Nobody can really explain it.

Republicans are aren’t even pretending anymore; they’re not even bothering to proclaim BS like “trickle down” or the “need to support the job creators.“

Most distressing, there’s virtually no discussion of any of this in the mainstream press.

— The Two Santas strategy is easily documented, but never mentioned.

— The explosion of our national debt is all over economists’ websites, but when the American media mentions it, it’s always in the context of Democrats needing to “reduce spending” rather than the fact that virtually 100% of our debt today was put there exclusively by Reagan, Bush, and Trump tax cuts and Bush’s two illegal wars.

— Nobody, it seems, is speculating about why Trump and Musk would want to kill off USAID or kneecap the FAA and the National Weather Service. Qui bono (who benefits?) other than Putin and Xi? The savings are a drop in the billionaire’s bucket; there must be a larger agenda than just funding tax cuts for billionaires.

— And, they’re now holding their votes in the middle of the night; I think we all know what they are hiding and the credulous press is letting pass.

I don’t know why Republicans have been so enthusiastic about first destroying the American middle class and now our government itself, but the consequences have driven the explosion of rightwing anger, racism, and misogyny that’s been sweeping the nation since Trump’s appearance on the scene in 2015.

And now they’re threatening our position in the world, as well as possibly leading us all into a third world war.

Why do you think this is happening?

NOW READ: 'Trump's tactics are in fact communist': Former Tea Party congressman busts MAGA for what it is

---

RAMBLE WEST PT SP? AN 5 25

Trump says 'there is no tariff' after announcing new 50% tariff on major trade partner

David Badash

---

AN 5 25

Trump’s ratings continue to slide on most issues. Recent Economist/YouGov polling across the US, completed on May 9-12, shows 51% think the country is on the wrong track, while only 45% have a favourable impression of his job as president. On inflation and prices in the shops, only 35% approve of his handling of this policy.

Trump seems to be scoring particularly badly with young voters. Around 62% of young people (18 to 29s) have an unfavourable opinion of the president, compared with 53% of the over-65s.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration continues to pursue an agenda to close down, or shackle, much of the media it considers not on his side.

Funding for national public service radio NPR and television PBS, as well as the global news service Voice of America, is under threat. Some national news outlets are under investigation by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for their coverage.

In a speech in March, Trump said broadcasters CNN and MSNBC, and some newspapers he didn’t name “literally write 97.6% bad about me”. He added: “It has to stop. It has to be illegal.”

The Trump team clearly see the role of the media as important to establishing and retaining support, and have taken steps to shake up White House coverage – including by changing who can attend the White House press pool.

About seven in ten members of the American public say they are following the news for updates on the Trump administration. It is interesting, therefore, to consider the role of the media in influencing Trump’s popularity, and insights can be found in the massive US Cooperative Election Study, conducted during the presidential contest last year.

That survey showed 57% of Americans had watched TV news in the previous 24 hours. Around 81% had used social media during the same period, but only 20% had used it to comment on politics.

There is a lot of attention being paid to fake news on the internet, which is helping to cause polarisation in the US. But when it comes to news about politics, TV coverage is still very important for most Americans.

The survey asked respondents about the TV news channels they watched, and Fox News came out on top with 47% of the viewers. ABC came second with 37%, and CBS and CNN tied on 35%. Fox News is Trump’s favorite TV station, with its rightwing populist agenda and regular output of Trump-friendly news.

Relationship between Trump voters and Fox News’s audience in 2024 US presidential election:

Source: Author graph based on Cooperative Election Study 2024, CC BY

The Cooperative Election Study had 60,000 respondents, which provides reasonably sized samples in each of the 50 states. The Trump vote varied quite a lot across states, with only 34% of voters in Maryland supporting him, compared with 72% in Wyoming. The electoral college formally decides the results of presidential elections, and this is based on states – so, looking at voting in this way can be quite revealing.

The connection between watching Fox News and Trump’s vote share can be seen in the chart above. It varies from 21% who watched the channel in Vermont to 60% in West Virginia.

Vermont is represented in Congress by Senator Bernie Sanders, a self-described socialist from a radical political tradition, and only 32% voted for Trump there. In contrast, West Virginia is part of the rust belt of impoverished states hit by deindustrialisation and the decline of the coal mining industry, and 71% voted for Trump there.

We can use a regression model (which looks at the relationship between variables) to predict support for Trump using key measures that drive the vote share for Trump in each state. The model uses three variables to predict the results with 95% accuracy, which means while not perfect, it gives a very accurate prediction of Trump’s vote.

Not surprisingly, partisanship – that is, the percentage of registered Republicans in each state – is one of the key metrics. In addition, ideology – the percentage of respondents who say they are conservatives – is another.

Perhaps more surprisingly, the third important predictor is viewership of Fox News. The relationship between watching the channel and voting for Trump is very strong at the state level. Also, the more time people spend watching the channel, the more likely they are to have voted for Trump.

Impact of key factors on Trump voting in 2024 US election:

Source: Author based on Cooperative Election Study , CC BY

This chart calculates the relationship between watching Fox News and other factors and the strength of a state’s support for Trump in 2024. If a variable is a perfect predictor of Trump voting, it would score 1.0 on the scale. If it is a perfect non-predictor, it would score 0.

So, the most important predictor of being a Trump voter was the presence of conservatives in a state, followed by the percentage of registered Republicans, and the third was watching Fox News. A high score on all three meant greater support for Trump.

To illustrate this, 45% of Texans considered themselves conservatives, 33% were registered Republicans, and 51% watched Fox News. Using these measures, the model predicts that 57% would vote for Trump. In fact, 56% voted for him in that state in 2024. So, while the prediction was not perfect, it was very close.

A similar predictive model can be used to forecast former Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris’s vote shares by state. In her case, we need four variables to predict the results with 95% accuracy – the percentage of registered Democrats, liberals and moderates in a state, and also Fox News viewership.

Not surprisingly in Harris’s case, the relationship between Fox News viewing and voting is strongly negative (correlation = -0.64). When viewership was high, the Harris vote was low.

Years ago, the “fairness doctrine” used to mandate US broadcasters to fairly reflect different viewpoints on controversial issues in their coverage. Candidates for public office were entitled to equal air time.

But this rule was removed by the FCC in 1987, and has led to an era of some broadcasters becoming far more partisan. The FCC decision followed a period of debate and challenges to the fairness doctrine. This led to its abolition under Ronald Reagan, the Republican president who inspired Project 2025 – the document that in turn appears to be inspiring the Trump government’s policy agenda.

When the Trump era is over, incumbent Democrats are going to have to repair US institutions that this administration has damaged. If they want to do something about the polarisation of US politics, they may also need to restore the fairness doctrine.

Had it not been removed in the first place, it is possible that Harris would have won the 2024 presidential election, since Fox News would not exist in its present form. Whatever happens next, the US media is likely to play an important role.

Paul Whiteley, Professor, Department of Government, *University of Essex

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

---

an 5 25

President Donald Trump called for an investigation into NBC News and the CEO of its parent company after one of the network’s top reporters pressed him on the Pentagon’s Wednesday afternoon acceptance of a $400 million luxury airliner from Qatar—a gift some legal scholars warn may violate the Constitution without congressional approval.

“The secretary of defense has accepted a Boeing 747 from Qatar in accordance with all federal rules and regulations,” Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement on Wednesday, as The New York Times reported. “The Department of Defense will work to ensure proper security measures and functional-mission requirements are considered for an aircraft used to transport the president of the United States.”

Estimates range as high as one billion dollars for work that would be required to make the luxury jetliner capable of acting as a mission center to not only transport the President but protect them and other top officials in the event of crisis or war.

Experts “said that accepting the 13-year-old jet would likely cost U.S. taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars over time, noting that refurbishing the commercial plane would exceed its current value of $400 million,” NBC News reported last week. “The project might also not be completed by the end of Trump’s term in 2029, at which time the plane is expected to be handed over to Trump’s presidential library foundation.”

READ MORE: ‘It’s a Nightmare’: Trump’s ‘Beautiful’ Bill Slashes $500B From Medicare, Dems Say

IFrame Content

But when confronted with a question about the jet, President Trump appeared combative and visibly angered.

“What are you talking about?” Trump asked NBC News Chief White House Correspondent Peter Alexander during an Oval Office meeting with the President of South Africa. “You know, you ought to get out of here.”

“What does this have to do with the Qatar jet? They’re giving the United States Air Force a jet, okay? And it’s a great thing. We’re talking about a lot of other things. It’s NBC trying to get off the subject of what you just saw. You are a real — You know, you’re a terrible reporter,” Trump charged.

“Number one, you don’t have what it takes to be a reporter. You’re not smart enough, but for you to go into a subject about a jet that was given to the United States Air Force, which is a very nice thing, they also gave $5.1 trillion worth of investment in addition to the jet. Go back, you ought to go back to your studio at NBC because [Comcast CEO] Brian Roberts and the people that run that place, they ought to be investigated.”

“They are so terrible, the way you run that that. And you’re a disgrace. No more questions from you.”

Moments later, the President of South Africa, Cyril Ramaphosa, jokingly remarked, “I’m sorry I don’t have a plane to give you.”

READ MORE: ‘Shameless Liar and Insane Conspiracy Theorist’: RFK Jr. Slammed by Democratic Senator

“I wish you did,” Trump replied, also saying he would accept it.

HuffPost White House correspondent S.V. Dáte remarked: “And there you have it. If Palestinians want their own state, they need to come up with a half billion dollar luxury jet to give Trump. Same with Zelenskyy, if he wants US help.”

Before the announcement that the U.S. has formally accepted the jet, U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), a former constitutional law professor, wrote: “I’ve introduced an amendment to block Trump from accepting his $400 million Bribe Force One from Qatar, a jumbo global scandal. It’s unconstitutional to take a foreign present ‘of any kind whatever’ from a foreign state, but House Republicans won’t even give me a vote. They don’t give a flying Emolument.”

Critics blasted and mocked the President.

“Someone’s getting testy about his Flying Bribery Palace,” wrote civil liberties and national security journalist Marcy Wheeler.

“Donald Trump has put a ‘for sale’ sign on the White House,” charged U.S. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA). “He’s accepting a $400 million jet from Qatar – rubber stamped by AG Pam Bondi, a registered foreign agent for Qatar. He’s accepting $300 million from a company tied to the PRC and TikTok. This is corruption, plain and simple.”

[Bondi is a former registered foreign agent for Qatar.]

Watch the video below or at this link.

---

an 5 25

When President Donald Trump visited Capitol Hill on Tuesday, May 20, he pressured GOP lawmakers to go ahead and pass a "big, beautiful bill" that will combine his legislative priorities. And one of the Republicans he singled out for attack was Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky), a hardcore budget hawk who opposes the current U.S. House version of the bill.

Attacking Massie as a "grandstander," Trump told reporters the Kentucky congressman "should be voted out of office."

Trump said of Massie, "If you ask him a couple of questions, he never gives you an answer. He just says 'I'm a no.' He thinks he's going to get publicity, and you have that. You have that."

But Massie is using the attack as a fundraising opportunity.

In a May 20 post on X, formerly Twitter, Massie posted, "I need your help. For having the audacity to say this bill does NOT repeal the green new deal, but DOES increase the deficit and debt substantially, I was threatened by Trump today. Can you contribute to my reelection at this link?"

IFrame Content

Although Massie isn't a Never Trumper, he has, at times, criticized Trump for not being fiscally conservative enough. And he doubled down on his messaging during a May 20 appearance on CNN.

Massie pushed back against Trump's claim that his "big, beautiful bill" will not add to the federal deficit, telling CNN's Manu Raju, "Now, that's a joke. We're going to add $20 trillion to the debt over the next 10 years, which is three and a half to $5 trillion more than would have been added otherwise."

READ MORE: 'Cruelty is the point': Trump’s Capitol Hill rant panned as MAGA warns 'Johnson hasn’t done his job'

---

an 5 25

Like Taylor Swift, Oprah Winfrey, Robert De Niro and Beyoncé, Bruce Springsteen was among the celebrities who endorsed Democrat Kamala Harris' 2024 presidential campaign and was disappointed when she narrowly lost to now-President Donald Trump.

The Boss isn't shy about attacking Trump during his concerts, and Trump is angrily railing against him.

Trump insulting celebrities is nothing new. But Rolling Stone's Asawin Suebsaeng, during an appearance on The New Republic's podcast posted on May 21, laid out some reasons why Trump's recent attacks on Springsteen and other celebrities are taking an increasingly dangerously "authoritarian" turn.

READ MORE:'Slink away like a coward': Academics slammed for abandoning Trump's America

Trump, Suebsaeng emphasized during the interview, is going way beyond disagreeing with Springsteen politically — he is calling for a criminal investigation of him.

IFrame Content

Suebsaeng told New Republic podcast host Greg Sargent, "All Bruce Springsteen did was exercise his American constitutional right to free speech. He was doing it abroad while on tour — but all Donald Trump was reacting to there was Bruce Springsteen using constitutionally protected free speech to say: I don't like Donald Trump or what he is currently doing to the country…. And Donald Trump's reaction to that was to essentially issue a fatwa against Bruce Springsteen, Oprah Winfrey, and Beyoncé Knowles."

Sargent noted Suebsaeng's use the word "fatwa," pointing out that "it’s almost as if he's a radical cleric or something issuing a command to a whole army of followers out there." And Suebsaeng responded that Trump is leading an "authoritarian movement" that has a lot of supporters in the U.S.

Suebsaeng told Sargent, "Bruce Springsteen said something that pissed him off just a little bit. So he is someone who (Trump) has to threaten with a major federal investigation — a criminal investigation — and he is a head on which Donald Trump needs to bring the massive weight of the entire federal apparatus to crack down. It is a crusade that Donald Trump has been launching against the First Amendment and free expression in this country since at least his 2016 campaign. And it has only gotten worse since he became president the first time — and much, much, much worse and more bloodthirsty and more authoritarian since he’s become president the second time."

READ MORE:Inside MAGA's real motive for trying to destroy America

Listen to the full New Republic podcast at this link and read the transcript here.}:

---

~ DEI

AN 5 25

South Africans are wearily attuned to governments’ Orwellian misuse of language. After all, South Africa is a country where a one-time government passed a law (the Natives Abolition of Passes and Coordination of Documents Act of 1952) which extended rather than abolishing the notorious pass system. This made it compulsory for black South Africans over the age of 16 to carry a passbook. And the same government passed the Extension of University Education Act of 1959 which made it more, not less, difficult for black students to register at “open” (or white) universities.

So perhaps they should not be unduly surprised that the government of the US has imported 49 Afrikaners and labelled them as “refugees”. The claim is that they are escaping from the persecution of Afrikaners – and white people more broadly – in South Africa today.

The Trump administration knows perfectly well this claim is a complete fabrication. As President Cyril Ramaphosa and his government have pointed out, there is no evidence whatsoever that Afrikaners or white people more generally are subject to genocide.

True, South Africa has one of the highest murder rates in the world. But it is poor black South Africans – not whites – who are principal victims of such deadly violence. Nor are Afrikaners/whites subject to persecution. Along with all other South Africans, their human rights are protected by a constitution. This is no mere piece of paper. Its provisions are (albeit imperfectly, and unlike in the US these days) largely enforced by the courts.

Furthermore, genocide implies the deliberate elimination of a people on racial, ethnic, or religious grounds. Therefore, if a genocide of whites and Afrikaners was taking place, we might assume that their numbers would be falling. In fact the reverse is true. The white population has continued to grow (albeit slowly) in absolute numbers since 1994.

Worse, the characterisation of Afrikaners as refugees at a moment in time when the people of Gaza are daily subject to a regime of death, terror, and murder inflicted on them by the Israeli government is not merely an absurdity but a downright insult to those genuinely subject to genocide.

So, what is really going on?

The drivers

Extensive commentary has correctly highlighted the motivations of the Trump administration.

First, the administration has launched an attack on what it terms the “tyranny” of “diversity, equity and inclusion” policies across the entire spectrum of public and private institutions in America. Critics argue this is driven by an appeal to Trump’s white Christian nationalist political base. Because post-apartheid South Africa, rightly or wrongly, has become the poster-country of diversity, equity and inclusion policies internationally, because of its constitutional commitment to non-racialism and diversity, it has been singled out for attack.

Secondly, labelling Afrikaners as refugees plays to the insecurities of Trump’s political base. This finds the idea of a white minority being ruled by a black majority government difficult to swallow.

Third, characterising Afrikaners as subject to genocide is a very deliberate response to South Africa’s charging of Israel as guilty of genocide against the Palestinian people before the International Court of Justice. But this is unacceptable to the US Christian nationalist right. For them the existence of Israel represents the realisation of Biblical truth – the return of Jews to the Holy Land.

Trump is saying that the US can and will play the same game, using it to clobber South Africa regardless of the groundlessness of the charge. But, being Trump, he will balance pandering to his support base against what economic benefits he can extract from South Africa.

The landscape

But what of the 49 Afrikaners themselves? Why have they chosen to accept the opportunity offered to them by the US government? After all, extensive attention in the South African media has been given to Afrikaners who have defiantly stated that they are committed to staying in South Africa . VID]

The reasons they give are that it’s their home. And they fully accept that, at least formally, South Africa has become a non-racial democracy.

Likewise, as I have detailed in my book on Whites and Democracy in South Africa, Afrikaners and whites have not only survived in democratic South Africa but, generally, have prospered economically. Furthermore, whites as a “population group” (to use outdated apartheid-era terminology) have participated fully in South African democracy. They are more highly disposed to voting in elections than other racial groupings, and de facto, they are well represented in parliament and local government by the Democratic Alliance, which is a vigorous defender of their interests.

But (there is always a but), if we want to guess the motivations of Trump’s 49 “refugees”, we need to bear in mind the following.

First, until we know more about the personal circumstances of the individuals involved, we cannot really know what has driven them to take the drastic step of leaving families and their personal history behind by moving to America.

Second, most whites have responded to the arrival of democracy pragmatically. They have their numerous complaints, notably about equity employment (affirmative action policies in favour of blacks) which they view as discriminatory against whites. But they have continued to enjoy high rates of employment. Indeed they continue to occupy the higher ranks of employment in the private sector in disproportionate numbers.

However, although many whites continue to live in a de facto overwhelmingly white world, both at work and at their homes in suburbia, there remains a minority which has remained wholly unreconciled to the changes which have taken place politically and economically since 1994. The armed opposers linked to the far-right have long been defeated. But we may presume the 49 belong to a broader category of passive resisters who have withdrawn into a white world as much as possible.

Third, although most whites continue to do well economically, the changes which have taken place since 1994 have led to the re-appearance of a small class of largely uneducated poor whites who feel excluded from employment by equity employment legislation. And who generally feel the loss of their racial status under democracy.

Opportunists, not refugees

Having said all that, some interesting questions remain.

Presumably the Afrikaner 49 belonged to that category of whites which, for one reason or another, is disposed to leave South Africa. However, emigrating requires jumping through numerous hoops; meeting educational and professional qualifications, getting a job offer, having sufficient financial resources to take with them to support themselves and their families before they can qualify for recipient countries’ social security systems, and so on. Apart from the emotional costs involved, emigration is not always the easiest of options, even for those who wish to “escape”.

The evidence suggests that the heads of household among the Afrikaner 49 are drawn not only from that minority of Afrikaners who are totally unreconciled to democracy, but who – quite simply – are opportunists who have availed themselves of a short cut to emigrate.

Roger Southall, Professor of Sociology, *University of the Witwatersrand

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

---

raw story

Criminal corporations are not people — but Trump just pardoned one anyway - Raw Story

In what could be a U.S. first, President Donald Trump last week pardoned a criminal corporation, a move that largely flew under the proverbial radar amid his pardon spree for white-collar criminals including at least one of his supporters.

On March 28, Trump pardoned HDR Global Trading, the owner and operator of the cryptocurrency exchange BitMEX; company co-founders Arthur Hayes, Benjamin Delo, and Samuel Reed; and former business development chief Gregory Dwyer.

The company and the four men hads each pleaded guilty to one count of violating the Bank Secrecy Act "by willfully failing to establish, implement, and maintain an adequate" anti-money laundering program, as required by law. In January, the U.S. Department of Justice sentenced BitMEX to a fine of $100 million, while the executives were sentenced to criminal probation and ordered to pay civil fines.

While experts noted that Trump acted within his rights to pardon the corporation, there is no known precedent for a president taking such action.

IFrame Content

Noting the U.S. Supreme Court's highly controversial 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling—which affirmed corporate personhood and the dubious notion that unlimited outside spending on political campaigns is free speech—Stanford Law School professor Bernadette Meyler toldThe Intercept that "while we have seen the rise of a trend of treating corporations as persons in other areas of law, we haven't seen that so far in the area of pardoning."

Kimberly Wehle, a professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law and preeminent pardons expert, wrote for The Hill on Tuesday that the BitMEX pardons send the message that "companies involved in financial crimes don't have to worry about accountability under this president, as least when it comes to crypto, for reasons that he has no incentive to ever make known."

"BitMEX can continue its prior criminal practices with federal impunity, and maybe even rely on the pardon to thwart future investigations into related conduct by federal lawmakers or state prosecutors," Wehle added. "The biggest losers in this deal are, once again, the American people, including the more than 77 million who might finally be realizing that they voted for lawlessness last November."

"The biggest losers in this deal are, once again, the American people."

Brandon Garrett, a Duke University law professor specializing in corporate crime and punishment, told The Interceptthat the BitMEX pardons are part of a wider pattern of impunity under Trump, who "now seems to be systematically pardoning corporate malefactors left and right without respect, really, to any real serious consideration about the merits of the cases [or] the larger policy implications of issuing these pardons."

As the consumer advocacy watchdog Public Citizen recently noted, "The Trump administration has dropped, withdrawn, or halted investigations and enforcement actions against over 100 corporations in its first two months in office."

Beneficiaries include companies owned or led by Trump donors or allies, including private prison giant GEO Group; Zelle network banks JPMorgan and Bank of America; crypto firms Coinbase, Gemini, Kraken, OpenSea, Ripple, and Robinhood; and Elon Musk's SpaceX.

"Trump's corporate pardons show the president's true base is the billionaire executives and corporate elites lining up to indulge their greed at the trough of Trump's corruption," Public Citizen research director Rick Claypool said last week. "Trump's soft-on-corporate crime approach invites a corporate crime spree and potentially catastrophic abuses for America's consumers, workers, and communities."

Public Citizen co-president Robert Weissman added that the Trump administration's "effective no-enforcement policy against corporations virtually guarantees more financial scams, more workplace discrimination, more poisoning of the air and water, more food contamination, more fraud, more disease, and more preventable death."

---

---}:

AN 5 25

Donald Trump is now four months into his second presidency, and some of his critics are commenting that Joe Biden's presidency now seems like a lifetime ago.

Trump's cheerleaders in right-wing media are applauding his "record of achievement," claiming that he has accomplished a great deal in a short period of time. But the New York Times' Thomas B. Edsall has a very different view.

In his May 20 column, Edsall argues that some of the damage Trump has inflicted on the United States during the last four months will take years to repair.

READ MORE:'Priorities': Kristi Noem ripped for demanding new $50M jet while the Coast Guard struggles

"One thing stands out amid all the chaos, corruption and disorder: the wanton destructiveness of the Trump presidency," Edsall laments. "The targets of Trump's assaults include the law, higher education, medical research, ethical standards, America’s foreign alliances, free speech, the civil service, religion, the media and much more…. Some of the damage Trump has inflicted can be repaired by future administrations, but repairing relations with American allies, the restoration of lost government expertise and a return to productive research may take years — even with a new and determined president and Congress."

IFrame Content

Edsall adds, "Let’s look at just one target of the (Trump) Administration's vendetta: medical research. Trump's attacks include cancellation of thousands of grants, cuts in the share of grants going to universities and hospitals; and proposed cuts of 40 percent or more in the budgets of the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Science Foundation."

Several interviewees cited examples of long-lasting "damage" Trump is inflicting.

Retired Judge J. Michael Luttig, a Never Trump conservative, told Edsall, "I even believe he is destroying the American presidency, though I would not say that is intentional and deliberate."

READ MORE:Busted: Fact-checker says Trump exaggerated certainty of prescription drug price cuts

Princeton University history professor Sean Wilentz told Edsall, "The gutting of expertise and experience going on right now under the blatantly false pretext of eliminating fraud and waste is catastrophic and may never be completely repaired…. There is no precedent, not even close, unless you consider Jefferson Davis an American president. "

Andrew Rudalevige, a political scientist at Bowdoin College in Brunswick, Maine, told Edsall, "The damage caused to governmental expertise and simple competence could be long-lasting. Firing probationary workers en masse may reduce the government employment head count, slightly, but it also purged those most likely to bring the freshest view and most up-to-date skills to government service, while souring them on that service."

Mara Rudman of the University of Virginia's Miller Center told Edsall, "The most lasting impact of this term will be felt in the damage done to the reputation of the United States as a safe harbor where the rule of law is king, and where the Constitution is as sacred a national document as any country has developed. Through his utter disregard for the law, Trump has shown both how precious and how fragile are the rules that undergird our institutions, our economic and national security, and the foundation for our democracy."

READ MORE:'Exceedingly foolish': Inside the Trump Administration's plan to slash health care spending

*Thomas B. Edsall's full New York Times column is available at this link (subscription required).

---

combo of uncertainty tariff BS and voodoo2 b b bill BS; voust to borrow for debt goes up; dngrade not for decades?

an 5 25

'Debt bomb': Morning Joe explains why Moody’s downgrade is 'siren going off' for US economy

---

AN 5 25

'That neocon traitor': MAGA erupts at Mike Pence over criticism of Trump's policies

---

AN 5 25

The Wall Street Journal reportsmany Americans may not care to adopt the kind of factory work President Donald Trump’s is pledging to bring back to the U.S.

“The jobs are tiring, feature hazards not found at desk jobs and are tough to fill. Once workers are recruited, it can be difficult to get them to stay,” reports WSJ. “… The work represents the type of gritty, physically demanding labor … Trump envisions will recast the U.S. as the manufacturing powerhouse it once was.”

READ MORE: A dangerous new lie is being peddled by Trump’s toadies

The Wall Street Journal reports the U.S. already has nearly half a million unfilled manufacturing jobs, according to the U.S. Labor Department. A 2025 National Association of Manufacturers survey also shows nearly half of manufacturing companies say their biggest challenge is recruitment and retention in jobs with rigid hours, hard work, and risk of significant physical injury. Additionally, the pay is 7.8% lower on average than the private sector, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, following a decline in union representation.

“A lot of people say they wouldn’t work in a place like this because of how hard it is,” said Quaker City Castings employee Zachary Puchajda, who is a metal caster.

IFrame Content

Carolyn Lee, president of the Manufacturing Institute, a nonprofit focused on workforce development for the sector, told WSJ that the significant labor shortage makes scaling up production a challenge.

Quaker City Castings President Dave Lordi told reporters his company saw a brief 25% surge in orders after Trump announced tariffs, but he would need to add a second work shift. This, say analysts, would not be easy without manufacturers adding better pay and schedule flexibility, among other things that Americans have come to expect from work. Plus, many of the incentives it would require to coax Americans into factories could drive up purchase prices for U.S. factory-made goods. American-made Viking stoves already cost more than $5,000 for a low end model, and those are made in Greenwood, Mississippi, which is known for its record low cost of living.

Lee says the U.S. manufacturing industry is nowhere near the level of evolution it needs to be to engage growth.

READ MORE:'Betrayed': Alarm sounded as GOP 'plotted behind closed doors to hurt even more families'

“You can’t just plop a factory down and hope people will miraculously appear,” Lee said.

Read the full Wall Street Journal report here.

---

THREAT SPRINGSTEEN BONO BEYONCE “SEE WHAT HAPPENS”

---

an 5 25

troll? military?

'Mad king': Trump teases 'fourth' term to US troops overseas

---

AN 5 25

People keep asking: How can Trumpdo this?

It’s not just a legal question about how Congress and the courts can allow his outright corruption, open use of the Justice Department to target perceived enemies, explicit threats to universities and law firms if they don’t cede their independence to the regime, direct attacks on media that criticize him, and defiant trampling on constitutional rights.

It’s also a question about how a president of the United States can be so utterly and uninhibitedly greedy, vindictive, and desirous of monarchic power at the expense of America’s democratic institutions.

A common explanation is that the “guardrails” are now gone. In his second term, Trump has installed people around him who are more loyal to him than they are to the United States, such as Attorney General Pam Bondi and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who therefore approve everything he wants (such as a $400 million luxury aircraft from Qatar that clearly violates the Constitution’s emoluments clause).

Another explanation I hear, especially from historians, is that crazy rulers — mad kings, ruthless power-hungry strongmen, malignant narcissists who take over nations — tend to attract fanatics who are even crazier than they are. And those fanatics (think Elon Musk, Stephen Miller, RFK Jr., Russell Vought) incite and excite each other and goad the crazy ruler into ever more extreme measures.

IFrame Content

I’m sure both go some way to explaining what’s happening to America under Trump 2. But I think they miss the biggest reason for Trump’s utter lack of inhibition this time around.

He believes nothing can stop him from doing whatever the hell he wants because nothing has.

He’s been impeached twice, indicted for trying to overthrow the results of the 2020 election, even convicted of criminal fraud. Not only has he gotten away scot-free, but the Supreme Court has given him presumptive immunity for whatever he does in office.

Anda plurality of voters even reelected him president, with more votes than Kamala Harris.

He’s 78 years old, soon to be 79, and figures he won’t ever have to face voters again — either because the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution prohibits it or because by 2028 he’ll have turned the nation into a full dictatorship and can count on being reelected.

Hell, he’s survived an attempted assassination.

So, he truly believes nothing can stop him no matter what he does. This is the core reason that he’s utterly, shamelessly, blatantly uninhibited — feeling totally unconstrained in seeking money and power.

The only potential obstacles are forces that he can’t easily push around because they’re are too rich or powerful — Xi’s China, Vladimir Putin, global bond traders, possibly Harvard University and the U.S. Supreme Court.

So with them he issues stern warnings and big threats. But if they don’t do what he wants he ultimately caves and claims victory nonetheless (as he has with China and Harvard).

There’s one constraining force that in the long run will be the most important of all: the American public.

Like a huge sleeping giant, the American public is not easily stirred to action. Right now, some of the public is loudly opposing Trump — among them, many of you. (Thank you!) His net approval ratings have fallen by nearly 20 points since he took office.

But we’re still too few to credibly threaten congressional Republicans with electoral defeat unless they turn on Trump.

I assure you that the giantwill awaken — especially if Trump openly defies the Supreme Court, or arrests American citizens for saying or writing things he dislikes, ortakes foreign bribes that clearly compromise America’s national security (such as getting the Saudi’s to invest in his crypto exchange and coins, in exchange for which he gives them America’s most advanced AI chips, which they then give to China). We’re inches away from one or more of these scenarios.

And when the giant awakens, Trump and his regime will be toast.

:{:{NOW READ:'A bumpy ride': Republican extremists and moderates unite to defy Trump}:

---

an 5 25

Educator Ross Rosenfeld tells The New Republic that Trump is exploiting so-called “emergency” powers to create a permanent dictatorship.

“The office of dictator was created in the early Roman Republic, when it granted a single person — a prominent and trusted citizen — immense power in times of emergency,” writes Rosenfeld.

And of course this power was exploited by the likes of Roman general Sulla, who used that legislative procedure to entrench himself as dictator for life. Julius Caesar later used it to permanently bring an end of the Roman Republic and mire it in a series of dictatorships.

READ MORE: 'Doesn't have a clue': GOP congressman buries Marjorie Taylor Greene in heated exchange

“A couple of millennia later, and half a world away, Donald Trump is taking steps in that direction,” he said, courtesy of complicity and courts.

IFrame Content

Woodrow Wilson was the first president to formally declare a national emergency and use this additional power to prepare the nation for World War I. FDR issued three national emergency proclamations, two related to World War II. Then, in 1976, Congress passed the National Emergencies Act (NEA) giving presidents broad emergency powers. It originally included a check on that authority by reining in an emergency declaration through a vote, but the Supreme Court overturned that check in the 1983. Presidents soon made emergency declarations a well-worn tool in the White House toolbox.

Ronald Reagan used the NEA six times during his eight years in office. Bill Clinton used it 18 times. George W. Bush declared an emergency 14 times against foreign entities related to terrorism, as did Barack Obama. But since retaking office, Trump has “declared eight national emergencies in just a few short months.”

“He’s used the NEA to militarize the Southern border against ‘invasion’ and to enact tariffs against the entire world,” writes Rosenfeld. “He declared a national energy emergency, even though no such emergency exists, so that he can push through more fossil fuel permits.”

Read more:'Be quiet!' Inside the 5 most explosive moments from Kristi Noem's 'laughable' testimony

Trump coupled his NEA “emergencies” with the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to violate the due process rights of undocumented immigrants “and sentence them to a lifetime of detention in El Salvador.” Trump has considered using the 1807 Insurrection Act to use American troops to deal with a "rebellion" within U.S. borders. Presidential advisor even considered suspending habeas corpus for undocumented immigrants, depriving them of any due process rights, in defiance of the Constitution.

Suspending habeas corpus is easier with “a Congress controlled by a feeble, impotent Republican Party,” Rosenfeld said. After all, when the Roman Senate suspended due process procedures for Gaius Gracchus they conveniently “shielded themselves from any responsibility for actions taken during the crisis.”

Rahm Emmanuel once said “Never let a crisis go to waste,” and Rosenfeld says Trump and Miller have exploited “Rahm’s rule” to craft a rule of governance that deliberately creates “a continual state of crisis and turmoil, allowing the president to assume expansive emergency powers.”

READ MORE:'None of that is true': RFK Jr. gets repeatedly fact-checked to his face in tense hearing

“Crises lend themselves to authoritarian rule, and often in the aftermath it’s extraordinarily difficult to return to republican government,” Rosenfeld warns.

But what commonly comes after a dictator is another dictator, and Americans made a mistake in “putting a fascist back in office after his first attempt to overthrow the government."

Read the full TNR report here.

---

NOTE TAKES TPS FROM AFGHAN TRANSLATORS SAME TIME?!

an 5 25

MAGA is furious at the Episcopal Church for refusing a directive from the federal government to help resettle white South Africans granted refugee status.

Newsweek reports the church submitted its refusal days after almost 50 South Africans arrived at a U.S. airport under a fast-tracked refugee program that appears to only serve white south Afrikaners. Other groups, including Black Sudanese refugees fleeing religious violence — who are also from Africa — are not similarly fast-tracked.

The new arrivals are minority descendants of mainly Dutch and French colonial settlers who created the segregationist system of apartheid in 1948, which allows white people to legally steal land and resources from the majority Black population, who were relocated to segregated overcrowded, townships of lean-tos and shacks.

READ MORE: Top Senate Republican issues Trump an ultimatum

Data show 73 percent of privately owned land in South Africa is white-owned despite white people comprising only 7 percent of the population. In corporate South Africa, white individuals also occupy 62 percent of top management positions while 17 percent of leadership roles are held by Black managers.

IFrame Content

Critics say Trump’s decision to expedite resettlement of Afrikaners bypasses an onerous refugee system that leaves thousands from conflict zones stuck in a years-long vetting processes and dangerous conditions.

Rev. Sean W. Rowe, presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church, confirmed in a letter to church members that the government contacted the church and expected it to resettle some of the South Africans under terms of a grant. But Rowe said the request posed a moral dilemma for the Episcopal Church, which has deep ties to the Anglican Church of Southern Africa and counts the late Archbishop Desmond Tutu — an outspoken apartheid opponent — among its spiritual forebears.

"In light of our church's steadfast commitment to racial justice and reconciliation and our historic ties with the Anglican Church of Southern Africa, we are not able to take this step," Rowe wrote. “… Accordingly, we have determined that, by the end of the federal fiscal year, we will conclude our refugee resettlement grant agreements with the U.S. federal government."

READ MORE:'Embarrassment:' Trump admin asks judge to hide it's tactics for mass layoffs

Right-wing figures roasted the Episcopal Church, with conservative political activist Charlie Kirk posting on X: "I guess you aren't a refugee if you are white. According to the Episcopal Church Jesus doesn't love white people."

Conservative commentator Alex Jones, a conspiracy theorist who settled a lawsuit with families of Sandy Hook victims after calling the mass shooting a “hoax”, wrote: "All Federal Funds MUST Be Pulled From The Episcopal Church. It's Time To Enforce The Separation Of Church And State."

Read the full Newsweek report here.

---

AN 525

'Weird reluctance to criticize': Expert explains why media ignores Trump's decline

---

an 5 25

new York Times bestselling author George Saunders knows President Donald Trump can probably fire the librarian of Congress, but says the move gave him "a visceral feeling for just how diseased this administration really is."

Librarian Dr. Carla Hayden, the first Black woman to hold the position, is energetic, engaged and “utterly dedicated to the work of the library,” Saunders wrote in the Times.

READ MORE: Top Senate Republican issues Trump an ultimatum

But the White House tossed out “nonsense from its meager box of repetitive right-wing auto-defenses” when it claimed Hayden had, “in the pursuit of D.E.I.,” done “quite concerning things.”

“Did it name those things? It did not. It couldn’t have,” Saunders argues. “Putting aside the basic idiocy of being against that position (“What, you value diversity? You think things should be equitable? And that all should be included?”), members of the administration now use ‘D.E.I.’ as a sort of omni-pejorative, deliberately (strategically) leaving its exact meaning vague.”

IFrame Content

“What it seems to mean, to them, is: The accused is a person who is aware that certain groups have had a different experience of American life and who feels that it is part of our intellectual responsibility (and joy) to engage with that history, so as to improve our democracy,” Saunders said.

The White House also claimed with “sickening” inaccuracy that Hayden put “inappropriate books in the library for children,” when the librarian of Congress “doesn’t put books” into the library at all.

READ MORE:'Embarrassment:' Trump admin asks judge to hide it's tactics for mass layoffs

“When a ship is sinking,” writes Saunders, “there’s value in knowing how fast, and calling it out. When a country is self-sabotaging, ditto. So let me just say it: Shame on the White House. Shame on those who should be stopping this slide into autocracy and aren’t. (I’m looking at you, John Thune, Mike Johnson and Marco Rubio.) Shame on all of us if we let these ignorant purveyors of cruelty reduce this beautiful thing we’ve built over these hundreds of years to a hollow, braying, anti-version of itself.”

Read the full New York Times essay here.

---

AN 525 qatar lux jet trump keep after; trump will visit none of std 3 mil ally on trip

Trump—no stranger to allegations of blatant corruption—faced an onslaught of criticism on Sunday in response to ABC Newsreporting that his administration is preparing to accept "what may be the most valuable gift ever extended to the United States from a foreign government."

Ahead of Trump's trip to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, sources told ABC that the administration "is preparing to accept a super luxury Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet from the royal family of Qatar—a gift that is to be available for use by... Trump as the new Air Force One until shortly before he leaves office, at which time ownership of the plane will be transferred to the Trump presidential library foundation."

The unnamed sources also explained that "lawyers for the White House counsel's office and the Department of Justice drafted an analysis for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth concluding that is legal for the Department of Defense to accept the aircraft as a gift and later turn it over to the Trump library, and that it does not violate laws against bribery or the Constitution's prohibition (the emoluments clause) of any U.S. government official accepting gifts 'from any king, prince, or foreign state.'"

"Even in a presidency defined by grift, this move is shocking. It makes clear that U.S. foreign policy under Donald Trump is up for sale."

ABC's revelations about the $400 million "flying palace" follow The Wall Street Journalreporting earlier this month that "the U.S. government has commissioned L3Harris to overhaul a Boeing 747 formerly used by the Qatari government... into a presidential jet."

IFrame Content

The White House, Boeing, and L3Harris declined to comment on the Journal's report. Similarly, on Sunday, the White House, Justice Department, and a spokesperson for the Qatari Embassy did not respond to ABC's inquiries.

However, as The Associated Pressreported Sunday:

Hours after the news, Ali Al-Ansari, Qatar's media attaché, in a statement said, "Reports that a jet is being gifted by Qatar to the United States government during the upcoming visit of President Trump are inaccurate.""The possible transfer of an aircraft for temporary use as Air Force One is currently under consideration between Qatar's Ministry of Defense and the U.S. Department of Defense," the statement said. "But the matter remains under review by the respective legal departments, and no decision has been made."

Amid the uncertainty, a range of people across the internet blasted the supposed plan, slamming it as "indefensible," "incredibly illegal," and "comically corrupt." Some critics pointed out that the reporting comes after the Trump Organization, the Saudi partner DarGlobal, and a company owned by the Qatari government last month reached a deal to build a luxury golf resort in Qatar.

Journalist Mike Rothschild said that "this is spectacularly corrupt, a level of greed and depravity that is breathtaking, even for Trump. Air Force One—the people's plane—is going to be a flying palace donated by Qatar. No American should accept this."

Some critics highlighted security concerns. One legal expert declared, "An emolument and security risk all wrapped up in one!"

Robert Weissman, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, said in a statement that "Trump's plan to accept a luxury plane from Qatar is blatantly unconstitutional, a textbook violation of the emoluments clause. The concern with foreign gifts is that they can sway a president's policy and predilections—and there's little doubt that Qatar wants to gift Trump a 'palace in the sky' for exactly that reason."

Weissman continued:

"The legal counsel who advised that this gift is OK because Trump will take personal control of it (through his library) only after leaving office should resign immediately, in shame and disgrace. The situation is no different than if the Qataris gave $400 million in cash to Trump and told him to keep it under his bed until 2029, when he could spend it freely. Except possibly it's worse, because he will use the plane in the interim, at great cost to the U.S. taxpayer, who will have to upgrade it.Even in a presidency defined by grift, this move is shocking. It makes clear that U.S. foreign policy under Donald Trump is up for sale. The juxtaposition with cancelled foreign aid grants and programs for poor and vulnerable people—cancellations that will cost millions of lives unless reversed—could not be starker or more morally grotesque.

"Is taking a gift from a foreign government this big a bribe or bad judgment? Or just Trump?" Congressman Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) asked on social media. "Wish the MAGA movement cared about ethics in their president."

Congressman Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) said: "The level of corruption from President Trump and his White House is unlike anything we have ever seen in American history. It is appalling and criminal. Openly taking bribes."

Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) noted that the reporting comes amid issues at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

"While ordinary Americans' flights are grounded because of problems at the FAA, Trump is taking a $400 million bribe in the form of a 'palace in the sky' from a foreign government," Casar said. "Over and over: He gets paid. Everyone else gets screwed."

NOW READ:This is the only way to defeat the morbidly rich

---

AN 525 VID]

When President Donald Trump a day after he crossed the 100-day mark of his time in office last month, members of the cabinet took turns to praise the president.

Although everyone offered glowing reviews, Attorney General Pam Bondi stood out by telling Trump that he was genuinely the best president of all time.

"President, your first 100 days has far exceeded that of any other presidency in this country. Ever. Ever. Never seen anything like it. Thank you," she said during the Cabinet meeting.

READ MORE: 'Embarrassment:' Trump admin asks judge to hide it's tactics for mass layoffs

In a podcast for The New Republic discussing Trump's need for constant approval, journalists Greg Sargent and Amanda Marcotte described the "over-the-top" praise he receives from his aides as feeding into his "narcissism.""Every emotion is exaggerated to the maximum. They pretend to be angry at the loudest volume. They pretend to be sad with the biggest droopy faces and wailing tears. Everything’s loud and garish and schmaltzy," Marcotte said.

IFrame Content

"Most of us would be embarrassed to have somebody praise us like that because we know it’s not true... But he just needs it to just be constantly coming into his ears. And it’s getting worse as he ages, for various reasons. Any psychologist will also tell you that when narcissists are feeling insulted or they’re feeling their insecurity rise up, often because their approval ratings are coming down or they’re otherwise failing, their need to be told they’re the greatest just continues to go up."

Sargent and Marcotte also analyzed White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt's description of the president, calling it "cultlike."

"She routinely fluffs Trump with astonishingly cultlike descriptions of him to reporters—ones that portray him as powerful, calm, and completely in command of events. But then, left to his own devices on Truth Social, Trump presents the opposite picture, erupting regularly in wild meltdowns and uncontrollable hissy fits over the tiniest of slights," Sargent said.

READ MORE:Trump's new greed deal the ultimate act of destruction the prophets have predicted

According to Marcotte,"the over-the-top nature of it does affect certain people by convincing them—I don’t think Trump’s voters, even his biggest fans, think he’s the greatest president ever; the person with the most integrity via all time; no person has ever been anything more thing than Donald Trump ever has."

She added that repeated claims such as, "He’s the greatest businessman of all time," unintentionally reinforce the notion that he was at least a successful businessman, which is actually false. "He was a failure. He bankrupted his company over and over and over again," Marcotte said during the podcast.

The speakers also discussed "AI-generated and real photographic imagery of over-the-top abuse" of migrants detained by the administration "and functionally kidnapped and renditioned to a foreign prison."

"And they shaved their heads. They made sure to like make their tattoos as garish as possible. They had videos of them bent over in these torture positions. And you see the effect that it has on the audiences at Trump’s 100-day rally. The crowd went absolutely nuts," she said.

READ MORE:An 'Angry Black Woman' explains how it's up to white Americans to defeat Trumpism

---

RWW 05/09/2025

Kyle Mantyla

Steve Benen @ The Maddow Blog: Despite his radicalism, Ed Martin lands on his feet with new Justice Department job

After an indefensible tenure as an interim U.S. attorney, Ed Martin is receiving his reward: a powerful position in the Justice Department.

Charlie Nash @ Mediaite: Trump Appoints Fox News Host Jeanine Pirro as D.C. U.S. Attorney

President Donald Trump announced on Thursday that Fox News host Jeanine Pirro would be appointed as the interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia.

Travis Gettys @ Raw Story: 'Her detention cannot stand': Judge orders release of student arrested by Trump admin

A federal judge has ordered the immediate release Turkish doctoral student who has been held at an immigration detention center for more than six weeks.

Corbin Bolies @ The Daily Beast: Vance Makes Bonkers Defense of Trump’s Insistence That Kids Need Fewer Dolls

JD Vance on Thursday defended Donald Trump’s insistence that children should have fewer dolls, claiming families will be happier once they know there are more U.S.-made weapons should their kids go to war.

Chuck Tanner and Devin Burghart @ IREHR: MAGA Schemes for a Trump Third Term

Far-right groups like the Third Term Project and Republicans for National Renewal are concocting a multitude of ways to keep Donald Trump in power.

---

an 5 25

'Increasingly vulnerable to threats': Trump slammed for skipping critical intel briefings

---

an 5 25

More than 100 days into his return to the White House, the conclusion is stark: Donald Trump is no longer the same president he was during his first term. His familiar nationalist and populist rhetoric is now openly paired with an authoritarian turn – one without precedent in US history. He has adopted a neo-imperial view of the economy, treating the global order as a zero-sum contest of winners and losers. In this worldview, cooperation gives way to domination: what matters is power and the accumulation of wealth.

Having withstood two impeachment procedures, numerous lawsuits and at least one assassination attempt, Trump now governs with what can appear to be unchecked authority. To his followers, he has become a hero, a martyr – almost a messianic figure. He no longer sees democracy as a framework to be honoured, but as a tool to legitimize his hold on power. His decisive electoral victory now serves as a mandate to cast aside institutional limits.

Three key features define his style of governance: a radical centralization of executive power grounded in the theory of the “unitary executive”; the politicization of the Department of Justice, used as a weapon against rivals; and the manipulation of federal authority to target cultural, media and educational institutions. His playbook is chaos: unsettle opponents, dominate the media narrative and blur the boundaries of democratic norms. Impulsive and reactionary, Trump often governs in response to Fox News segments or trending posts on Truth Social. Instability has become a strategic tool.

But Trump is not a historical anomaly. While his 2016 victory may have seemed unlikely, his re-election reflects a deeper, long-term transformation rooted in the post-Cold War era.

From an external to an internal enemy

The collapse of the USSR – a structuring external enemy – redirected political confrontation toward the designation of an internal enemy. The culture war has become the dominant ideological battleground, driven by two closely linked forces. On one side, a religious radicalization led by nationalist Christian movements – such as the New Apostolic Reformation – seeks to roll back social progress and promote the vision of an outright theocracy. On the other, growing racial anxiety is fueled by fears of white demographic decline and resistance to civil rights gains.

The commentator Pat Buchanan saw it coming as early as the 1990s. Speaking at the 1992 Republican National Convention , he warned: “There is a cultural war going on for the soul of America… as critical as the Cold War itself.” Too radical for his time, Buchanan championed a white, Christian, conservative US hostile to cosmopolitan elites. Though marginalized then, his ideas laid the groundwork for what would become Trumpism.

Newt Gingrich, who served as Speaker of the House from 1995 to 1999, played a pivotal role in reshaping both the Republican party and US politics. A Republican group he chaired famously distributed a pamphlet to Republican candidates titled “Language: A Key Mechanism of Control”, advising them to use uplifting language to describe themselves, and inflammatory terms like “corrupt”, “immoral” and “traitor” to describe their opponents. This aggressive rhetoric redefined political rivals as enemies to be defeated – helping pave the way for a right-wing politics in which winning trumps democratic norms.

At the same time, the rise of a new conservative media ecosystem intensified polarization. The launch of Fox News in 1996, the growth of right-wing talk radio shows like Rush Limbaugh’s and the later explosion of social media gave the US right powerful tools to shape and radicalize public opinion. Today, algorithm-driven information bubbles trap citizens in alternate realities, where misinformation and outrage drown out reasoned debate. This has deepened polarization and fractured society as a whole.

Channeling anger

This ideological and media realignment has unfolded alongside a broader crisis: the unraveling of the post-Cold War neoliberal consensus. Promises of shared prosperity have been replaced by deindustrialization, deepening inequality and widespread resentment. Successive traumas – from 9/11 and the 2008 financial crash to the Covid-19 pandemic – and foreign wars without real victories have eroded public trust in the establishment.

Trump channels this anger. He offers a vision of a restored and idealized America, a rollback of recent social gains, and a reassertion of national identity grounded in religion and race. His populism is not a coherent ideology but an emotional response – born of perceived injustice, humiliation and loss.

Trump is more than a symptom of America’s democratic crisis: he is its most vivid manifestation. He embodies the legacy of the 1990s – a foundational decade of identity grievance, culture wars and media deregulation. Viewed as a political outsider, he has never been judged as a traditional politician, but rather embraced, by some, as the archetypal “self-made man” – a successful businessman and reality TV celebrity.

His rhetoric – transgressive, provocative and often cruel – gives voice to what had been repressed. The humiliation of opponents becomes part of the performance. For his supporters, it’s exhilarating. It breaks taboos, flouts political correctness and feeds the fantasy of reclaiming a lost America.

And he’s no longer alone. With the vocal support of economic and tech elites like Elon Musk – now a central figure in the radicalized right on X – Trumpism has entered a new phase. Together, they’ve outlined a new kind of authoritarian, cultural and digital power, where influence matters more than institutions.

The US re-elected not just a man, but a style, an era and a worldview built on dominance, disruption and disdain for rules. Still, history is unwritten: intoxicated by hubris and undermined by incompetence, Trumpism may yet crash into the wall of reality – with consequences far beyond America’s borders.

Jérôme Viala-Gaudefroy, Spécialiste de la politique américaine, Sciences Po

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

---

AN 5 25

Trump administration officials have reportedly been pressuring countries facing U.S. tariffs to approve satellite internet services offered by Elon Musk's Starlink to help grease trade negotiations, further underscoring the conflicts of interest stemming from the mega-billionaire's proximity to the White House.

The Washington Postreported Wednesday that it obtained "a series of internal government messages" that "reveal how U.S. embassies and the State Department have pushed nations to clear hurdles for U.S. satellite companies, often mentioning Starlink by name."

"The documents do not show that the Trump team has explicitly demanded favors for Starlink in exchange for lower tariffs," the newspaper added. "But they do indicate that Secretary of State Marco Rubio has increasingly instructed officials to push for regulatory approvals for Musk's satellite firm at a moment when the White House is calling for wide-ranging talks on trade."

The Post points specifically to ongoing bilateral trade negotiations between the U.S. and India, where "government officials have sped through approvals of Starlink with the understanding that doing so could help them cement trade deals with the administration."

The Times of Indiareported Wednesday that Starlink, a subsidiary of Musk's SpaceX, "has been issued a Letter of Intent by the Indian government for satcom services."

IFrame Content

Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the U.S.-based consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said in response to the Post's reporting that "the glaring conflict of interest inherent in this pressure to preference a Musk-owned company is disgusting."

"The bottom line here is that tools of trade and government should be utilized for the benefit of the American public, not abused for personal tech bro profiteering," Gilbert added.

Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, called the revelations "a huge new scandal."

"Trump and Musk are using tariffs as leverage to get other countries to buy from Musk's companies. Working families pay $4,000+ more a year so Musk gets new deals," Casar wrote on social media. "They get richer. Everyone else gets screwed."

Last month, U.S. President Donald Trumppartially paused the more aggressive tariffs he sought to impose on countries around the world while leaving in place 10% across-the-board import duties, which are already raising costs for American families.

The Post reported Wednesday that "at least two countries have explicitly discussed or moved toward adopting Musk's Starlink as a means of avoiding Trump’s tariffs and negotiating a better trade deal with the United States."

Cambodia, which is facing a potential 49% tariff rate, appears to be one of those countries. The Post obtained a U.S. embassy cable indicating that Cambodian officials have signaled a "desire to help balance our trade relationship by promoting the market entry of leading U.S. companies such as Boeing and Starlink."

"Another cable from April 17 reported that Starlink was pushing for a license to operate in Djibouti," the newspaper reported. "Embassy staffers wrote they would help Starlink as much as they could: 'Post will continue to follow up with Starlink in identifying government officials and facilitating discussions.'"

U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said the internal cables show "gross corruption." Congressional Democrats are already probing the White House's use of Starlink services.

"Surprise, surprise: another Trump move that directly benefits Elon Musk—the guy who spent $260 million to elect Donald Trump and has been given the keys to the federal government," said Van Hollen. "They are rigging the government for themselves."

---

rww

05/06/2025

Kyle Mantyla

Annie Grayer, Paula Reid and Manu Raju @ CNN: Nomination for Trump’s pick for DC’s top prosecutor in trouble amid key Republican push back

The odds that President Donald Trump’s controversial nominee to serve as US attorney for Washington, DC, reaches confirmation are rapidly diminishing as he faces public pushback from a key Republican on Capitol Hill.

David Gilmour @ Mediaite: Trump Slams ‘Communist Persecution’ of Convicted Election Clerk, Demands DOJ Release Her

President Donald Trump ordered the Department of Justice to “take all necessary action” to help free former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters, who is serving a nine-year sentence in Colorado for breaching election equipment security in a bid to uncover voter fraud.

Angry White Men: Matt Walsh Defends White People Using The N-Word

On Monday, Daily Wire contributor Matt Walsh used his show to defend Shiloh Hendrix, a racist woman accused of calling a Black child the N-word. After lauding the people who contributed to her online fundraiser, Walsh complained that it’s not socially acceptable for white people to say the N-word.

Janna Brancolini @ The Daily Beast: MAGA Tries to Sway Pope Vote With $100 Bottles of Wine and Billion-Dollar Promises

As the College of Cardinals prepare to vote on a new pope this week, conservative U.S. Catholics are trying to woo them with expensive meals and donations if “the right pope” is selected.

Kate Riga @ Talking Points Memo: While His Admin Delights In The Culture Wars, Trump Tiptoes Around Abortion. At Least For Now.

This general embrace of the culture war stands in stark contrast to the administration’s low-key triangulation on abortion. That mutedness was a feature of the 2024 campaign and has, somewhat surprisingly, continued into the early months of Trump’s second term.

Dan McClellan: Responding to Charlie Kirk on Christian nationalism

---

---}:

an intercept 5 25

The Intercept reports Donald Trump’s Pentagon budget proposal will almost certainly lavish Special Government Employee and Trump Senior Advisor Elon Musk and his company SpaceX with new expensive projects.

“No matter how you slice it, the Pentagon budget is obscenely high at a time when the fundamentals of our diplomatic infrastructure are being decimated, the social safety net is being shredded, and medical and scientific research are under attack,” said William Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

In addition to Trump’s plan to budget an undisclosed sum for “U.S. space dominance,” the most obvious project benefiting Musk is a missile shield, dubbed the Golden Dome.

READ MORE: Trump’s toadies are peddling a dangerous new lie

“… Pentagon [funds] have as much to do with pork barrel politics and techno-fantasies like the Golden Dome as they do with a sound defense strategy,” said Hartung, who added that it was clear current resources going to the Pentagon “are not only excessive but are more likely to undermine than promote our security.”

IFrame Content

The Golden Dome project involves launching a network of surveillance satellites to detect and track enemy missiles targeting the United States. Musk wants to use his SpaceX resources to build both the satellites and the rockets. The Intercept reports SpaceX is already the top Pentagon supplier of launch services and low-Earth-orbit communications systems.

However, Reuters reports SpaceX is proposing to provide Golden Dome technology to the Defense Department through a “subscription service,” similar to Tesla’s $12.99 monthly EV-charging services to non-Tesla owners. Such a subscription will charge U.S. taxpayers considerably more than $12 a month while putting technical knowledge of Musk’s seek-and-strike missile system under an intellectual property lock.

Gabe Murphy, a policy analyst at Taxpayers for Common Sense, said there is also no determining what happens to the system, or if it would even be usable should a new president refuse to renew Musk’s contract.

READ MORE:'You see falls in politics — but not like this': DeSantis’ star imploding amid fraud scandal

“With his subscription model plan, Musk is looking to both retain control of these systems and keep taxpayer dollars flowing his way,” Murphy told the Intercept.

Democratic lawmakers are already calling for the Pentagon’s acting inspector general to review Musk’s role in the bidding process for the missile defense shield.

“Mr. Musk’s formal or informal participation in any process to award a government contract raises serious conflict of interest concerns, including the possibility that SpaceX is a top contender for the Golden Dome contract because of Mr. Musk’s position in the government,” lawmakerswrote.

If the inspector general finds Musk provided an advantage to SpaceX in the bidding process, lawmakers could then request the findings be remanded to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, which would be more likely to happen under a future Democratic administration.

*Read the full Intercept report here.

---

AN 5 25

London-based journalist Phil Tinline, who spent 20 years as a BBC reporter and authored the 2023 book "The Death of Consensus: 100 Years of British Political Nightmares," is known for his expertise on authoritarian movements. And he doesn't exclude the United States and the MAGA movement from his scrutiny.

During a Q&A interview with Salon's Chauncey DeVega published on May 7, Tinline discussed President Donald Trump's second term and where he believes it fits in with anti-democracy movements around the world.

"Trying to keep up with the new Trump Administration and the implications of its actions is disorientating and exhausting," Tinline told DeVega. "I've spent a lot of time over the last 20 years researching the history of the fear that democracy is about to die, mainly in the U.K., but also, in the U.S. Historically, we have worried about this many times without our nightmares coming to life. This led me to be very wary of people airily predicting that democracy was finished, and made me alive to the way that, paradoxically, such nightmares can actually damage democracy."

READ MORE:'You see falls in politics — but not like this': DeSantis' star imploding amid fraud scandal

Tinline continued, "But since Trump’s speech at the airport in Waco, Texas, two years ago, and especially since January this year, I've been forced to the conclusion — as many others have — that constitutional democracy in America really is now under severe threat. I hope that, as has happened before, this crisis will force politicians to break free from old taboos and find more effective ways to restore ordinary Americans' trust that democracy can make their lives better — and then to actually deliver on that."

IFrame Content

During the interview, Tinline discussed the role that conspiracy theories play in far-right movements. According to Tinline, conspiracy theories are "one of the warning lights on the dashboard of democracy."

"They express how people feel about power," Tinline told DeVega. "More people who care about democracy should have seen those lights flashing red and acted accordingly much earlier. But now here we are. The only way that I can see America recovering from this situation is for democratically elected politicians to show that they can and do make ordinary people’s lives better."

Tinline added, "The problem is that, meanwhile, conspiracy theories are a very useful way for other politicians to stoke distrust and division in pursuit of power."

READ MORE:'Be more relatable': GOP begs Trump to stop talking about dolls

*Chauncey's DeVega's full interview with Phil Tinline for Salon is available at this link.

---

AN 525

'A blatant conflict': Trump just made 'aggressive step' toward fundamentally changing USPS

US 'stepping up' intel gathering on Greenland as Trump pushes to 'take over the island'

---

05/05/2025 rww

Kyle Mantyla

Peter Wade @ Rolling Stone: Trump Says ‘I Don’t Know’ When Asked if He Has to ‘Uphold the Constitution’

The president complained that due process rights are interfering with his mass deportations.

Joe DePaolo @ Mediaite: Trump Tries to Have it Both Ways on Economy: The ‘Good Parts’ are Mine, The ‘Bad Parts’ are Biden’s

President Donald Trump attempted to take credit for parts of the economy which he considers “good,” while blaming former President Joe Biden for other parts he considers “bad.”

Travis Gettys @ Raw Story: 'I love you guys': Trump greets convicted Proud Boys militant at Mar-a-Lago

President Donald Trump offered a message of support to the Jan. 6 insurrectionists when he met with a former Proud Boys militant in Mar-a-Lago over the weekend.

Hemant Mehta @ Friendly Atheist: A curriculum coup: Oklahoma Republicans allow right-wing rewrite of history

State Superintendent Ryan Walters bypassed oversight to push Christian Nationalism and right-wing conspiracies into public classrooms.

The Throckmorton Initiative: Charlie Kirk's Christian America, Part Two

In this segment, I examine the notion that there was something exceptionally Christian about America's founding era. Last week, I fact-checked Charlie Kirk's viral video defense of the belief that America was founded as a Christian nation in the legal sense. Most of what Kirk had to say was irrelevant or incorrect.

Janna Brancolini @ The Daily Beast: Laura Loomer Sets to Work on New MAGA Civil War Over Trump Pick

The 9/11 truther denounced Trump’s nominee for U.S. surgeon general and claimed the COVID-19 vaccine is “killing millions of people.”

---

an 525

'Dangerous': Priest says Trump has 'co-opted' Christianity to 'secure his own power'

---

an 525

President Donald Trump has stopped floating the idea that he would run for a third term — and CNN data analyst Harry Enten believes he knows why.

During an appearance on CNN Monday, Enten said the real reason Trump has stopped talking about a third term is because the idea is extremely unpopular among Americans, including Republicans.

“There’s a reason why Donald Trump is backtracking or saying, ‘No, I won’t actually do this,'" Enten said. "Because this idea is about as popular as New Coke was back in the mid-1980s.”

ALSO READ:Another day, another Trump distraction to draw attention away from his failures

According to recent polling, there is strong opposition to Trump seeking a third term, with 76 percent of Americans against it. This includes a majority of Republicans, with only 21 percent expressing support overall — and even less support among Independents (16 percent).

...

---

NO LNX

A new low even for MAGA – but they're about to go lower

REUTERS/Rebecca Cook

Sabrina Haake, Raw Story May 05, 2025

Last week, Trump held a campaign-style rally on the campus of Macomb Community College in Warren, Michigan. To the delight of his MAGA fans, he trotted out the same personal grievances he’s been serving up since 2015.

Despite achieving fewer legislative accomplishments during his first 100 days than any president since the 1950s, Trump told his adoring crowd that he had “accomplished more in three months than most administrations accomplished in four years or eight years.”

If aiding the enemy, defying court orders, and taking a chainsaw to federal services are “accomplishments,” then Trump is accomplished indeed.

MAGA delights in Trump’s cruelty

After his usual braggadocio, Trump pivoted to video recordings of abject cruelty. Behind the podium, Trump displayed large screen videos of the inhumane treatment of helpless migrants he deported to El Salvador's notorious gulag, CECOT. He brayed, still without evidence, “The worst of the worst are being sent to a no-nonsense prison in El Salvador… watch this!”

“This” was a series of video clips showing hundreds of men he has imprisoned without due process, without a hearing, and without credible evidence that they committed any crime. “This” was a video showing men brutally bent over, having their heads shaved bare, and forcibly shoved into concentration camp-style cages that sleep 75 to 80. “This” was Trump priming his already violence-prone base into a bloodthirsty frenzy, as they exploded in raucous approval of his inhumanity, thundering, "USA! USA! USA!"

According to an affidavit from the Human Rights Watch, prisoners held in CECOT are denied communication with the outside, and only appear before courts in online hearings, often in groups of several hundred detainees at the same time. The Salvadoran government calls them “terrorists” who “will never leave” the prison.

El Salvador, governed by a man who controls the media and calls himself a “cool” dictator, denies human rights groups access to its prisons, and allows journalists to visit only under highly staged circumstances. In videos produced during these visits, prison authorities brag about men held in completely dark solitary confinement cells.

Trump’s stochastic violence against judges

Trump also used the rally to showcase his continued attack on judges, whom he called “communist radical left judges,” claiming they are trying to ‘seize his power.’ Nodding to the courts’ inability to enforce their own orders, Trump warned the world: “Nothing will stop me.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio concurs. At least week’s cabinet meeting, to which Trump invited the media, each cabinet member tried to out-flatter the next person by praising Trump. Seated to Trump’s right, Rubio announced that questions regarding Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man sent in error to El Salvador — specifically, what steps the White House was taking to facilitate his return — were off limits to the media. “I’ll never tell you that, and you know who else I’ll never tell?” Rubio jeered.

“A judge,” he answered himself, “because the conduct of our foreign policy belongs to the president of the United States.”

Due process is not a matter of foreign policy

Vice President J.D. Vance also describes the rule of law with sarcastic bombast. He has slammed critics, including federal judges, for “weeping over the lack of due process.”

The Fifth Amendment protects all persons, not just US citizens. It guarantees that no person shall “be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law;” it does not say, ‘no citizens.’ Trump, Rubio, Attorney General Pam Bondi and Vance act as if they’ve never heard of it, despite its storied American history. Trying to assume the role of the courts in deciding what the law is, they keep declaring, falsely, that their abuse of immigrants is about “foreign policy.” It isn’t. It’s about the US Constitution, the lynchpin of democracy, without which we don’t have one.

After the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that Trump must facilitate Garcia’s return from El Salvador, Trump took to social media to turn a legal block into a PR strategy. He wrote that he is “being stymied at every turn by even the U.S. Supreme Court…which seemingly doesn’t want me to send violent criminals and terrorists back to Venezuela… If we don’t get these criminals out of our Country, we are not going to have a Country any longer.”

Revealing his complete ignorance of how legal immigration works, he added, “We cannot give everyone a trial, because to do so would take, without exaggeration, 200 years. We would need hundreds of thousands of trials for the hundreds of thousands of Illegals we are sending out of the Country. Such a thing is not possible to do…MAGA!”

It’s as if, despite tanking last year’s border bill just so he could campaign on it, he’s never actually considered that processing immigrants requires paperwork.

VP Vance, who knows better, says it’s up to Trump—and himself— to decide what due process is, and what it requires. “To say the administration must observe “due process” is to beg the question: what process is due is a function of our resources, the public interest, the status of the accused, the proposed punishment, and so many other factors.” No. It isn’t. It’s not up to Vance and Trump’s discretion because the Fifth and 14th Amendments, and well established precedent, mapped out what due process requires — notice, a hearing, and an opportunity to be heard — decades ago.

Trump is a symptom, not a cause

It’s a sick disease of the mind, this urge to oppress others for power, but Trump didn’t invent it. Neither did Hitler, Mao Zedong, or Stalin. It’s been there since we stopped living in tune with the earth, and started living in our heads. It’s our collective fall from grace, a phenomenon worsened exponentially by social media.

Watching our experiment stumble brings deep personal anguish, like watching someone you love destroy themselves. You’d give your own life to help, but they have to save themselves.

A minority of Americans- 23%- approve of what Trump is doing and would loudly cheer “USA!!” at videos of human suffering. These are the same people who used to applaud public lynchings; before that, they salivated at public stonings, witch burnings and Caligula’s public displays of torture. It seems they will always be with us; the only positive is that there are far more of us than there are of them.

ALSO READ: Trump is a troll – but this 'ugly' selfie demands a damning response

Sabrina Haake is a 25+ year federal trial attorney specializing in 1st and 14th A defense. Her columns are or have been published in Alternet, Chicago Tribune, MSN, Out South Florida, Raw Story, Salon, Smart News, State Affairs, and Windy City Times. Her Substack, The Haake Take, is free.

---

an 525

A Sesame Street character with the most trash and a fragile ego was possibly one parody too far for President Donald Trump, according to the Daily Beast:

“The president signed an executive order to halt all federal funding to PBS, the free public broadcasting service. Almost immediately, people began to suspect that Trump’s vendetta against the network wasn’t because of its 'woke programming,'" wrote the Beast's Clare Donaldson. "Instead, it’s all to do with a certain puppet show that has been trolling the man since the ’80s.”

One of Trump’s longest-running haters isn’t one of his alleged scam victims, but “‘Sesame Street’—the educational children’s program that taught generations of kids to read and count.”

Read more:'Losing the base': MTG goes on massive rant against Trump

Cue the song lyric:“He’s got so much trash it spills out of his can!”

IFrame Content

Ronald Grump first hit the scene in the late 1980s as a “famous Grouch builder” looking to replace Oscar’s trash can with a condominium of waste bins called “Grump Tower.” All Oscar had to do was surrender his can and relocate to a trashy condo in Grump’s new construction.

There were strings attached, of course, so Oscar ends up fighting his way back out of Grump’s twisty contract with the help of the Sesame Street community.

Later, in the 1990s, ‘Sesame Street’ convinced actor Joe Pesci to lend his voice for another round as Grump threatens to turn Sesame Street into “Grump World.”

READ MORE:'Kill them all': Shocking details about Fetterman’s behavior raise concerns over his health

The show later did a parody ofTrump’s NBC reality show The Apprentice.

Read the entire Daily Beast article here.

---

AN 525

NO LNX

Trump’s clown car cabinet is driving off a cliff

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reacts as she walks towards the White House, in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 10, 2025. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein

Sabrina Haake, Raw Story May 03, 2025

UPS, the United Parcel Service, just announced that it is laying off 20,000 employees and closing 73 of its buildings by the end of June. It attributes the downturn to reduced shipping volume from its largest customer, Amazon, due to Trump’s tariffs.

When a division of Amazon considered telling consumers the truth, by posting the costs tariffs added to the price of each imported product, the mere possibility set the White House on attack mode. Trump immediately called Amazon owner Jeff Bezos, who reassured him Amazon would never do such a thing, while Karoline Leavitt accused Bezos of a “political and hostile” act just for thinking about it.

When a presidential team of incompetent egoists calls truth-telling a “hostile act,” we’re in trouble.

Ruinous economic indicators prompt ruinous deflection

Trump’s first quarter report from the Bureau of Economic Analysis reflects a sharp contraction in the economy, showing an annual decrease in the GDP of 0.3 percent. Compared to Biden’s last quarter, when “real GDP increased 2.4 percent,” the data suggest that perhaps Trump isn’t the economic genius he claims to be.

These are not partisan data; that the Bureau falls under the US Department of Commerce suggests Trump may soon hobble its reporting capacity. For now, the data show economic contraction, reflecting a colossal reversal from Biden’s expansion. Wall Street sums up Trump’s first 100 days in office as the “worst for the stock market in half a century.”

On brand, when faced with these data, Trump lied, deflected, and blamed his predecessor, posting,“This is Biden’s Stock Market, not Trump’s. I didn’t take over until January 20th. This… has NOTHING TO DO WITH TARIFFS, only that (Biden) left us with bad numbers, but when the boom begins, it will be like no other. BE PATIENT!!!”

Trump continues to manufacture Biden’s “bad numbers”

Trump can’t stop parroting his own campaign lies about Biden’s economy. During the 2024 presidential campaign, when he wasn’t manufacturing a border invasion to enrage people, Trump repeatedly attacked Biden’s economy. It worked. While remaining mum on how his own COVID-19 mismanagement worsened the economy, he convinced 49% of voters that they were impoverished, despite economic indicators to the contrary.

After commerce reports came out this week, Trump doubled down. During an embarrassing televised cabinet meeting orchestrated to praise himself, Trump confirmed that he sought to undo everything Biden did to improve the economy, stating, “We came in and I was very against everything that Biden was doing in terms of the economy. … We took over his mess in so many different ways.”

Trump and his cabinet may drink their own economic Kool-Aid, but Wall Street is abstaining. Multiple indicators confirmed that Biden delivered the strongest post-COVID economic recovery in the world, including: growth and job creation that exceeded G7 and other advanced economies' growth in 2024; inflation control despite global inflationary pressures; avoidance of the post-COVID recession predicted by many; wage gains; strong market performance with record S&P 500 highs; and stellarinfrastructure investment that Trump, in a toddler-esque pique of jealousy, is scrambling to unravel.

During Biden’s term, the U.S. added 16 million jobs, low earners were experiencing wage growth, inflation levels approached the Federal Reserve’s target, and unemployment hit a 54-year low. By these metrics, Biden performed economic jujitsu, delivering an economy that The Economist called “the envy of the world.”

Teaching Trump media how to lie better

After Trump officially blamed Biden this week for economic contractions caused by his own ill-conceived tariffs, he went further, instructing right-wing media how to spin bad economic news of the future. During his televised “Praise Dear Leader” cabinet meeting, Trump told his preferred outlets (Fox, Newsmax, OAN) that they should also blame any economic downturns in the second quarter on Biden.

Trump showed similar intransigence during an interview with Terry Moran of ABC News about Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the man Trump is keeping in an El Salvador prison despite a Supreme Court order to facilitate his return. Trump insisted during the interview that an obviously photoshopped picture showed Garcia with “MS13” tattooed on his knuckles. When Moran told Trump that the image was clearly photoshopped, Trump acted like a tyrant. He first suggested Moran owed him something – it was thanks to Trump that Moran got the interview at all. Frustrated by Moran’s continuing refusal to lie, Trump told him, “you’re not being very nice,” before pivoting to attacking media as a whole, saying this “is why people no longer believe the news … It’s such a disservice…”

Discussing the Supreme Court order to facilitate Garcia’s return, Moran stated the obvious — that Trump could simply pick up the phone, call El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, and get him back. Trump confirmed that he is, indeed, flouting the Supreme Court’s authority, stating, “I could…. And if he were the gentleman that you say he is, I would do that.”

In one interview, Trump vacillated between being the all powerful Oz, and the cheap salesman behind the curtain. When Moran reminded him that the high court ordered him to return Garcia, Trump deflected, incredibly: “I'm not the one making this decision. We have lawyers who don't want to do this.”

Trump’s clown car cabinet is driving off a cliff

After the Supreme Court slapped the administration and ordered Garcia’s return with a 9-0 decision, White House adviser Stephen Miller simply lied about it. Miller claimed on Fox News that the administration had “won” the case, “clearly,” prompting a conservative columnist to retort, “Nope, you lost. Unanimously.” Fox viewers, of course, won’t hear that rejoinder as Fox anchors continue to throw falsehoods at the wall to see what sticks.

As Team Trump continues governing the country like a made-for-Fox-TV reality show, real-life consequences are piling up. China just canceled orders for American pork, soybeans, and lumber, putting US farmers in “full-blown crisis” mode.

Maybe, like dolls for Christmas, farmers can make do with selling one or two hogs instead of 30. As Trump put it during a town hall Wednesday night, he plans to defeat public skepticism over his tariffs through deception. “I just think that I’ll be able to convince people how good this is.”

NOW READ: Trump's rampage is out of control — but there's one way to stop it

---

// take harvard tax status

an 525

U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday signed an executive order calling for an end to taxpayer funding for NPR and PBS, an escalation of his assault on the media that could shutter hundreds of local stations across the country.

The president's order, which he signed behind closed doors, echoes a section of Project 2025, a far-right agenda that called for stripping public funding from NPR, PBS, and other broadcasters on the grounds that they "do not even bother to run programming that would attract conservatives."

Trump's order instructs the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB)—a private nonprofit corporation created and funded by Congress—to "cease direct funding to NPR and PBS, consistent with my administration's policy to ensure that federal funding does not support biased and partisan news coverage."

The executive order, which is expected to face legal challenges, also directs all federal agencies to "identify and terminate, to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law, any direct or indirect funding of NPR and PBS."

Trump's move was expected, and it came in the wake of reports that the administration intends to ask Congress to rescind previously approved funding for CPB, which is already engaged in a court fight with the president over his attempt to fire several of the organization's board members. The Associated Pressreported Thursday that the rescission request "has not yet been sent to Capitol Hill."

IFrame Content

According to the organizations' estimates, federal funding accounts for roughly 1% of NPR's annual budget and 15% of PBS's yearly revenue.

In a letter to congressional leaders earlier this week, a coalition of civil society groups led by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) warned that, if enacted, Trump's proposed funding cuts for public broadcasting "will result in the shutdown of dozens, if not hundreds, of local, independent radio and television stations serving Americans in every corner of the country."

"As it stands, public media journalists are often the only reporters attending a school board meeting, or a local zoning hearing, or at the scene of a crime," the groups wrote. "They are the journalists most likely to hold local public officials accountable and expose

corruption. Faraway digital media outlets will not replicate this coverage, and the American public will lose out."

Trump's attack on public broadcasters is part of his administration's broader effort to undermine journalism in the United States and around the world.

RSF said in a report published Friday that Trump's "early moves in his second mandate to politicize the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), ban The Associated Press from the White House, or dismantle the U.S. Agency for Global Media, for example, have jeopardized the country's news outlets and indicate that he intends to follow through on his threats, setting up a potential crisis for American journalism."

"After a century of gradual expansion of press rights in the United States," the group said, "the country is experiencing its first significant and prolonged decline in press freedom in modern history, and Donald Trump's return to the presidency is greatly exacerbating the situation."

NOW READ:Trump's top spy chief blasted as her 'crazy' cash grab is exposed

---

an 525

The collective stock value of America's oil and gas firms reportedly declined by over $280 billion following the announcement of President Donald Trump's controversial tariff policy.

The Wall Street Journal reported Friday that this drop took place between April 2, the day Trump announced the tariff measures, and this Monday.

This amount exceeds the market capitalization of Chevron, the second-largest oil company in the United States. The oil industry's total market value is said to have fallen more than any other major sector.

"Among the biggest U.S. oil companies, Exxon and Chevron shares have declined 11% and 18%, respectively. Oil-field services giant Schlumberger and its top rivals, Halliburton and Baker Hughes, have fallen between 21% and 23%. Those companies are bellwethers for activity in the U.S. oil patch," noted the WSJ report, written by Benoît Morenne, Collin Eaton and Andrew Mollica.

The report further said U.S. oil prices dropped 19 percent in April to $58.21 a barrel. This is the lowest level to which the prices have been in over four years.

IFrame Content

Several economists expect that tariffs imposed by Trump will trigger a worldwide economic slowdown, leading to decreased demand for crude oil. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and its partners plan to increase their production by over 400,000 barrels daily starting in May, according to the report.

"Before Trump came into office, oil production in most U.S. crude regions was set to decline because of maturing fields and dwindling sweet spots. Oil executives expect Trump’s policies to accelerate this trend, including in the Permian Basin of West Texas and New Mexico, the largest oil field in the country," the report adds.

ALSO READ:Dems who don't believe Trump will try to destroy us need to quit wasting our time

---

an 525

One sitting Supreme Court associate justice is now publicly coming out against President Donald Trump's attacks on the federal judiciary — without mentioning the president by name.

Politico reported Thursday that Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, addressed "the elephant in the room" during a judges' conference in Puerto Rico. She said that threats to impeach Article III judges solely because they issued rulings that conflict with a president's wishes is a direct threat to the American system of government.

“The attacks are not random. They seem designed to intimidate,” Jackson said. “The threats and harassment are attacks on our democracy, on our system of government. And they ultimately risk undermining our Constitution and the rule of law.”

READ MORE:'New Tiffany Trump': Marco Rubio mocked after being given yet another White House role

The liberal jurist received a standing ovation for her remarks, in which she urged her colleagues to have "raw courage" when carrying out their duties. Politico reported that Jackson spoke about the attacks on judges for roughly 18 minutes.

IFrame Content

"I urge you to keep going, keep doing what is right for our country, and I do believe that history will vindicate your service," she said.

Trump and his supporters have specifically called for the impeachment of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who ordered deportation flights carrying 238 Venezuelan immigrants deported under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to be turned around until the issue could be fully litigated. Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) even submitted articles of impeachment against Boasberg to the House Judiciary Committee. Chief Justice John Roberts (who was appointed by former President George W. Bush) spoke out against the impeachment threat, though like Jackson on Thursday, did not specifically mention Trump's name.

"For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision," Roberts wrote. "The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose."

READ MORE:'The purge': Trump to fire 'a lot' of White House officials amid 'distrust and tension'

Click here to read Politico's full article.

---

mma daily bs

In response to interview where Trump suggests an allegedly photoshopped image was real, Fox's Greg Gutfeld lashes out at ABC News' Terry Moran

04/30/25

also stunned by ignorant decl of indep response

---

notus

President Donald Trump Says Ukraine Promise Was ‘Said in Jest’

but not cda 51st]

The bipartisan Federal Election Commission has unanimously dismissed a complaint from conservative activists who alleged NPR is controlled by the Democratic Party and “clearly and unmistakably” advocated for 2024 presidential nominee Kamala Harris.

The 4-0 ruling, released Monday evening, affirms what the FEC has previously established: that NPR is a legitimate news organization exempt from election laws governing political committees and candidates.

This victory comes at a critical juncture for NPR, as President Donald Trump wants...

Trump Says He’s Bringing Transparency to Foreign Money. He Can Still Keep Some of His Foreign Donors Secret.

Trump-Aligned Nonprofits Are Turning Local Fights Over Transgender Students Into Federal Investigations

‘Delay, Obstruct, Confuse’: How the DOJ Is Mimicking Trump’s Personal Defense Strategy

This Chicken Company Paid Over $100 Million in Fines for Fixing Prices, Then Gave $5 Million to Trump’s Inauguration pilgrims pride

Trump’s Tariffs Are Encouraging Some Companies to Leave America

---

AN 4 25

'Dangerous dictator': How Trump 'bullied' Bezos to drop plan to display Amazon tariff cost

SPOX: 'Hostile and political act': Analyst says Leavitt just revealed 'Trump’s weakness'

---

AN 4 25}:

On Monday, President Donald Trump issued a new executive order just shy of the 100th day of his second term that has some experts and academics sounding the alarm.

Trump's new order, which is entitled "Strengthening and Unleashing America's Law Enforcement to Pursue Criminals and Protect Innocent Citizens," makes various declarations about the administration's commitment to supporting law enforcement professionals in the opening paragraphs. However, one section further down specifically mentions the U.S. military and the administration's intent to have enlisted service members participate in civilian law enforcement actions.

"Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the heads of agencies as appropriate, shall increase the provision of excess military and national security assets in local jurisdictions to assist State and local law enforcement ... [and] shall determine how military and national security assets, training, non-lethal capabilities, and personnel can most effectively be utilized to prevent crime."

READ MORE:'Terrible idea': Republican senator slams Mike Johnson's 'dishonesty'

"The Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall utilize the Homeland Security Task Forces (HSTFs) formed in accordance with Executive Order 14159 of January 20, 2025 (Protecting the American People Against Invasion) to coordinate and advance the objectives of this order," the order continued.

IFrame Content

That section in particular prompted Lead Matthew Noe, who is the lead collection & knowledge management librarian at Harvard Medical School, to call the order "legitimately frightening." Philadelphia, Pennsylvania-based writer Susan Keiser posted to Bluesky: "Serious Question: Is this martial law[?]" Former criminal defense investigator Andrew H. Sowards responded to the order by simply declaring: "Not good."

"We're already a police state," Daily Beast columnist David Rothkopf skeeted (the accepted term for Bluesky posts). "But now, thanks to this EO, moreso."

Deploying the U.S. military within American borders to act as a police force would be a direct violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which is a 143 year-old law prohibiting the president from ordering the military to double as law enforcement. As the Brennan Center for Justice explained in 2021, Congress passed the law during Reconstruction in order to prevent the military from being used to enforce Jim Crow laws in former Confederate states after the Civil War. Additionally, deploying the military to conduct law enforcement activity violates parts of the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution — which were ratified in direct response to the British military's abuse of colonists prior to the Revolutionary War.

READ MORE:'Destroyed for no reason': Trump fires would-be mom hour after she nabs foster parent slot

Click here to read the full executive order.

---

AN 4 25

'Heed the warnings': Scathing WSJ editorial warns Trump 'could sink his presidency' after first 100 days

---

AN 4 25

In a Monday morning, April 28 post on his Truth Social platform, President Donald Trump — angry over his low approval ratings in recent polls — called for the New York Times, ABC News, the Washington Post and others to be "investigated for election fraud."

The post came three days after ABC News' Katherine Faulders reported that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), under U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, had "rescinded a policy implemented during the Biden Administration that restricted prosecutors from seizing reporters' records in criminal investigations, according to an internal memo obtained by ABC News."

In an article published by Salon on April 29, Austin Sarat — a professor of jurisprudence and political science at Amherst College in Massachusetts — warns that the Trump Administration and the Trump-era DOJ are quite serious about using the legal system against reporters.

READ MORE:America is first in the global race to the bottom — thanks to Trump

"(The Trump Administration's) latest effort to bring the press to heel came on April 25, when news leaked of the Justice Department's intention to aggressively pursue journalists who receive leaked information from confidential government sources," Sarat explains. "When it is implemented, the policy will give the administration another tool to make the lives of reporters miserable and provide the basis for jailing those who resist."

IFrame Content

Sarat continues, "While no journalists are presently in jail in this country for doing their jobs, prosecuting and punishing them is a regular part of the arsenal of repressive regimes around the world. And the atmosphere for the American press is by no means friendly. April alone saw a dramatic escalation of threats."

Sarat stresses that when it comes to reporters, Bondi is a radical departure from former U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland —who spoke of the "crucial role that a free and independent press plays in our democracy."

During Joe Biden's presidency, Garland said, "Because freedom of the press requires that members of the news media have the freedom to investigate and report the news, the new regulations are intended to provide enhanced protection to members of the news media from certain law enforcement tools and actions that might unreasonably impair newsgathering."

READ MORE:Nastiness 'doesn't travel well': Trump ripped after shock election results in Canada

Sarat comments, "How times have changed. Bondi's new memo chastises the news media for publishing leaked material 'that undermine(s) President Trump's policies, victimize(s) government agencies, and cause(s) harm to the American people.' Calling such activity Illegal and immoral, the attorney general said she would be personally responsible for approving 'efforts to question or arrest members of the news media.' There you have it. Journalists are put on notice that if they publish leaked material that 'undermine(s) President Trump's policies,' they may be arrested."

READ MORE:Hitler's first 100 days — and Trump's

*Austin Sarat's full article for Salon is available at this link.

---

AN 4 25

resident Donald Trump has reached the 100-day mark of his second term, and already administration officials are preparing for an impeachment defense—despite the fact that the House and the Senate are under Republican control, and the midterm elections are more than 18 months away.

Trump's advisors "are seriously considering the likelihood that he would be impeached again if Democrats take the House next year," Axios reports.

"I'm certain," Trump's longtime pollster, John McLaughlin, told Axios—an opinion reportedly shared by others in Trump's "orbit."

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt blasted U.S. Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-MI), who filed seven articles of impeachment against President Trump on Monday.

READ MORE: ‘Rank Incompetence’: Trump Says Hegseth Is ‘Safe’ Just Before Navy ‘Loses’ $60 Million Jet

IFrame Content

"Who the hell is this lunatic?" the Press Secretary asked, according to Axios.

U.S. Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA) on Friday signaled support for a Trump impeachment, becoming the first swing state Senator to do so.

"The threat of impeachment has added urgency to the Trump administration's push to get as much of his agenda through Congress as possible before the 2026 midterms — especially his plan to extend his 2017 tax cuts," Axios noted.

"We need to pass the tax cuts and avoid a recession," McLaughlin said. "That's the high stakes here. We cannot lose the midterms."

Some economic experts say a recession may now be the best possible outcome, not just in the U.S., but globally, driven by President Trump’s tariff and trade wars. Others are raising alarms about the risk of "stagflation."

READ MORE: ‘Heads on Pikes’: Trump White House Accused of ‘Vaguely Fascist’ Display

Trump insiders reportedly also feel an impeachment threat could help solidify the MAGA base, and be a fundraising boon.

"Trump’s attacks on due process, birthright citizenship, humanitarian aid, and the courts are not 'politics,'" Congressman Thanedar wrote on Monday. "They are a direct attack on our democracy. Enough is enough."

Meanwhile, at The Bulwark, Jill Lawrence writes that she took a "look at all the impeachment articles against presidents and figure[d] out how many Trump has already matched or surpassed."

"Spoiler: It has not been fun. And the answer is pretty much all of them—from Andrew Johnson in 1868 to the charges in Trump’s own pair of impeachments a few short years ago. How do we know? Because it’s all unfolding publicly and blatantly in real time."

RELATED: ‘Authoritarian Takeover’: Legal Scholars Warn of Trump’s ‘100 Days of Lawlessness’

---

Alex Jones: “I think it's way more dangerous Trump saying we're looking to deporting citizens to El Salvador. Now, that's unconstitutional, and that is really bad.” 04/28/25 MMA

---

mma 4 25

President Donald Trump is ramping up his assault on the press, opening new avenues for federal retribution against outlets which displease him as his administration prepares to mark 100 days in office.

Trump has long railed against journalists as the “enemy of the people,” used the power of the state as a cudgel against the industry in his first term, and promised more of the same in his second.

His return to office brought what Columbia Journalism Review’s Jon Allsop described as a “sharp, often contemptuous rupture” between the federal government and the press, with the White House seeking over the last few months to dominate reporters, place new restrictions on critical outlets, and lift up right-wing propagandists in their place.

The president’s threats against news outlets have been so extreme for so many years that by contrast, such moves struck some observers as “small beer” or “trivial nonsense.”

But Trump’s talk is cheap until it isn’t — at any time, on a whim, he or the assortment of ideologues and shills he’s appointed can set the gears of government grinding against his foes. And this weekend brought a sharp escalation and worrying signs for the future.

Justice Department ends restrictions protecting journalists}:

Attorney General Pam Bondi on Friday laid the groundwork for the imprisonment of journalists who produce reporting that damages the president’s interests.

In an internal Justice Department memo, Bondi rescinded Biden-era protections which restricted prosecutors “from seeking records and compelling testimony from members of the news media,” stating this was necessary “in order to identify and punish the source of improper leaks” by individuals whose conduct she described as “treasonous.”

Notably, her memo targets not just the leaking of classified information but also “disclosures that undermine President Trump’s policies, victimize government agencies, and cause harm to the American people.”

Trump regularly rails against reporting based on anonymous sources. Bondi’s move raises the prospect of the Trump administration responding to such reports by forcing reporters to choose between revealing their sources and going to jail.

Bondi, a Trump loyalist who previously parlayed frequent Fox appearances defending Trump into a post on his first impeachment legal defense team, will apparently be making the call over when the Justice Department uses that legal tool.

Other top prosecutors and investigators who might weigh in include her deputy, Emil Bove, who previously represented Trump in state and federal prosecutions; Ed Martin, the lawyer for January 6 defendant who now serves as interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia; FBI Director Kash Patel, who has called for the federal targeting of journalists; and his extremely online deputy, the former Fox host Dan Bongino.

How far will they go? Trump wants them to go very far indeed.

Trump calls for investigations of media pollsters

Trump responded on Monday to new surveys which show his approval ratings plunging in light of his catastrophic tariff rollout by calling for investigations into the pollsters and the media outlets which conduct them.

Trump claimed in an early morning post on Truth Social that results from New York Times/Siena and ABC/Washington Post polls were due to the surveys “looking for a negative result.”

“These people should be investigated for ELECTION FRAUD, and add in the FoxNews Pollster while you’re at it,” he wrote. “They are Negative Criminals who apologize to their subscribers and readers after I WIN ELECTIONS BIG, much bigger than their polls showed I would win, loose a lot of credibility, and then go on cheating and lying for the next cycle, only worse.”

Trump regularly accuses his media foes of breaking the law, and in a March speech at the Justice Department headquarters he instructed its employees to “watch for” their “totally illegal” behavior.

The president is currently suing Iowa pollster J. Ann Selzer over the results of one of her presidential campaign surveys.

Trump has personally dictated Justice Department investigations into two former officials from his first administration who became critics, as well as into ActBlue, the hub for Democratic campaign fundraising — and he could launch a similar legal assault on any news outlet which displeases him at any time.

A cry of desperation from CBS News

60 Minutes anchor Scott Pelley Sunday’s broadcast with a blunt explanation for the resignation last week of Bill Owens, a journalist with decades of experience at CBS News and the show’s longtime executive producer.

“Our parent company, Paramount, is trying to complete a merger,” he said. “The Trump administration must approve it. Paramount began to supervise our content in new ways. None of our stories has been blocked, but Bill felt he had lost the independence that honest journalism requires.”

Trump and his administration had targeted CBS News for retribution following a 60 Minutesinterview of Kamala Harris, the editing of which the president alleged had been unfair to him.

Trump launched a lawsuit seeking $10 billion in damages from the network, which First Amendment attorneys described as “ridiculous junk” and “a frivolous and dangerous attempt by a politician to control the news media.” Brendan Carr, his handpicked chair of the Federal Communications Commission, is conducting an investigation into the editing that former FCC commissioners have denounced.

Rather than stand firmly behind the company’s journalists, Paramount Chair Shari Redstone is reportedly seeking a settlement with Trump and an agreement with Carr that will allow the company’s merger to go through.

Trump gloats about media owners bowing to his will

Trump thinks he’s winning his battle against the press, as The Atlantic reported in a recent interview with the president:

“Tell the people at The Atlantic, if they’d write good stories and truthful stories, the magazine would be hot,” he said. Perhaps the magazine can risk forgoing hotness, he suggested, because it is owned by Laurene Powell Jobs, which buffers it, he implied, from commercial imperatives. But that doesn’t guarantee anything, he warned. “You know at some point, they give up,” he said, referring to media owners generally and—we suspected—[Washington Post owner Jeff] Bezos specifically. “At some point they say, No más, no más.” He laughed quietly.

Trump understands that many of the news outlets whose work he decries are owned by multinational corporations or wealthy magnates whose business interests make them vulnerable to federal retaliation.

After only a few months in office, he’s seen the pressure he’s exerted on CBS News push it to the breaking point, while the resolve of major newspaper owners is seemingly crumbling. And he has years more time in office to try to break them to his will.

### Trump is trying to throttle the free press — and U.S. moguls are going along with it

02/04/25 9:00 AM EST

### Donald Trump’s authoritarian playbook to crush the free press in a second term

10/29/24 9:09 AM EDT

### Trump is threatening to use the government to “come down hard” on the free press. Believe him.

11/30/23

---

an 4 25

President Donald Trump washed his hands of one of his most controversial policies and blamed it on lower-ranking officials.

The president sat down for an extended interview with The Atlantic's Ashley Parker and Michael Scherer, who wrote that he seemed to acknowledge that his executive powers have limits, even as he continually seeks to expand them, and they added that Trump seemed to understand the Constitution would not allow him to disregard a judicial order.

“I think the judge is horrible,” Trump said, referring to U.S. District judge James Boasberg.

That federal judge has tried to stop the deportation of Venezuelan immigrants to an El Salvador prison under the Alien Enemies Act, but Trump cited a controversial Supreme Court granting him immunity from criminal prosecution for anything he does as part of his “official” duties as president.

"I’ve had a lot of horrible judges, and I won on appeal, right?" Trump said. "I got immunity on appeal."

IFrame Content

The reporters questioned him on the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an El Salvadoran national who had been living legally in the U.S. before he was mistakenly deported, but the government's own admission, to the notorious CECOT prison, and Trump denied any responsibility for his case or others like it.

Also read:'This is our shot': Dems believe MTG's new job gives 'golden opportunity' to destroy GOP

“You know, I’m not involved in that," Trump said. "I have many people, many layers of people that do that. I would say they are all extremely tough, dangerous people. I would say that, and, don’t forget, they came in the country illegally.”

The government has argued that Abrego Garcia was a gang member, which his attorneys and family deny, and he was never granted due process for an opportunity to challenge the allegation, but Trump's advisers argue that his approach is working – even if the public doesn't seem to agree.

“Think about everything that’s happened immediately on immigration,” said Cliff Sims, who has served as an aide in both Trump administration. “Oh, we’re just going to ship gang members to a prison in El Salvador? ‘Sure.’ We’re going to send [border czar] Tom Homan to kick down the door of every criminal illegally in the country? ‘Have at it.’ It is the ultimate example of the ruthless efficiency of Trump 2.0.”

---

AN 4 25

Faced with two primary challengers and growing public support for impeaching U.S. President Donald Trump a historic third time, Congressman Shri Thanedar on Monday filed seven articles of impeachment against the second-term Republican.

"Donald Trump has repeatedly demonstrated that he is unfit to serve as president and represents a clear and present danger to our nation's constitution and our democracy," Thanedar (D-Mich.) said in a statement. "His unlawful actions have subverted the justice system, violated the separation of powers, and placed personal power and self-interest above public service. We cannot wait for more damage to be done. Congress must act."

Thanedar explained the seven articles of impeachment included in his resolution in a brief video, which he shared on social media.

As a statement from the congressman's office details, Trump's alleged constitutional violations are:

Obstruction of Justice and Abuse of Executive Power: Including denial of due process, unlawful deportations, defiance of court orders, and misuse of the Department of Justice.
Usurpation of Appropriations Power: For dismantling congressionally established agencies and impounding federal funds.
Abuse of Trade Powers and International Aggression: Including imposing economically damaging tariffs and threatening military invasion against sovereign nations.
Violation of First Amendment Rights: Through retaliatory actions against critics, media, and attorneys exercising constitutionally protected speech.
Creation of an Unlawful Office: By establishing the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and unlawfully empowering Elon Musk to unilaterally violate the Constitution.
Bribery and Corruption: Involving dismissing criminal cases, soliciting foreign emoluments, and extortionate settlements for personal and political gain.
Tyrannical Overreach: Seeking to consolidate unchecked power, erode civil liberties, and defy constitutional limits on presidential authority.

IFrame Content

Earlier this month, Thanedar called for Trump's impeachment over his administration's failure to comply with a 9-0 Supreme Court ruling about facilitating the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia from a prison in El Salvador to the United States.

"We must take action now," he said at the time. "Donald Trump and members of his administration are deporting people with limited evidence and no due process to horrific megaprisons in a foreign nation. As a member of Congress, I have a responsibility to uphold the checks and balances that safeguard the integrity of our democracy and prevent a slide into authoritarianism. This must be a red line. Otherwise, we risk Donald Trump continuing to defy the Constitution in his own interest, rather than the interest of the nation."

"Enough is enough," Thanedar declared. "We can not allow this obvious authoritarian power grab to continue. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to stand up for the Constitution and the American people and join the call for impeachment."

While Thanedar had expressed support for impeachment prior to Monday, his resolution came as a second primary challenger announced his candidacy for Michigan's 13th Congressional District. State Rep. Donavan McKinney (D-11) joined former state Sen. Adam Hollier (D-2), who has twice tried to oust the congressman and is trying to do so again next year.

McKinney is backed by the progressive group Justice Democrats, whose executive director Alexandra Rojas said in a statement earlier Monday that "Democratic voters in the face of unprecedented attacks on our livelihoods and liberties are fed up with a Democratic Party overrun by do-nothing career politicians who are totally unequipped to lead in this moment. Donavan represents the future the Democratic Party should be fighting: working-class people taking our power back from multimillionaires to deliver for everyday people."

After Thanedar announced the impeachment resolution, Business Insider senior politics reporter Bryan Metzger said on social media Monday that it is "always interesting to see how primary challenges affect members' behavior, though usually it's a bit more subtle than this."

Recent polling has found that a majority of voters disapprove of how Trump is handling his job and would support a historic third impeachment. In response to one survey, Free Speech for People's Alexandra Flores-Quilty—whose group is leading a nonpartisan Impeach Trump Again campaign—declared Friday that "it's up to Congress to do their job, defend the Constitution, and impeach and remove Donald Trump from office for his grave abuses of power."

Trump is the only president to be impeached twice by the House of Representatives—though in both cases during his first term, he was acquitted by the Senate. Republicans now narrowly control both chambers of Congress.

While Republicans haven't yet signaled a willingness to stand against the president, U.S. Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) told attendees of an early April anti-Trump rally that "within the next 30 days, I'm bringing articles of impeachment."

Axiosnoted Monday that "Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) also privately floated impeaching Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard over Signalgate."

NOW READ:Only one thing is going to stand in Trump's way — and he knows it

---

AN 4 25

In hisEaster morning post earlier this month, President Donald Trump’s wished a happy holiday to “the Radical Left Lunatics … fighting and scheming so hard to bring Murderers, Drug Lords, Dangerous Prisoners." The president's post was criticized by many as being too divisive, but evangelicals supported the president's controversial message.

In an article published Monday, Guardian quoted Jackson Lahmeyer, the founder of the Pastors for Trump organization who supported the president's Easter message, as saying: “You cannot unify with evil.”

Several white evangelical leaders continue to back Trump vigorously, even in light of what many consider to be violent and extremist rhetoric. Many people view this narrative as inappropriate for any religious event, especially one closely associated with themes of renewal, forgiveness, and peace.

ALSO READ:'It’s time': Conservative calls for 'comprehensive national civic uprising' against Trump BROOKS

"To evangelical leaders, that emphasis on Christian values stands in contrast to how they perceive the Biden administration’s actions, including in 2024 declaring 31 March Transgender Day of Visibility, the date when it had been celebrated since its creation in 2009, but last year fell – entirely coincidentally – on Easter Sunday," the Guardian article noted.

IFrame Content

Brad Sherman, an Iowa pastor and Republican now running for governor, told Guardian: "Easter was barely mentioned."

That is not true.

The tradition of the annual White House Easter egg roll continued under Biden's presidency. In a statement made last Easter, the former president said: “As we gather with loved ones, we remember Jesus’s sacrifice … with wars and conflict taking a toll on innocent lives around the world, we renew our commitment to work for peace, security, and dignity for all people.”

This means that some of the evangelical support for Trump may be based on misinformation that Biden did not celebrate Christian traditions in the White House.

This year, Trump hosted an Easter prayer service and dinner attended by Lahmeyer, well-known pastors like Franklin Graham and Robert Jeffress, as well as his personal pastor, Paula White-Cain, who currently heads the White House faith office, among others.

ALSO READ:These Christians have big problems with Trump’s 'spiritual adviser' — here's why

“[Trump] preached the gospel to us pastors, and I thought that was amazing,” Lahmeyer told Guardian.

ALSO READ: 'Trump has eclipsed Jesus himself': Here’s what really drives evangelicals’ MAGA rage

---

note nicknames gossip tabloid rag celeb tiffs?

an 4 25

Following his appearance at the funeral of Pope Francis on Saturday, where he was called out in a homily, Donald Trump jumped onto Truth Social to lash out at the New York Times and, in particular, reporter Peter Baker.

In his long tirade, the president took extreme exception to a Saturday report by Baker about negotiations involving Ukraine where the status of Crimea has become a sticking point.

In his rant, the president accused Baker and the New York Times of having it all wrong and accused them of giving former President Barack Obama a pass on the annexation of Crimea by Russia.

ALSO READ:'Retribution or bust’: 'Secretary of Retribution' joins J6 leaders to demand mass arrests

As he wrote, "No matter what deal I make with respect to Russia/Ukraine, no matter how good it is, even if it’s the greatest deal ever made, The Failing New York Times will speak BADLY of it. Liddle’ Peter Baker, the very biased and untalented writer for The Times, followed his Editor’s demands and wrote that Ukraine should get back territory, including, I suppose, Crimea, and other ridiculous requests, in order to stop the killing that is worse than anything since World War II."

IFrame Content

He then added, "Why doesn’t this lightweight reporter say that it was Obama who made it possible for Russia to steal Crimea from Ukraine without even a shot being fired. It was also Liddle’ Peter who wrote an absolutely fawning, yet terribly written Biography, on Obama. It was a JOKE! Did Baker ever criticize the Obama Crimea Giveaway? NO, not once, only TRUMP, and I’ve had nothing to do with this stupid war, other than early on, when I gave Ukraine Javelins, and Obama gave them sheets."

"This is Sleepy Joe Biden’s War, not mine," he accused. "It was a loser from day one, and should have never happened, and wouldn’t have happened if I were President at the time. I’m just trying to clean up the mess that was left to me by Obama and Biden, and what a mess it is. With all of that being said, there was no reason for Putin to be shooting missiles into civilian areas, cities and towns, over the last few days. It makes me think that maybe he doesn’t want to stop the war, he’s just tapping me along, and has to be dealt with differently, through 'Banking' or 'Secondary Sanctions?' Too many people are dying!!!"

You can see his post here.

---

SAME DAY?!

NO LNX

Will we let this orange-faced death-cult leader finish the job he started?

Thom Hartmann April 25, 2025

The Trump administration just gutted Meals on Wheels. Seriously. Meals on Wheels!

Donald Trump didn’t just “disrupt” America; he detonated it. Like a political Chernobyl, he poisoned the very soil of our democratic republic, leaving behind a toxic cloud of cruelty, corruption, and chaos that will radiate through generations if we don’t contain it now.

He didn’t merely bring darkness; he cultivated it. He made it fashionable. He turned cruelty into currency and made ignorance a political virtue.

This man, a grotesque cocktail of malignant narcissism and petty vengeance, ripped the mask off American decency and showed the world our ugliest face. He caged children. Caged. Children. He laughed off their cries while his ghoulish acolytes used “Where are the children?” as a punchline for their next QAnon rally.

He welcomed white supremacists with winks and dog whistles, calling them “very fine people,” while spitting venom at Black athletes who dared kneel in peaceful protest.

He invited fascism to dinner and served it on gold-plated Trump steaks. He made lying the lingua franca of the right, burning truth to the ground like a carnival barker selling snake oil from a flaming soapbox.

And let’s not forget the blood on his hands: 1,193,165 dead from COVID by the time he left office, 400,000 of them unnecessarily, dismissed as nothing more than “a flu,” while he admitted — on tape — that he knew it was airborne and knew it was lethal. His apathy was homicidal, his incompetence catastrophic.

He tried to overthrow a fair election. He summoned a violent mob. He watched them beat cops with American flags and screamed “Fight like hell!” while cowering in the White House, delighting in the destruction like Nero fiddling as Rome burned.

And now, like some grotesque twist on historical fascism, Trump’s regime is quietly disappearing even legal U.S. residents — snatched off the streets by ICE and dumped into El Salvador’s CECOT mega-prison, a dystopian nightmare of concrete and cruelty.

One such man, Kilmar Ábrego García, had legal status and a home in Maryland. But Trump’s agents defied a federal court order and deported him anyway, vanishing him into a foreign hellhole so brutal it defies comprehension.

This isn’t policy: it’s a purge. A test run for authoritarian exile. And if Trump’s not stopped by Congress, the courts, or We The People in the streets, it won’t end there.

But somehow, he’s still here, waddling across the political stage like the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man of authoritarianism, bloated with power, empty of soul, and reeking of spray tan and sulfur.

Donald Trump didn’t just bring darkness: he’s a goddamn black hole, a gravity-well of cruelty sucking the light out of everything he touches.

This is a man who desecrates everything good.

Empathy? He mocks it. Truth? He slanders it. Democracy? He’d bulldoze it for a golf course.

And if we let him continue, he won’t just end democracy — he’ll make damn sure it never rises again.

So the question is: are we awake yet?

Or will we let this orange-faced death-cult leader finish the job he started, grinning over the corpse of the America we once believed in?

Now is not the time to kneel: it’s the time to rise. Stay loud, stay vigilant, and show up. Every protest, every march, every call to DC, every raised voice chips away at the darkness.

Democracy isn’t a spectator sport: it’s a fight, and we damn well better show up for it.

NOW READ: Time's up for the GOP

---

he forgot fox and reagan

NO LNX

Time's up for the GOP

Thom Hartmann April 25, 2025

We’ve spent years watching Donald Trump attack our democratic institutions, inflame divisions, and corrupt the public discourse.

But focusing solely on Trump misses the larger, more disturbing reality: Trump isn’t acting alone. He’s a dangerous pathogen that found the perfect host in today’s Republican Party, an organism already compromised and eager to be infected.

The evidence of this dangerous symbiosis is alarming and immediate. Just days ago, America crossed a threshold that should chill every citizen who still believes in the rule of law.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a young man living peacefully in Maryland with no criminal record, was ripped from his home and deported to El Salvador — not by rogue agents, not by mistake, but in deliberate defiance of multiple federal court orders.

A judge had explicitly ordered that Garcia not be deported. The U.S. Supreme Court had intervened. And still, the Trump-controlled Department of Justice — under Attorney General Pam Bondi — refused to comply.

Garcia vanished from U.S. soil like a political dissident in a dictatorship. Senator Chris Van Hollen flew to El Salvador to find him yesterday, only to be denied access. The Salvadoran government wouldn’t even confirm his location. Garcia now sits detained, alone in a foreign country, denied lawyers, family, or recourse.

He’s not a criminal — he’s a political hostage. His only crime was existing under an administration that believes it is above the law.

This isn’t abstract. This is what the death of democracy feels like. A court order ignored. A life uprooted. A senator stonewalled.

And it’s a precedent set: if the executive branch can disappear a legal US resident despite Supreme Court orders, democracy is already bleeding out right in front of our eyes.

To fully comprehend the gravity of our situation, we must recognize that Trump is both a symptom and a disease. Like any opportunistic virus, he didn’t invent the weakness — he exploited it. The Republican Party, drifting toward authoritarianism since Nixon, became the perfect host.

From the backlash to the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision, to Nixon's Southern Strategy, to the Tea Party’s billionaire-funded anti-government rage against our first Black president, the GOP built a party on grievance and fear. It corroded democratic norms for decades. Gerrymandering, voter suppression, union busting, judicial stacking, demonizing immigrants and queer people, rightwing propaganda media — all laid the groundwork.

Trump didn’t create this environment. He walked into it, flipped the switches, and set it ablaze. He didn’t poison the well. He found it already poisoned and drank deeply.

What’s particularly chilling is how methodical Trump’s attack on democracy has been.

He’s spent years convincing millions that elections are fraudulent — despite no credible evidence. This isn’t just the tantrum of a defeated candidate. It’s a calculated attempt to destroy the one institution that makes a republic function: trust in the vote. When citizens no longer believe their ballots count, democracy dies.

That was the goal. Undermine faith in the system so completely that only Trump — and those who pledge loyalty to him — are seen as legitimate.

His authoritarian instincts were never hidden. He praised dictators like Putin, Orbán, MBS, and Kim Jong Un. He demanded personal loyalty from government officials, attacked the judiciary, and labeled the free press “the enemy of the people.” Every move was pulled straight from the autocrat’s playbook, designed to erode checks on his power.

The insurrection on January 6 was not an outlier, but rather the inevitable outcome of years of lies, hate, and democratic erosion. Trump didn’t just incite a mob; he sat and watched — gleefully — as it ransacked the Capitol, hunted lawmakers, and shattered windows in the temple of democracy. He delayed help. He wanted it to succeed.

And the Republican Party? It shrugged. Which is the key to both understanding and stopping Trump.

None of this destruction would be possible without the Republican Party’s active complicity. They are not passive bystanders; they are eager enablers. Leaders who once called Trump “dangerous” and “unfit” now parrot his lies and excuse his crimes.

Why? Because they’ve traded principle for power. The “party of family values” excused porn star hush money because it helped rig the 2016 election. The “party of fiscal responsibility” celebrated massive tax cuts for billionaires that exploded our nation’s deficit. The “party of national security” turned a blind eye as Trump aligned with America's adversaries and vilified NATO.

They sold their souls. And for what? Judges? Tax cuts? A fleeting grip on power?

At the core of this transformation is the deliberate cultivation of cruelty as political strategy. Trump’s policies were never just misguided: they were purposefully cruel.

The separation of children at the border wasn’t a failure; it was a feature. Designed to cause pain. Designed to deter. Designed to send a message that America no longer welcomed the tired, the poor, the huddled masses, at least when their skin is not white.

His refusal to return Kilmar Garcia to his family and community (and over 200 others) is not an outlier. It’s the same cruelty repackaged. The same contempt for legal restraint. The same hunger for domination. And if he’s not stopped by Republicans on the Supreme Court or Republicans in Congress, history and his own words tell us he’ll be coming for you and me next.

Beyond policy, Trump has waged a relentless war on truth itself. He didn’t just lie; he declared war on the very idea of truth. He called climate change a hoax. He politicized a deadly pandemic. He turned science into a partisan enemy and transformed medical expertise into a battleground.

The result? Hundreds of thousands of unnecessary Covid (and now measles) deaths. A public so divided they couldn’t agree on masks or medicine. That wasn’t an accident. It was the point: destroy our shared reality, and you can then more easily destroy democracy.

Perhaps most destructive of all, Trump didn’t merely inherit America’s divisions: he weaponized them. He didn’t unify urban and rural, rich and poor, Black and white: he pitted them against each other for personal gain. Rage was his currency. Fear his strategy. When people are busy hating each other, he knows, they don’t notice who’s robbing them blind.

What we now face is no longer a political party but a vicious, cruel cult of personality. Today’s GOP isn’t defined by principles or policies: Disagree and you’re exiled — just ask Liz Cheney. Ask Adam Kinzinger. Ask Mitt Romney.

Marjorie Taylor Greene doesn’t represent a fringe any longer; she is the mainstream now. Her recent town hall — where dissenters were tased — wasn’t an aberration. It’s the new GOP, where violence is celebrated as a tool, not a last resort, and elected officials revel in their own cruelty, brutality, and ability to ignore the needs of their constituents while taking millions from their donors.

She’s the perfect reflection of Trump: His pathological narcissism drives much of his destructive behavior. A man who cannot tolerate criticism, admit fault, or share the spotlight will burn down democracy itself to protect his fragile ego.

When faced with a choice between national interest and personal gratification, Trump invariably chooses the latter. His demand for absolute loyalty — to him personally, not to the nation or the Constitution — reveals a man who sees America not as a nation to serve but as a stage for his own aggrandizement.

There’s also method in Trump’s chaos. By keeping the country in a constant state of outrage and crisis, he prevents organized resistance and meaningful accountability. The chaos isn’t accidental; it’s strategic, designed to exhaust opponents and normalize previously unthinkable behavior. Each new outrage makes the previous one seem quaint by comparison, creating a downward spiral of degraded expectations.

Trump has weaponized division for political gain. He doesn’t simply observe American divisions; he actively creates and exploits them. By turning Americans against each other — urban versus rural, white versus non-white, native-born versus immigrant — he creates tribal loyalties that override ethical concerns or policy considerations. A divided America is easier to manipulate and control than a united one.

What’s most terrifying about this transformation is that Trump has created a blueprint for future authoritarians. He’s shown how to destroy a developed, advanced democracy from within — legally, slowly, under the guise of patriotism.

And the Republican Party? It’s not just following the map. It’s paving the road.

The critical question before us isn’t whether Trump has damaged America. He has. The question is whether that damage is reversible.

— Can we still rebuild?

— Can Republican elders return to principle?

— Can billionaire donors withdraw their support and allow democratic values to reassert themselves?

— Will it take a second Republican Great Depression to shock the party awake?

Americans don’t yet know any of the answers here, but we do know this: inaction is surrender.

Our democratic survival depends on recognizing that Trump is the virus, but the Republican Party is the host. And if we don’t treat the host, the next authoritarian will be worse. Smarter. More effective. More dangerous.

What happened to Kilmar Garcia could happen again. It will happen again, in fact, if we let it. Our democratic immune system — the press, the courts, business and the legal profession, the voters — must fight back. Because we are running out of time.

Rebuilding what they’ve destroyed will require more than simply removing Trump from power; it will demand a fundamental recommitment to democratic values and institutions by the GOP.

Republicans: Wake up!

You are the last firewall. This is your reckoning. Your move.

NOW READ: Farmers in deep-red state spell trouble for Trump as he mocks the Constitution

---

4 25

KASH ARREST JUDGE

4TH DISTR? TRUMP JUDGE ORDER RET OF 2ND CECOT

---

AN 4 25

UNDERWATER ON ECONOMY 1ST X

A 'systemic collapse' in Trump approval shattering 'illusion of invulnerability': analysis

'Trump has been lying': CNN fact-checker busts president’s 'fictions' about economy SAYS MTG W CHINA THEY SAY NO

'Not good for anybody': How Walmart's self-made CEO confronted Trump in White House

---

attack crew irs

---

meme coin spIke up to 2/7b on annouNCement? 25 to dinner at t resort; IT IS NOT EVEN CRYPTO, NO UNDERLYING VALUE MSNBC RUHLE 4 25 25

---

“Trump targets Democratic fundraising platform ActBlue with memorandum,” The Guardian, April 24, 2025

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/24/trump-actblue-memo

---

RWW

04/23/2025

Kyle Mantyla

Khaya Himmelman @ Talking Points Memo: Trump’s DOJ Is Taking Cues From MAGA Influencers And Conspiracy Theorists

President Trump’s nominee for D.C. U.S. Attorney Ed Martin, and Donald Trump’s Department of Justice more broadly, are taking cues from right-wing influencers — allowing some of the loudest media figures on the right to influence significant decisions, including who gets fired from the DOJ and who and what gets investigated.

Media Matters: Cigar company founder Michael Knowles asks Trump for a tariff exemption

Knowles: “Anyone listening right now in the admin, a great little carve out would be for all of the patriotic Americans who have been oppressed for too long, who work in the premium cigar industry, and for all of the premium cigar smokers.”

Alex Griffing @ Mediaite: MAGA Influencer Tells Steve Bannon Trump ‘Will Have No Choice’ But to Suspend Habeas Corpus

Former Trump White House advisor turned podcaster, Steve Bannon, spoke to another MAGA influencer on Tuesday, who argued that President Donald Trump will eventually have to suspend habeas corpus in order to facilitate mass deportations.

Judd Legum @ Popular Information: U.S. citizen wrongly detained by Border Patrol says government account is false

Jose Hermosillo was held in a detention facility for undocumented immigrants for 10 days.

Amanda Lewellyn @ Vox: How Trump is rewriting American history

Yale professor David W. Blight explains why Trump is far from the first to try to rewrite the record.

Steve Benen @ The Maddow Blog: Bondi launches dubious ‘Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias’ in U.S. government

Trump administration officials could be focused on “anti-religion bias” within the government, but they’re instead focused only on “anti-Christian bias.”

---

an 4 25

---

an 4 25

'Pay to play': Trump hammered for 'explicit' attempt to 'profit off the presidency'

Adam Lynch

---

an 4 25

'Game show politics': Trump is now promising voters 'free money' — and it might work

---

an 4 25

In an open letter published Wednesday, amid the Trump administration's unprecedented scrutiny on Big Law, multiple legal groups are calling on elite American law firms to convene and coordinate a unified response to U.S. President Donald Trump's "unconstitutional actions" and "threats to the rule of law and system of justice."

The legal groups include the coalition Lawyers Defending American Democracy (LDAD), the coalition Lawyers Allied Under Rule of Law, and the Steady State—which, according to the executive director of LDAD, "formed in the first Trump term as a loose association that maintained a low internet profile because many members were in government," but has "become much more organized and active" in response to the president's Department of Government Efficiency.

The groups drew a distinction between the several elite law firms who in recent weeks have negotiated deals with the Trump administration either in response to punishments imposed via executive order or to avoid the prospect of an executive order, and law firms who have resisted the Trump administration's pressure.

The law firms Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey have all filed suits challenging Trump's executive orders targeting them. All four have won initial relief in court.

According to the letter, more than 800 other firms, including 17 firms on the Am Law 200—a ranking of top law firms based on gross revenue—have joined amicus briefs in defense of the firms that have sued.

IFrame Content

"Lawyers Defending American Democracy calls on the 170 undeclared Am Law 200 firms to avoid the path of those now notorious nine," the letter states.

"If you are one of these firms, you understand that the threatened executive edicts are not legal or enforceable. Rather, they are a tactic designed to enlist you in undermining the rule of law. Any concession by your prestigious firms only helps the administration intimidate the legal profession from challenging its actions," according to the legal groups.

The letter states that negotiating with the administration is futile in part because "there exists no reasonable terms for resolving this dispute."

The letter also points to the fact that all four courts that have heard the cases from firms challenging Trump "have held that the likelihood of these law firms succeeding on the merits is so great that they have taken the extraordinary step of issuing temporary restraining orders against the government’s enforcement." This is evidence, according to the letter, that negotiation is unnecessary.

"If you band together and agree to support one another, the White House strategy will collapse," the letter states. "These threats reveal the administration's own fear. They don't want you in court where they will lose. They are afraid to find out what happens if you and other firms stand together as a profession."

"We must fight because if lawyers don't stand up for the rule of law, who will? If we don't fight for the principles that we have devoted our professional lives to—and that make us a free society—those principles will be forever compromised," the letter concludes.

According to a statement from LDAD, the legal groups behind the letter collectively represent over 1,000 lawyers who who have worked as senior partners, judges, state attorneys general, senior officials at the U.S. Department of Justice, as general counsel for major companies, and state bar presidents.

---

AN 5 25

The grinding path to justice for the most lethal mass shooter to ever appear in a U.S. courtroom came to an end Monday when Patrick Crusius pleaded guilty to murdering 23 people and wounding 22 others in an anti-Hispanic assault on an El Paso Walmart in 2019.

“The community you tried to break has become a symbol of resilience, of love overcoming hate, of humanity enduring in the face of evil,” 409th District Judge Sam Medrano said to Crusius after sentencing him to 23 life terms in prison. “This community will always remember those whose lives you stole – their names, their stories, their accomplishments. Their light will never fade. While you, your name and your hate, will be forgotten.”

Crusius was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for capital murder, and life in prison for each of 22 counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. The capital murder and aggravated assault sentences will be served concurrently, meaning at the same time.

While the hearing was focused on a horrific hate crime from 5 1⁄2 years ago, both the prosecution and defense spoke of anti-immigrant rhetoric that lit the fuse for Crusius’ explosion and continues to animate political and media conversations.

“While Patrick claimed in his manifesto that his views predated the then-President (Donald Trump) and that political figures were not to blame, he also explicitly stated the attack was a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas, echoing the language used by political figures,” defense attorney Joe Spencer told the court. “Indeed, Patrick believed he was acting in the direction of the president at the time, seeing it as his duty to stop the invasion because that’s what he believed the president was telling him.”

...

---

AN 4 25

After nearly 100 days into President Donald Trump's second term, New Republic editor Michael Tomasky is wondering who were the "gullible" people buying the lies before November.

“How many times did Trump say he’d end [the Ukraine] war on the first day of his presidency?" Tomasky asks. "It had to have been hundreds. I saw a lot of those clips on cable news over the weekend …. He did not mean it figuratively. You know, in the way people will say, ‘I’ll change that from day one,’ and you know they don’t literally mean day one, but they do mean fast. But that isn’t what Trump said. He meant it literally. He used the phrase“ in 24 hours” many, many times. So, I ask you: Who really believed that?”

Tomasky said the same question can be made of Trump’s “truly unbelievable” claims with tariffs. Tariff is “the most beautiful word in the dictionary,” Trump said, boasting that they would "fix everything."

ALSO READ:'Totally unacceptable': GOP congressman breaks ranks to publicly demand Trump fire Hegseth

“Well … it’s not as if there weren’t hundreds of economists and others pointing out how much smoke he was blowing,” Tomasky writes. “Experts predicted exactly what has unfolded: that he’d start a trade war, which would roil the markets and result in higher prices, and that the rest of the world would stop trusting us. Who’s looking more right today, Trump or the experts?”

IFrame Content

“Again: Who on earth believed his nonsense?” writes Tomasky, adding that Trump is the "biggest liar in the history of American politics," who “will say anything to anyone at any time with utterly no thought of consequences or ever being held accountable. When the moment of accountability comes, he just tells another lie. … When he was just a sleazy real estate grifter, this was merely annoying. But now that he’s the president, and he has an army of propagandists behind him insisting that he is American history’s great truth-teller, it’s sick and it’s dangerous.”

The New Republic writer had no hard answer to explain the motivation of voters who bought the “ridiculous and obvious lies …" that he’d bring peace to Ukraine in one day, [or] that his tariffs would produce economic nirvana.

“Anyone who couldn’t see that was either brainwashed by right-wing media and social media or—well, or what? It’s hard to say. Maybe those people’s instinct is to hate liberals. Maybe they believed all that ‘he’s a businessman’ crap. Maybe they just didn’t want a woman in the White House,” Tomasky said. “Whatever the case, they’re poor judges of character, and we—and this is a ‘we’ that includes them—are about to pay a high price for their bamboozlement.

ALSO READ:'He must resign in disgrace': Hegseth on the ropes after second war plans chat exposed

Read the full post at The New Republic at this link.

---

4 25

The Trump administration has found itself embroiled in a number of scandals, which critics say are affecting governance as well as the United States' relations with its key allies.

But CNN's Stephen Collinson wrote in an article published on Wednesday that even the chaos currently at display will not stop some supporters of President Donald Trump for backing him. Collinson argued that his supporters don't judge the president's performance by a traditional yardstick.

He said despite America’s reputation abroad being impacted by Trump’s dismantling of USAID, his stance on the Russia-Ukraine crisis and abandonment of Africa, Trump and his supporters are not concerned about their allies. "He’d rather be feared than liked," Collinson wrote.

"By conventional measures, Donald Trump’s second presidency is already descending into disarray amid a legal morass, self-inflicted errors, and a vast gap between its massive ambition and its capacity to enact that vision," said Collinson, who covers the White House for CNN.

ALSO READ:Incompetence and chaos as Trump 2.0 crashes and burns

IFrame Content

"Yet Trump’s tens of millions of supporters didn’t send a conventional president back to the White House – and don’t judge their hero’s performance by traditional yardsticks."

The writer noted that several crises on multiple fronts indicate a potentially failed administration, but this chaos means he is succeeding. "But as Trump attempts to destroy governing structures at home and abroad, chaos is itself a marker of success," Collinson wrote.

"A sense of disorder is mounting," Collinson added, pointing to the "backbiting and organizational chaos at the Pentagon" following the controversy surrounding Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who shared sensitive information about military strikes in Yemen on two Signal chats.

"Trump’s belief in almost absolute presidential power horrifies his critics. But millions of Americans voted for this. He made no secret on the campaign trail of his intention to weaponize presidential power and the Justice Department to pursue his enemies," the reporter said.

ALSO READ:'Need for chaos' powers Trump voters support for destroying government: psychologists

Collinson added that Trump enjoys this confrontation.

"But the White House loves the fight. It’s failed to prove Abrego Garcia is a terrorist and a gang member. But White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stoked the fire again on Tuesday. 'We were always right. The president was always on the right side of this issue to deport this illegal criminal from our community.' When Trump said last week that he’d like to deport US citizen criminals to El Salvador, he knew his audience," the article notes.

"And on this immigration issue, he has some genuine results to show for his efforts. Border crossings are down significantly compared with the days of the Biden administration."

This contentious presidency, argues Collinson, may appear to be a significant failure to one half of the nation, but the other half sees it as a remarkable success.

ALSO READ: Alarm sounded as 4,100 factory workers laid off amid Trump policy chaos

---

rww

04/18/2025

Kyle Mantyla

Elizabeth Dias and Ruth Graham @ The New York Times: White House of Worship: Trump Elevates Christian Prayer and Power

Evangelical leaders are relishing the new atmosphere at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue — and greater access to the president.

Angry White Men: Stew Peters: America Has A ‘Black Problem’

On The Stew Peters Show, Holocaust denier and Nazi sympathizer Stew Peters dedicated yet another segment to the killing of Austin Metcalf. In it, Peters claimed that America has a “Black problem,” and called for a “national conversation about the problem that we have with Blacks.”

Media Matters: Kevin Roberts tells Mark Levin that Heritage has started planning Project 2029

"I can tell you on behalf of all of my colleagues at Heritage, we're extraordinarily proud of our work, and I will also tell you, Mark, we're already starting Project 2029 because we are not tired of winning."

Steve Benen @ The Maddow Blog: Trump allies pitch an alternate reality in which his approval rating is ‘soaring’

Confronted with evidence that the president’s support is falling, Trump’s allies have some options. They’ve chosen the worst one.

David Badash @ The New Civil Rights Movement: Trump’s Latest Target: The Watchdog That Keeps Suing Him

From the outset of his 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump signaled that a central focus of his presidency would be targeting and exacting retribution against his critics.

ref

From the outset of his 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump signaled that a central focus of his presidency would be targeting and exacting retribution against his critics.

“In 2016, I declared, ‘I am your voice,’” Trump told attendees at CPAC, the Conservative Political Action Conference in March 2023. “Today, I add: I am your warrior. I am your justice. And for those who have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution.”

In keeping his retribution vow, Trump in just three months—often with the use of the power of his executive orders—has targeted for retribution numerous top law firms, revoked the security clearances of dozens of top national security experts, former government officials, and former political opponents. He has targeted top universities, threaten to defund millions of dollars or more in critical research grants, and declared top news outlets CNN and MSNBC “corrupt” and “illegal.”

Just days after the 2024 election, NPR reported that during the campaign, “Trump made more than 100 threats to investigate, prosecute, imprison or otherwise punish his perceived enemies, including political opponents and private citizens.”

READ MORE: ‘Things Like This Take Place’: Trump Shrugs Off Mass Shooting Despite Once Being a Target

On Thursday, Trump threatened to go after one of his top legal critics: CREW, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a nonprofit legal and ethics watchdog that has been working for years to hold him (and others) to account, often by suing.

Asked by a reporter what group he would like to see have their tax exempt status removed, Trump replied, “Well, we’ll be making some statements, but it’s a big deal.”

“They’re so rich and so strong, and then they go so bad, they’ve earned so much by being a member of this country, you know, a member of this group, this beautiful group of people in this country, and then they go and they abuse their power like that,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office Thursday afternoon. “I think it’s, you know, I think it’s very sad.”

“I have a group named CREW,” he continued. “CREW. You ever hear of it? I think it’s CREW, and they have a guy that heads CREW. It’s supposed to be a charitable organization. The only charity they had is going after Donald Trump. So we’re looking at that.”

“We’re looking at a lot of things, but if you take a look at CREW, what they’ve done, and I think it was a very big abuse, but we’re going to be finding out pretty soon.”

During Trump’s first and second terms, CREW sued Trump or his administration for alleged emoluments clause violations, alleged Presidential Records Act noncompliance, and challenged some of his executive orders. It also represented voters in a lawsuit attempting to use the 14th Amendment to remove him from the ballot, claiming his role in the January 6, 2021 insurrection was constitutionally disqualifying.

READ MORE: ‘Full Time Babysitter’: Treasury Secretary Urges Caution After Trump Fed Chair Threat

In January, CREW was part of a lawsuit suing to “block Trump’s illegal plan to fire government workers,” and in February, CREW sued the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) “to compel transparency.”

CREW, in a statement to NCRM, vowed to continue its work.

“For more than 20 years, CREW has exposed government corruption from politicians of both parties who violate the public trust and has worked to promote an ethical, transparent government,” CREW Vice President of Communications Jordan Libowitz said. “Good governance groups are the heart of a healthy democracy. We will continue to do our work to ensure Americans have an ethical and accountable government.”

Legal experts are blasting Trump’s threat.

“It is literally a federal crime punishable by up to five years in prison for the President, VP, or any senior White House employee, to ‘request, directly or indirectly, any officer or employee of the IRS to conduct … an audit or other investigation of any particular taxpayer,'” wrote attorney Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council.

“The Trump administration has gone after law firms, they’ve gone after universities, and they’re now going after civil society, including groups like @CREWcrew. They want to silence any opposition to their extreme agenda,” added the National Women’s Law Center.

“President Trump is now threatening to weaponize the IRS against nonprofit organizations like @CREWcrew,” wrote Public Citizen. “He is attacking our most basic right: to say what we believe without fear of government prosecution. We proudly stand in solidarity with our friends at CREW.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

---

mma In response to Trump saying he doesn't know what the Congo is, Newsmax's Greg Kelly says “nobody knows what all these countries are”

04/18/25

:{:{---}:

---

an 4 25

wholesale dn a bit but retail still record high?

Trump doubles down calling egg prices 'too low' as cost hits 'highest price ever recorded'

---

an 4 25

These MAGA voters are willing to 'suffer' — if Trump is 'hurting' others even more: analysis

===

4 25 an eliz warren says firing wd tank economy

Trump’s pre-dawn post shook investors’ confidence on Thursday, as he railed against the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, and called for his “termination.” Hours later, the White House insisted the President was not suggesting he would be firing Jerome Powell, whom he installed during his first term, but the Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent reportedly is urging caution.

Pointing to news about the European Central Bank, Trump at 6:12 AM exploded:

“The ECB is expected to cut interest rates for the 7th time, and yet, ‘Too Late’ Jerome Powell of the Fed, who is always TOO LATE AND WRONG, yesterday issued a report which was another, and typical, complete ‘mess!'” Trump exclaimed.

“Oil prices are down, groceries (even eggs!) are down, and the USA is getting RICH ON TARIFFS,” he insisted, although some consumers may disagree. “Too Late should have lowered Interest Rates, like the ECB, long ago, but he should certainly lower them now.”

“Powell’s termination cannot come fast enough!” Trump concluded.

IFrame Content

READ MORE: ‘Stunning Admission’: GOP Senator Says Colleagues ‘Are All Afraid’ of ‘Retaliation’

The White House quickly jumped in.

“A White House official tells me today this post should not be seen as a threat to fire Powell,” reported CNBC’s Megan Cassella. “It’s more of an airing, or re-airing, of grievances and frustrations with the central bank chair. And the President is looking forward to the scheduled end of Powell’s term.”

Reuters reported that Christopher Hodge, Chief US Economist for Natixis, said: “So previously I thought the odds were very much against Trump trying to remove Powell, but my confidence has faded. Trump seems more comfortable than expected with a slowing economy and equity volatility and the tariff policies are much more onerous than anticipated, even if they have been walked back a bit. The bottom line is the parameters of potential policy outcomes has widened and while I still think Powell will be retained until his term ends, I am less certain that I was previously.”

Journalist and author Charles Fishman called Trump’s post, “a frontal attack on Jay Powell, chairman of the Federal Reserve, whose independence is enshrined in law—and who is one of the few forces holding the US economy together in the face of White House tariff chaos.”

“Trump can’t fire Powell. But is shouting like he might try,” Fishman writes.

Trump may try, but some say he may need help from the U.S. Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, barely two weeks ago, reports stated Bessent was thinking of quitting.

“Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent may be planning to cut and run after Donald Trump’s disastrous ‘reciprocal tariff’ announcement earlier this week,” The New Republic reported. “During an appearance on MSNBC’s Morning Joe Friday, contributor Stephanie Ruhle reported that the key Cabinet member is already looking for an escape hatch.”

“My sources say that Scott Bessent is kind of the odd man out here and, in the inner circle that Trump has, he’s not even close to Scott Bessent or listening to him,” Ruhle said, TNR reported. “Some have said to me, he’s looking for an exit door to try to get himself to the Fed, because in the last few days he’s really hurting his own credibility and history in the markets.”

Last week, things apparently got more heated.

READ MORE: ‘Strategically Disastrous’: How JD Vance Is Harming America’s Foreign Relations

“Wall Street prizes stability, which is why Trump’s shambolic tariff rollout has wiped out trillions of dollars of market value,” Vanity Fair reported last week. “Executives say the on-again, off-again tariffs are evidence of a civil war engulfing Trump’s economic policy team. According to sources close to the White House, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick have been at odds over a tariff plan, with Bessent urging discipline and Lutnick encouraging Trump to go big. ‘The real war is between Howard and Scott,’ one of the sources said.”

And now, Bessent reportedly is urging caution on firing Powell.

According to a Politico report on Thursday, Bessent “has repeatedly cautioned White House officials that any attempt to fire Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell would risk destabilizing financial markets, according to two people close to the White House granted anonymity to share details of private discussions.”

Adding some insight, Politico notes that “Bessent’s private message reinforces what President Donald Trump already knows but comes as the president’s anger with the Fed chair is growing because Powell hasn’t shown signs that he will cut interest rates soon. It also comes against the backdrop of widespread market turmoil over the administration’s far-reaching trade war.”

Not only has Powell not cut interest rates — which he historically has been very caution on doing — but CNN Business reported Thursday afternoon that mortgage rates just saw “the largest one-week jump” min over a year, and are have now climbed to the “highest level in two months as Trump’s tariffs continue to rock markets.”

Responding to Politico’s report, hedge fund founder and chief investment officer Spencer Hakimian writes, “Bessent hating his new job of being a full time babysitter. Just cleaning up Trump, Lutnick, Navarro, etc. diaper all day long.”

READ MORE: ‘Willful Disregard’: Judge Finds ‘Probable Cause’ to Hold Trump Admin in Criminal Contempt

---

4 18? djt shuck jive do not know much about it, the lawyers are looking at it?

bukele sipping margaritas in trop paradise

CI said in gang but judge ruled he cd not be sent to el salv bc of threat?

trump admin laugh when cool dic said he could not smuggle him back

no one in room asked to return him, rubio, jdv, bondi

next US citizens rendered

an 4 25

Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) has requested a meeting with El Salvador President Nayib Bukele during his current visit to the United States to discuss the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who was wrongly deported to an infamous Salvador prison due to an "administrative error" by the Trump administration.

In a letter to the Salvadoran ambassador to the U.S. Milena Mayorga written Monday, Hollen said U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Abrego Garcia was wrongly deported to a prison in El Salvador.

"I have met with Mr. Abrego Garcia’s wife, mother and brother and, as you can imagine, they are extremely worried about his health, safety, and continued illegal confinement, as am I," he wrote in the letter.

ALSO READ:'Dystopian': Miller makes 'outrageous' claim as El Salvador refuses to return US resident

"I look forward to your response," the Maryland Democrat told the envoy.

IFrame Content

During a press conference alongside Bukele in the Oval Office on Monday, Trump claimed that the Supreme Court had ruled 9–0 in his favor and that the ruling in the case meant that the U.S. government would have to provide a plane only if the Salvadoran president chose to return Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man wrongfully deported to an infamous Salvadoran prison.

“Of course I’m not going to do it,” Bukele said when asked by reporters if he would help return the man, adding that returning him would be akin to smuggling “a terrorist into the United States.”

In a statement sharing the letter, the Senator said, “If Kilmar is not home by midweek — I plan to travel to El Salvador this week to check on his condition and discuss his release."

ALSO READ:'Clear choice': Experts say Trump 'openly defying' Supreme Court may

Democratic strategists and commentators are calling on other Democratic lawmakers to follow in Sen. Van Hollen's footsteps and call for Abrego Garcia's return.

"What’s happening to him is wrong, and we need Dems to draw attention to it," Democratic strategist Mike Nellis wrote on the social platform X.

Academic Keith Orejel, while sharing the letter on X, said, "Make Chris Van Hollen minority leader. Oust Schumer and all the other spineless collaborationists who have said next to nothing about this issue."

ALSO READ:'Waiting for Vance to smash through the door': Trump officials give Bukele a pass on Oval Office garb

---

an 4 25

Vice President JD Vance found himself in yet another argument on the social platform X, this time with renowned musician Mikel Jollett, over the Supreme Court ruling that ordered the administration to bring back a Maryland man who was wrongfully deported to a prison in El Salvador.

"The entire American media and left wing industrial complex has decided the most important issue today is that the Trump admin deported an MS-13 gang member (and illegal alien)," Vance wrote on X on Tuesday, sharing a video from the Oval Office that showed the Trump team aggressively responding to CNN reporter Kaitlan Collins' question about the deported man, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia.

In response to the vice president's post, Jollett wrote, "No, the most important issue is that the Supreme Court ruled by a 9-0 decision that you must return him."

ALSO READ:'Dystopian': Miller makes 'outrageous' claim as El Salvador refuses to return US resident

"Trump is not a dictator or a king. He's a president and a president must follow the Supreme Court's ruling. If he does not, he must be removed from power. It's that simple," Jollett added.

IFrame Content

Replying to Jollett, Vance said, "Are you proposing that we invade El Salvador to retrieve a gang member with no legal right to be in our country? Where in the Supreme Court’s decision does it require us to do that?"

Jollett pressed the vice president further, saying, "The ruling clearly states that you are required to take steps to facilitate his return and update the court on your progress. You have plenty of tools at your disposal to do this without invading El Salvador."

ALSO READ:Ex-Blackwater CEO’s new pitch for Trump 'could be a precursor to deporting US citizens'

"You, of course, KNOW THIS because you are a Yale-educated lawyer. You're pretending NOT TO KNOW IT and playing dumb publicly. Our entire system rests on checks and balances and you just got checked by the Supreme Court in a 9-0 ruling," he added.

"Are you saying Trump is too weak to simply ask Bukele to return him?" the musician asked.

Some political commentators on X agreed with Jollett's view that the vice president is simply pretending not to know what the Court ruling says.

"Intentionally obtuse. JD Vance thinks you’re too stupid to understand the facts. - he’s not a gang member - they’ve been ordered to facilitate his return - Bukele has already returned a dozen migrants - all they have to do is ask for him to be released and put him on a plane," wroteDemocratic strategist Sawyer Hackett.

ALSO READ:'Clear choice': Experts say Trump 'openly defying' Supreme Court may doom future elections

---

wh visit an 4 25

Backing up the Trump administration, the President of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, says he has no intention or ability to return an unlawfully removed Maryland legal resident, Kilmar Abrego García, to the United States. Abrego García was wrongly deported to a notorious maximum security “mega-prison” for terrorists in El Salvador.

“How can I return him to the United States?” President Bukele said to reporters on Monday, during a meeting with President Donald Trump and his top officials in the Oval Office, as reported by The Washington Post. “I smuggle him into the United States? Of course I’m not going to do it.”

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court in an apparent unanimous opinion ordered the Trump administration to “facilitate” the return of Abrego García to the United States.

Minutes before President Bukele’s remarks, White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller, on-camera in the Oval Office, delivered what is being called an “outrageous misinterpretation” of the Supreme Court’s opinion, which was quickly condemned.

READ MORE: Trump Rages Against Critics, All But Silent on Alleged Terror Attack on Dem Governor

IFrame Content

“I promise you, if he was your neighbor, you would move right away,” Miller, who was the architect of the first Trump administration’s child separation policy, told reporters.

“What was the ruling in the Supreme Court, Steve, was it nine to nothing?” President Trump interjected.

“Yes, it was a 9-0, in our favor,” Miller wrongly claimed. “against the district court ruling, saying that no district court has the power to compel the foreign policy function of the United States.”

“As Pam said,” Miller continued, referring to Attorney General Pam Bondi, “the ruling solely stated that if this individual—at El Salvador’s sole discretion—was sent back to our country, that we could deport him a second time.”

“No version of this legally ends up with him ever living here, because he is a citizen of El Salvador,” Miller claimed, before pointing reporters to Bukele.

“That is the president of El Salvador. Your questions about it per the court can only be directed to him,” said Miller.

Attorney Michael Kasdan responded to Miller’s remarks: “We have reached the point where the White House openly lies on television about what a unanimous Supreme Court ruling against them says. The stuff of dystopian novels.”

“This is a blatant lie. The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 AGAINST Trump,” wrote the progressive nonprofit People For the American Way.

READ MORE: ‘Apocalyptic’: Trump Plan Would Be ‘Science Demolition Derby’ Experts Warn

“This is deeply Orwellian. The Court ruled against the Trump administration 9-0,” observed the MeidasTouch Network.

Conservative legal activist and political commentator Ed Whelan, who clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, weighed in.

“Outrageous misrepresentation of Supreme Court ruling,” Whelan declared, serving up a somewhat technical legal analysis. “The unanimous Court ruled that the district-court order ‘properly requires the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.’ Yes, the Court also stated that the “intended scope of the term ‘effectuate’ in the District Court’s order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority,” and it told the district court to ‘clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.’ But: (1) ‘due regard’ doesn’t mean that the district court couldn’t give any teeth to ‘effectuate’; (2) in any event, the district court dropped ‘effectuate’ from its revised order, so this is all irrelevant. Duty to ‘facilitate’ continues.”

Commenting on the video, immigration attorney Allen Orr Jr. Esq. wrote: “When you tell yourself the story you want to believe even when it is fiction.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

---

an 4 25

President Donald Trump's misrepresentation of the Supreme Court ruling on Kilmar Abrego Garcia — falsely claiming that the court ruled 9-0 in the administration's favor — has raised concerns among some analysts, who are calling it a "constitutional crisis."

During a press conference alongside El Salvador President Nayib Bukele in the Oval Office on Monday, Trump claimed that the Supreme Court had ruled 9–0 in his favor and that the ruling in the case meant that the U.S. government would have to provide a plane only if the Salvadoran president chose to return Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man wrongfully deported to an infamous Salvadoran prison.

ALSO READ:'I’m not asking for state secrets': Judge gives Trump ultimatum on wrongfully deported man

According to some political commentators, the president is openly defying the judiciary and some have warned that this development poses a risk to the credibility of the 2026 midterm elections.

IFrame Content

David Frum, a writer at The Atlantic said in a post on the social platform X: "Trump defying a 9-0 Supreme Court decision is the reason I say 'if we still have free and fair elections in the United States' when I talk about 2026 midterms."

Editor in chief MeidasTouch Ron Filpkowski saidthis was "another court order that Trump is now openly defying."

"Republicans in Congress assured us repeatedly that Trump would never defy a court order. It is obvious that he simply doesn’t care though after the Supreme Court gave him immunity," he added.

ALSO READ:Supreme Court unanimously rules against Trump in case of wrongfully deported man

Author Hold Meyerson wrote in an article for the American Prospect that Garcia's case is "the first that presents Trump with the clear choice of obeying a Supreme Court order or flouting it."

"So far he's opting for the latter, bolstered by the administration's most powerful adviser," Meyerson added.

Democratic strategist Mike Nellis said he doesn't use that term lightly, "but Trump outright refusing the Supreme Court’s order to bring Kilmar Abrego Garcia is an actual constitutional crisis."

Political activist Don Winslow wrote, BREAKING RIGHT NOW! THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BRING ABREGO GARCIA HOME. This is Donald Trump defying the SupremeCourt."

ALSO READ:'Vance is lying': VP blasted for 'arguing with people on social media' to defend 'administrative error'

---

mojo

The Real Reason El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele Cozied Up to Trump

Reveal

US and El Salvador Celebrate Their Refusal to Return Man Wrongly Deported to “Gulag”

Noah Lanard and Isabela Dias

---

an 4 25

Many of President Donald Trump's, from Fox News to Newsmax TV and One America News (OAN), are echoing his claim that Americans can expect "the biggest tax cut in history" during his second term. But Trump's detractors are countering that his economic plan will mainly benefit the richest of the rich — while causing considerable hardship to the middle class and the poor.

Some economists, in fact, are even worried that Trump's tariffs will cause "stagflation," a painful combination of inflation, unemployment and poor economic growth. Stagflation played a major role in President Jimmy Carter's landslide defeat in 1980 and persisted during President Ronald Reagan's first few years in office.

In an article published on April 12, Salon's Russell Payne offers some reasons why Trump's critics are worried about what lies ahead for the middle class and the poor.

READ MORE: 'Nothing to worry about': Brutal Fox News parody 'Foxsplains' Trump tariffs

One of those critics is Elizabeth Pancotti, managing director for the Groundwork Collective and a former adviser to progressive Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont).

IFrame Content

Pancotti described the Trump/GOP economic plan as a "triple whammy of massive redistribution in a society that is already tilted toward the wealthy," telling Salon, "The end goal here is to redistribute trillions of dollars from the middle and working class at the bottom to the one percent and the wealthy folks. They're doing that in three different ways."

According to Pancotti, those three different ways are tariffs, tax cuts from the ultra-wealth, and major cuts to safety-net programs like Medicaid.

Payne explains, "Tariffs, Pancotti said, are a regressive tax that disproportionately impacts lower earners because, in essence, a tariff is a sales tax on imported goods. Because lower-income Americans spend a larger proportion of their income on goods, they will also spend a larger proportion of their income paying the tariffs on affected goods. At the same time, Pacotti said, the Trump tax cuts, which Republicans were planning to extend, were skewed to benefit the wealthiest Americans…. The Yale Budget Lab estimated that Trump's tariff plan will likely cost the average American household around $4689 a year — a sum that eclipses the tax cut that most households received in the GOP's budget plan while only being about 8 percent of the average tax cut the wealthiest households received"

READ MORE:'The Southern border is under attack': Trump orders US military to take over strip of land

According to Dean Baker, an economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, cuts to Internal Revenue Service (IRS) staff will make it easier for the ultra-rich to dodge taxes.

Baker told Salon, "Most of us have our tax deducted from our wages. We don't have much choice in the matter. So you both have, you know, the legislative changes that reduce their tax liability, but also, you know the fact of change is that if you don't have much by way of enforcement, you have a lot of people that don't pay their taxes."

---

militaritization state of emerg

The Southern border is under attack': Trump orders US military to take over strip of land

troops to border 4 25 an

---

an 4 25

The Wall Street Journal announced a twist in President Donald Trump’s purported crusade against the weaponization of the justice system: He’s now targeting his own former aides.

Trump — the nation’s first president to be elected after having been convicted of felonies — campaigned on ending the “weaponization” of the federal government, but the WSJ reports he is now “siccing it” on two of his perceived enemies, ordering federal investigations and possible prosecutions.

The editorial board calls this “a broken promise, an abuse of power, and another twist down the spiral of politicized law enforcement.”

READ MORE: ‘Beyond Contemptuous’: DOJ Slammed for ‘Sheer Indignation’ in Defying Judge

On Wednesday, Trump directed allegedly independent federal agencies to open inquiries into two former officials who worked in his first term. The paper notes how Trump made a point of “picking targets first, publicly announcing them, and only then looking for misdeeds and evidence.”

IFrame Content

“Mr. Trump,” the board said, “is doing precisely what Democrats did to him.”

Trump’s first “target” is Chris Krebs, who led the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) until two weeks after the 2020 election when Trump fired him for dispelling Trump’s bogus claims of voter fraud.

The other, Homeland Security chief of staff Miles Taylor, allegedly “stoked dissension by manufacturing sensationalist reports on the existence of a supposed ‘resistance’ within the Federal Government.” Trump has ordered “review” of Taylor’s “activities” and “conduct,” with recommendations for “remedial” action, but opined: “I think he’s guilty of treason, if you want to know the truth.”

---

an 4 25

Critics of President Donald Trump often describe the MAGA movement as a "cult," arguing that Trump supporters behave like cult members when they express their relentless devotion to him and explode in anger at even subtle criticism.

But Salon's Amanda Marcotte takes the MAGA/cult analogy a step further in an article published on April 10, comparing the GOP of 2025 to a suicide cult in which Republicans avoid criticism of Trump no matter how bad his "idiocy" becomes.

"History's most famous cults are known primarily for their final suicidal acts: the mass poisoning at Jonestown, the self-immolation of the Branch Davidians, the self-asphyxiations of Heaven's Gate," Marcotte explains. "We know these things happen, but it's still a mystery to most of us how cult members get to this point. Why didn't they hit the eject button sooner, as their leader descended further into his incoherent megalomania? Why did they stick by him, even as it became increasingly clear he was putting the whole community on a pathway to self-destruction? Why didn't more people voice doubts or even confront the cult leader before things got this bad?"

READ MORE:'Compete mess': Trump slammed as Wall St. CEO says policies will 'probably' cause recession

Marcotte continues, "We're getting a compelling illustration on the national stage of how a cult leader can induce his followers to stick by him, even as he loses his mind and his behavior becomes too erratic and dangerous to defend. Almost every Republican on Capitol Hill knows that Donald Trump's tariff plan is political suicide, but few are willing to admit that Dear Leader fully intends to see this idiocy to the very end. Instead, most resemble the residents of Jonestown, many who hoped Jim Jones was testing their faith with all this poison-Kool-Aid talk, which allowed them to play along until it was too late to save themselves."

IFrame Content

Some right-wing conservatives and libertarians aren't shy about offering scathing condemnation of Trump's policies, from tariffs to his obsession with the U.S. acquiring Greenland. But those on the right who bash Trump frequently are likely to be MSNBC or CNN pundits or writers for The Bulwark — and they have long since been banished from Fox News, Fox Business and the Republican National Committee (RNC).

Nonetheless, Marcotte notes that there is a caveat with Trump's "Jim Jones fantasies": Some of his supporters are expressing their frustration with tariffs, including GOP Senators Ted Cruz of Texas and John Kennedy of Louisiana — albeit in a "passive" way. And Republicans in Congress, according to Marcotte, have a "collective action problem" when it comes to Trump policies that trouble them.

"Few are willing to be the one seen questioning the infinite wisdom of Dear Leader, lest they draw his ire and be singled out for punishment," Marcotte observes. "Instead, they resort to passive language, in hopes they can convey their concerns without daring to question whether the MAGA prophet is not the wisest man who ever lived…. What ties all this together is a fear of criticizing Trump directly, and instead hoping that all this gentle hand-holding and blame-shifting will give their leader the space he needs to stop the madness."

READ MORE:Donald Trump has an addiction: WSJ

---

an 4 25

President Donald Trump's decision last week to impose sweeping global tariffs, despite warnings from economic experts against the move, and then to suddenly "pause" most of these tariffs on Wednesday, has been met with sharp rebuke from political commentators.

In a Wall Street Journal articlepublished Wednesday, conservative commentator Mark Helprin accused the Trump administration of being "too addicted to shock, awe and intimidation to see the harm it is doing to itself."

"In his attempt to break the excesses of the administrative state, Mr. Trump’s every action can be countermanded. More consequentially, given that the seat and beneficiary of the administrative state is the executive, once the wheel turns and a Democratic administration effortlessly reverses his flurry of executive orders, augmented executive power insulated from judicial restraint will resurrect and supercharge the permanent bureaucracy," Helprin wrote.

ALSO READ:This chart explains why Trump flip-flopped on tariffs

"Thus, unbeknownst to him, Mr. Trump is building, as he might say, an “incredibly beautiful” fortress—across the battlements of which Elizabeth Warren may someday stride," he added.

IFrame Content

The columnist noted that the administration's initiatives in various areas jeopardize its true achievements. "Its delight in shock and awe feeds upon itself in complete disregard of history and without projecting forward in view of the relative powers it seeks to marshal against those of the world, the laws of economics, and the very weight of reality, all of which it seems to imagine it is somehow able to intimidate," he said.

"Although Congress planted the administrative state within the executive and only Congress can extirpate it, nonetheless Elon Musk has been set loose to move fast and break it," the commentator wrote.

"The fact that payroll, for example, represents only 5% of federal expenditures makes many of his targets look more like the cape than the bullfighter. Rather than savings quietly accomplished by attrition and carefully deliberated reductions, a lot of political capital is evaporating in exchange for frissons and provocations," he said.

ALSO READ:The suffering of white Trump voters isn't going to change a thing

Helprin went on to say that "the things that are broken belong to the American people, not to Messrs."

He said Trump and Musk's "defiant enjoyment of being bad boys is unseemly and undignified."

"The Republican Party, or what is left of it, will suffer for years to come as a result of the gross overestimation of impermanent political advantage," he added.

ALSO READ:Potential 'knives out' for MAGA Republicans following Trump’s trade war implosion

---

an 4 25

The Trump administration has reportedly limited the number of individuals who can access President Donald Trump’s confidential daily intelligence briefing.

CNN reportedThursday that officials within the administration intended from the beginning of Trump's second term to reduce access to the President's Daily Brief (PDB) partly due to instances during his first term when information from the report was leaked to the media. This fueled Trump's belief that the intelligence community was working against him.

CNN quoted sources as saying it was initially White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles who was deciding who had access. Burt now, Director of National Security Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard handles access to the president.

ALSO READ:'Putin is giddy': NSA knew Signal was vulnerable to Russian hackers before security breach

Since being elected in 2016, Trump has held a significant distrust of the intelligence community. In his second term, the president has appointed individuals who openly align with his skepticism.

IFrame Content

"Trump, since he was first elected in 2016, has harbored a deep mistrust of the intelligence community, and in his second administration he has appointed officials who openly share his suspicions," CNN reports.

"Current and former officials say the move to limit access to the PDB comes against the backdrop of the president and his top officials’ determination to quash leaks and bring to heel what they see as subversive elements within the intelligence community — highlighting what one US official described as 'ongoing large distrust issues.'"

Ahead of the 2024 election, Trump declined to receive intelligence briefings that are typically provided to major party candidates, partially due to leaks of the PDB content during his first term, as noted by a source CNN quoted.

The administration appears to be motivated by that belief in overseeing the intelligence community, as it has taken strong measures to restrict access to information regarding intelligence and policy discussions. This access is being granted only to a select group of officials considered sufficiently loyal to the MAGA agenda.

ALSO READ:Passwords, contact info for top Trump NatSec officials 'publicly' available: report

"Gabbard in particular has vowed publicly to 'aggressively [pursue] recent leakers' and 'clean house.' She told lawmakers during her confirmation hearing that she 'will welcome dissenting voices to be able to make sure that [the PDB] is thoroughly vetted prior to presenting it and make sure that the truth is reported whether that truth is convenient or not'," the CNN report notes.

ALSO READ:Trump fires 3 officials for 'disloyalty' after meeting with conspiracy theorist

---

an 4 25 the conv

Trump, met with far-right activist Laura Loomer in the Oval Office last week. Loomer is a figure so extreme that she is shunned by many, even in Trump’s “make America great again” (Maga) movement.

Hours after their meeting, Trump fired a string of national security officials, including General Timothy D. Haugh, the head of the National Security Agency and US Cyber Command, apparently at Loomer’s request. Trump has said Loomer was not involved in the firings, but also praised her judgment.

Even for a president who has always listened to – and, indeed, echoed – fringe voices, the incident stood out. It served as a reminder that Trump is less constrained than ever before, and that his White House is responsive to his personal whims rather than any deliberative policy-making process.

Gone are the days of Trump’s first administration, when aides would at least try to block the most extreme conspiracy theorists from having access to the president. Now, apparently, even a four-star general (the highest officer rank) like Haugh serves only at the pleasure of figures such as Loomer.

So, who exactly is Loomer? She is, first and foremost, a media influencer – someone who made her name in far-right circles by spreading hate and conspiracy theories.

She calls herself a “proud Islamophobe” and “pro-white nationalism”. She has endorsed claims that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were an “inside job”, alleged that the “deep state” manipulates the weather to influence elections, and spread conspiracy theories implying that the FBI let school shootings happen in election years to help the Democrats push gun control.

Loomer’s claims, and her open racism, have sometimes proven too much even for other prominent Maga figures, who prefer to be slightly more subtle in their messaging.

When Loomer said in 2024 that if Kamala Harris won the election, the White House “will smell like curry” and speeches will be “facilitated via a call centre,” she drew push-back from the now vice-president, J.D. Vance, and far-right congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene.

But Trump seems to have appreciated Loomer’s commentary all the same. The president has repeatedly praised her in public and backed her unsuccessful run as a Republican candidate for a US House of Representatives seat in Florida in 2020.

Like many other Maga media figures, Loomer has realised that her antics give her direct exposure to a television-obsessed president, and that this exposure can be transformed into access and, ultimately, political power.

Loomer, who is only 31, is entirely a product of the Trump era. As an adult, practically the only conservatism she has known is the conservatism of Maga – openly prejudiced, vindictive, and more a stew of grievance and hatred than a coherent political platform.

Insofar as Loomer advocates for particular policies, they are a crude channeling of these impulses. She has campaigned for a ten-year immigration moratorium and has called for the death penalty for Democrats who oppose Trump.

On a podcast in June 2024 about whether Democrats should be prosecuted and jailed if Trump wins the election over alleged “unscrupulous behaviour,” Loomer said: “Not just jailed, they should get the death penalty. You know, we actually used to have the punishment for treason in this country.”

But the chief way in which Loomer personifies modern American conservatism is her single-minded loyalty to the president. Loyalty to Trump, and fury at the disloyalty of others, is the central component of her identity.

Deep loyalty

This loyalty seems to be both a deeply felt emotion and also a shrewd way of recommending herself to the president. And, more than anything else, it was what landed her in the Oval Office last week.

Loomer’s apparent recommendation that Trump fire a slew of national security officials had its roots in this obsession with loyalty. Many people serving in national security positions in the Trump administration are not card-carrying members of the Maga movement.

This reflects the fact that such positions require deep expertise developed over long apolitical careers in the civil service or military. As the product of a movement that disdains expertise and rationality, few Maga die-hards have the requisite knowledge to do these jobs.

For Loomer, such figures pose a threat. It ought to be emphasised that this is not because people like General Haugh have ever shown open disloyalty to Trump. It is merely that they are not, like Loomer, his fanatical adherents. In her worldview, anything less is unacceptable.

Trump seems to agree, which opens the way to more firings in the future. Sensing her opening, Loomer has declared that she will establish an organisation dedicated to investigating executive branch officials for suspected disloyalty to the president.

Government officials will have to live in fear of being targeted, creating a chilling atmosphere in which pushing back against Trump’s whims becomes impossible.

Loomer’s growing influence also suggests that the Trump White House is becoming more chaotic and unpredictable.

The president’s aides have long claimed that the White House would be run in a controlled fashion this time around, with clear chains of command and questionable outsiders kept away. Loomer’s presence in the Oval Office – at Trump’s personal request – blows that story away.

For her part, Loomer seems to have what she has always wanted: the president’s attention. Where might she direct it next?

Andrew Gawthorpe, Lecturer in History and International Studies, *Leiden University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

---

jpm? predict recession, now others

'Uncharted territory': Deutsche Bank strategists warn of 'simultaneous collapse' in 'all US assets'

4 9 25

---

rww

“Let Him Cook': Glenn Beck And Kevin Roberts Flack For Trump's Tariff Policy

04/07/2025

Kyle Mantyla

Over the weekend, Glenn Beck posted a podcast with Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts, focused on the global tariffs that have been unilaterally imposed by President Donald Trump.

With those tariffs rattling the international economy and tanking the stock market, Beck and Roberts agreed that they support Trump simply because they want to "let him cook" even as they admitted that they are fielding panicked calls from friends and acquaintances who are actively seeing their businesses destroyed by Trump's policy.

Beck, who spent the entire 2016 presidential campaign warning that Trump is a psychopath, a narcissist, and a "the biggest flaming ass that you could possibly imagine" only to become a MAGA cultist the moment Trump took office, said that while he has always opposed tariffs, he is now willing to support them because Trump "loves America as much as me."

"On election day, we all walked out of the office going, 'OK. You're the boss,'" Beck said. "He's the best negotiator I've ever seen. He's a businessman, and he's one of the first presidents—in fact, I think the first president since Reagan—that I actually trust loves America as much as me, [who's] not in it for himself [but] in it for the country."

"I'm not going to give him a pass forever," Beck continued. "I mean, a year from now, if we are really struggling because of this, I'm not going to be saying the same thing. But I think we have to let the chef cook the meal. We came into the restaurant; we came because we knew he was the chef. Let him cook the meal."

Roberts, who turned the Heritage Foundation into a MAGA think tank that was the source of the infamous Project 2025 which Trump disingenuously disavowed on the campaign trail only to immediately implement upon taking office, agreed with Beck.

"You just summarized exactly where we are," Roberts said. "The larger thing is what you explained, which is Donald Trump's great love for this country [and] a cabinet that I think is the best assembled in modern history."

"I think maybe since [Abraham] Lincoln," Beck replied. "The first time I saw the cabinet altogether, I said, 'Look at the brains. I haven't seen this since the founding era.'"

"I think you're right," Roberts responded. "I think only [George] Washington's and Lincoln's rival them."

---

LIBERATION DAY TRUMP TARIFFS

cruz and foghorn jump ship? 4 gop defect on bill 1 cda, 2? budget cut his pwr

narvarro made up ron anagram, tossed under bus in 48 min recd?

---

an 4 25

'Really scary': Experts sound alarm on new GOP threat to military and other mail-in voters

A sweeping executive order from President Donald Trump would overhaul the administration of U.S. elections and upend how they’re run in Colorado, but election experts in the state say the measure is unconstitutional, and it already faces several legal challenges.

The order, issued late last month, requires proof of citizenship to register to vote and vote, requires all ballots be counted on Election Day, and threatens federal funding for states that don’t comply, among other changes. On Thursday, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser filed a lawsuit alongside other Democratic states challenging the order, saying it will cause imminent and irreparable harm to states and voters.

“This elections executive order is an overreach by the White House and it threatens to undermine Colorado’s well-established gold standard for free and fair elections,” Weiser said in a statement. “That’s why we are challenging this illegal action and protecting our freedom to vote.”

Voting rights advocates and the Democratic National Committee have filed separate lawsuits challenging the legality of Trump’s order too. Doug Spencer, a professor at the University of Colorado who specializes in election law, said legal challenges to the order “will prevail.” He said the executive order is similar to others Trump has issued in that it attempts to take actions that are beyond the president’s authority.

“Some of the executive orders I think raise some interesting questions or novel questions, and some of them are just blatantly wrong, like if you’re born here, you’re not a citizen. That’s just blatantly wrong,” Spencer said, referring to Trump’s attempt to end the constitutional right to birthright citizenship. “That the president can dictate how states run their elections, even for federal offices, is just wrong. The Constitution has clear language: Congress has authority to do this, and Donald Trump is not Congress, so those lawsuits will be successful.”

Spencer said Colorado would have to change numerous aspects of how it conducts elections under Trump’s executive order, but he doesn’t see that becoming reality. He said the order may still have the political consequences Trump is looking for, though, in that it signals to Republicans in Congress and the states what he wants from them.

Aly Belknap, executive director of Colorado Common Cause, a nonprofit that works to defend democracy and voter rights, said Congress has already passed laws detailing what is required to register to vote in federal elections, and Trump cannot simply decide there are new requirements with an executive order.

“States really just need to resist these attempts to override state and federal law through the ongoing legal challenges, and we just really need states to reassert their right to control their own elections and the core of what our democracy is,” Belknap said.

Matt Crane, executive director of the Colorado County Clerks Association, said the order “goes well beyond” the constitutional powers of the presidency.

“Here in Colorado we’ve been very innovative and are one of the best states in the country in how we conduct our elections, and so federal overreach like this is not welcome,” Crane said.

Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, a Democrat, said the order is unlawful and would prevent eligible voters from casting a ballot.

“The Trump administration is weaponizing the federal government and trying to make it harder for voters to fight back at the ballot box,” Griswold said in a statement when the order was first issued. “The United States has always led the world in conducting free and fair elections, and we cannot let Donald Trump end that legacy.”

Burden on voters

Spencer said verifying citizenship when registering to vote “has the potential to stop non-citizens from voting. The problem is, non-citizens aren’t voting, so there’s not really a problem to be solved.” He said it’s not easy to prove citizenship, and requiring everyone who wants to vote to do so could lead to citizens not being able to vote.

“There’s not really any evidence that there’s a problem in the first place, but you’re going to risk disfranchising people because of the challenges of the documents,” Spencer said.

Belknap said millions of Americans who are eligible to vote don’t have the proper form of ID the executive order would require from a voter, such as a passport or a birth certificate.

“This is just really scary because it basically takes the responsibility to verify a person’s citizenship status from election officials — who do that now to ensure that non-citizens aren’t voting — and puts it on American voters, making them have to convince the government that they’re eligible to exercise the right to vote,” Belknap said.

Denver Clerk and Recorder Paul López said Colorado already has systems in place to ensure only eligible voters cast a ballot in an election, with many opportunities to catch anything suspicious. He said the state verifies a voter’s registration information with various state agencies using their ID number, and once verified within Colorado’s voter database, they’ll use the Electronic Registration Information Center to compare with other states around the country.

“It is really nothing more than an attempt to discourage and undermine voters of all stripes and of all backgrounds, especially people of color and naturalized citizens and even women, from engaging in the right to vote,” López said of the executive order. “This would dramatically impact folks whose name doesn’t match their original birth certificate because of marriage or divorce or anything else.”

López said instances of people who are not eligible to vote attempting to vote are very rare “because the system that we use works,” and if someone does try to vote illegally, they will be prosecuted. He also said undocumented immigrants are not trying to illegally participate in U.S. elections as Trump claims.

“On its face there’s really just this baseless claim of fraud, especially amongst undocumented immigrants who are somehow voting in these elections,” López said. “It’s a false narrative and frankly it only serves to turn Americans against each other.”

Crane said if the order were enacted, Colorado voters would have to show proof of citizenship when registering for the first time, as well as every time they update their registration. The process would also have to take place in person, removing online registration as an option, and lines to vote in person would take much longer as election workers would have to verify documentation.

Most Colorado voters already need to have their ballot to their county clerks office by 7 p.m. on Election Day to have it counted, but for military and overseas voters, their ballot can be counted up to eight days after Election Day so long as it’s postmarked on Election Day. Trump’s order would preclude ballots to be counted after Election Day.

“We believe our military voters deserve every opportunity to have their voice heard and so this executive order would walk that back, which seems insane,” Crane said.

Belknap said the order could also hinder Colorado’s automatic voter registration process, as Division of Motor Vehicles employees would have to “assess customer citizenship status” during every interaction they have.

“We’ve had this automatic motor registration at the DMV for many years now,” Belknap said. “It’s how so many Coloradans get registered to vote originally when they get their permit or their drivers license, or when they move and have to update.”

SAVE Act

Republicans in Congress reintroduced the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, which would require proof of citizenship for anyone registering to vote nationwide. The bill poses a more substantial threat than Trump’s executive order because Congress actually has the power to legislate certain requirements for federal elections. Spencer said the SAVE Act includes some provisions Trump tried to address with his executive order related to citizenship and voting machine verification, but it’s not quite as far reaching.

Two Colorado Republicans in Congress, Reps. Lauren Boebert of Windsor and Jeff Crank of Colorado Springs, are sponsors of SAVE Act.

The CCCA has taken a formal position against the SAVE Act. Crane said the measure is “poorly written” and would increase costs of conducting elections without providing the funding for those costs.

With the potential for civil or criminal charges for election workers who unintentionally register an ineligible voter in the SAVE Act, Crane said it would also deter people from working as an election judge because they wouldn’t want to risk prosecution.

“Nobody is out there right now — no clerk, no election judge — purposefully registering somebody who shouldn’t be registered,” Crane said. “If it does happen, it’s certainly on a very, very small scale now. But if you make a mistake, you could face five years in prison and you could be sued civilly. Who in their right mind is going to want to work in that environment?”

Crane said while it is important to ensure only citizens are voting, the Trump administration is looking to do so in a way that isn’t efficient without seeking alternative means.

“They aren’t interested in having conversations with experts who do this work to figure out those better ways,” Crane said. “They’d much rather be informed by people who have been spreading disinformation for the last four years and spreading lies and legislating based on disinformation rather than fact, and that’s a very dangerous place to be.”

López said Trump intentionally spreads misinformation — particularly the false claim that the 2020 presidential election was stolen — to undermine voters and create distrust to the point that eligible voters won’t want to vote. Ultimately, López said he thinks that’s Trump’s main goal.

“He doesn’t like who’s coming out to vote, so let’s stifle it rather than fighting a fair fight in a fair election and talking about the facts,” López said.

Claims of widespread fraud in recent U.S. elections have been debunked by elections officials, experts, media investigations, law enforcement, and the courts.

López said “in the age of misinformation,” he encouraged all voters to go “straight to the source” and ask their local elections officials any questions they have about their voter registration or how their vote is counted.

“Our voters can expect the same level of excellence from their clerk and recorder’s office, from the elections division, as they are used to — the same fair, secure and accessible model that leads the nation,” López said.

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE. SUPPORT

Colorado Newsline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Colorado Newsline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Quentin Young for questions: info@coloradonewsline.com.

---

AN 4 25

[How Trump’s economic policies imperil the 'far-right parties' he claims to suppor]T

---

an 4 25

Trump criticized on Thursday a court ruling against Marine Le Pen, the leader of France's far-right, who was found guilty of embezzling millions of euros from the European Parliament.

“The Witch Hunt against Marine Le Pen is another example of European Leftists using Lawfare to silence Free Speech, and censor their Political Opponent, this time going to so far as to put that Opponent in prison,” Trump wrote in a late-night post on his social platform Truth Social.

“It is the same ‘playbook’ that was used against me by a group of Lunatics and Losers,” the president added.

READ MORE: The 'honeymoon might be over': Here’s why Trump 2.0 is flailing

Le Pen was sentenced to four years in prison, with two years suspended, and is also facing a five-year ban on holding office, which takes effect immediately. This restriction would bar her from running in the 2027 presidential election in France, an election she was expected to win, unless she succeeds in appealing her conviction.

Trump's statement about the French politician's case came the same day global stock markets plummeted in response to his decision to impose a series of sweeping global tariffs.

“I don’t know Marine Le Pen, but do appreciate how hard she worked for so many years,” Trump further said in his post, crediting the leader for suffering losses, but continuing her politics.

"And now, just before what would be a Big Victory, they get her on a minor charge that she probably knew nothing about—Sounds like a ‘bookkeeping’ error to me," he added.

The court determined that Le Pen and around twenty other co-defendants exploited the European Parliament as a source of income, misappropriating almost $5 million in parliamentary funds. This misuse allegedly took place over an 11-year span during a time when her party’s finances were critically low.

Tech billionaire and Department of Government Efficiency head Elon Musk endorsed the president's post about Le Pen's case on his own social platform X.

"Free Le Pen!" he wrote, along with a screenshot of Trump's Truth Social post.

---

// TESLER WH COMMERCIAL, LUTNICK HYPES STOCK

AN 3 25

In a departure from tradition, The White House “is soliciting corporate sponsors for this year’s Easter Egg Roll,” CNN reported Sunday.

According to reporter Betsy Klein, “sponsorship offers range from $75,000 to $200,000, with the promise of logo and branding opportunities.”

In a series of tweets Sunday, Klein posted a "9-page pitch document" she obtained outlining the various sponsorship tiers, which states a $200,000 “investment” will offer sponsors “branding for a key area or activation,” “choice of Meet & Greet or White House Tour" and 150 tickets to the White House Easter Egg Roll.

Klein reports the White House is working with the outside production company Harbinger to solicit sponsors. “All money raised by Harbinger will go to the White House Historical Association,” Klein reports.

As the reporter notes, “the solicitation for sponsorships marks an unprecedented offering of corporate branding opportunities on White House grounds running counter to long-established regulations prohibiting the use of public office for private gain.”

“A former official involved in planning the event” told CNN, “This is not your grandmother’s Easter Egg Roll where people lined up outside the gate and go and roll an egg and get a little gift bag and walk out.”

“This is an enterprise,” the former official said.

Former White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter, who viewed the document, said it “wouldn’t have gotten through Counsel’s Office.”

“That would have been vetoed in about 30 seconds in my day,” he said. “We’re not running this like a football stadium where you get all logos all over the place for kicking money.”

Read the full report at CNN.

---

paul weis law firm caves 40 mil pro bono for regime

---

'Obfuscation tactics': Trump moves to hide key data as economy careens 'toward a downturn'

an 3 25

---

rww

03/21/2025

Kyle Mantyla

Eric Metaxas is very excited about finding a way to ensure that President Donald Trump gets "a third, fourth, and perhaps fifth term": "Trump needs a third term. It needs to happen."

Right-wing pastor John Amanchukwu, who has made a name for himself by appearing at school board meetings to rant about the books carried in their libraries, was on hand when Trump signed an executive order to dismantle the Department of Education yesterday.

Anti-choice activist Seth Gruber explains his position: "Abortion is wrong because I once was a fetus. That is all."

David Barton says that he and other Christian nationalists were at the White House this week to ensure "that faith is firmly embedded in the government of the United States": "This is the way it was intended to be."

Finally, Jim Garlow, who was also part of that White House meeting, penned an embarrassingly obsequious article about the experience: "During the course of the conversation, the issue of the polls came up. He responded, 'It appears I am doing well there.' I added (these are the words I can reconstruct to the best of my knowledge), 'Mr. President, you are also doing well in the "polling" in heaven. God approves of the many changes you are bringing."

---

an 3 25

'Does not add up': Fact checker exposes Trump’s 'off-kilter' claim about Canada

---

as dow tanks, still on cda 51st, greenland [act of war dnmk] and panama an 325

Trump orders military to plan invasion of Panama to seize canal: report

---

'It's just globalists': Trump ducks blame for stock market selloff amid tariffs

180 tariff? 3 25 raw story //

---

an 3 5

At a campaign rally in 2023, Donald Trump famously told a crowd of supporters, "I am your retribution" — a theme he echoed in many subsequent rallies. And when he gave his 2025 joint address to Congress on Tuesday night, March 4, 2025, Trump prioritized grievance as he angrily railed against former President Joe Biden, Democrats in Congress, and "radical-left lunatics."

The New York Times' Jamelle Bouie, in his March 5 column, describes Trump's second presidency as a "grand tour of retribution" — and that retribution, he warns, is being aimed at political foes as well as the general public.

"Donald Trump rambled, ranted and raved his way through the 2024 presidential campaign," Bouie explains, "but he was clear on one point: When he was elected, he would get revenge. 'I am your retribution,' Trump said to crowds of his supporters throughout the campaign. This was not an abstraction. He had a few targets in mind."

READ MORE:Ex-Treasury official warns Trump’s tariffs will make consumer confidence even worse

The targets Trump named, Bouie notes, included Biden, former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyoming), Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg Jr., and Gen. Mark Milley, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"For once in his public career," Bouie observes, "Trump wasn't lying. As president, he has made it a priority to go after his political enemies. One of his first acts once he was back in office was to remove security protections from former officials facing credible death threats, including his former secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, and his former national security adviser John Bolton — both of whom Trump views as disloyal. Not only did he take away their protection, knowing they were under threat from Iran, but he also publicly discussed that he had removed their security, as if to entice their antagonists."

The Times columnist continues, "Trump fired more than a dozen government inspectors general at various federal agencies — most likely in retaliation for the fact that it was an inspector general who informed Congress about Trump's attempt to pressure Ukraine to investigate Biden. Trump has also tried to purge the Justice Department of any lawyers and officials who worked on the January 6 investigation or helped to prosecute the January 6 rioters — nearly all of whom, of course, he pardoned or released."

Trump's "grand tour of retribution," according to Bouie, also includes appointing "supplicant Kash Patel" as FBI director and showing his "deep hostility toward Ukraine and its president, Volodymyr Zelensky."

READ MORE:DC insider explains why Trump could hit an economic slump — and soon

"Altogether, Trump has done more to actualize his desire for retribution than he has to fulfill his campaign promise to lower the price of groceries or reduce the cost of housing," Bouie observes. "A telling sign, perhaps, of his real priorities in office. This fact of Trump's indifference to most Americans — if not his outright hostility toward them, considering his assault on virtually every government function that helps ordinary people — suggests another dimension to his revenge tour. It is almost as if he wants to inflict pain not just on a specific set of individuals, but on the entire nation."

READ MORE: 'Lies, lies and more lies – but no plan to lower costs': Dems blast Trump's State of the Union

---

new rep

The MAGA faithful were not happy with how Democrats in Congress reacted to Donald Trump’s speech Tuesday night.

Democrats protested Trump in different ways, whether it was Representative Melanie Stansbury holding up a protest sign as Trump walked into the chamber (which was quickly snatched away), Representative Al Green shouting at the president that he does not have a mandate to cut Medicaid, before being kicked out, or others leaving the chamber mid-speech, wearing T-shirts reading, “No kings live here” and “RESIST.” This was too much for Trump’s devotees.

White House staffers were quick to show their support for Trump on X.

Others in conservative media also attacked Democrats.

[[]

It seems that Republicans have short memories. In the past, the GOP has shouted at Democratic presidents during their addresses to Congress, including Representative Joe Wilson shouting “You lie” at President Obama in 2009 or multiple Republicans, including Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert, repeatedly interrupting President Biden in 2023. Since the GOP kowtows to Trump, they think everyone else should, as well.

---

ANNO GOP 8

had ejection text cued up, demoniz of dems will never kiss my aSS NO MATTER WHAT I SAY

The Democrats showed their disapproval of Trump’s Tuesday night speech to Congress, and MAGA is having a “full-blown meltdown,” the Daily Beast reported on Wednesday.

Democrats held up signs, declined to clap and wore pink in protest. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) wrote notes on a white board. Rep. Al Green (D-Tex.) was removed after he stood up and yelled.

“Has there ever been a more disgraceful and pitiful and malicious display in politics than Congressional Democrats refusing to stand for heartbroken families and courageous heroes?” White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller asked on X.

READ MORE: 'This is not normal': How Trump’s 'bitter' SOTU resembled a 'sordid campaign rally'

“Democrats showed whose side they’re on — and it’s not the American people,”the White House said in a statement.

The White House statement quoted Dana Perino on Fox News. “The Democratic Party still has no common sense. They have no ideas and they have no heart. They couldn’t even stand for the most inspiring moments of the speech,” she said. Perino was White House press secretary under George W. Bush.

The statement then listed 35 bullet points of points where the Democrats did not applaud. They included “declaring America’s youth are perfect as God made them,” “removing illegal alien killers, rapists, and drug dealers from our streets” and simply “The United States of America.”

Some members of Trump world were incensed that Democrats did not cheer for Trump making 13-year-old cancer survivor DJ Daniel an honorary Secret Service agent.

READ MORE: 'I almost choked': Economist highlights gobsmacking moment of Trump’s speech

“Democrats reminded us they are the party of insanity and hate — they could not even clap for a child battling cancer, or mothers who lost their children,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt posted on X.

Donald Trump Jr. wrote a similar sentiment on X. “If you can’t stand up and cheer for a kid with brain cancer being made an honorary member of the Secret Service, then you might be a deeply disturbed and f---ed up person!!!” he wrote.

“If you didn’t stand up and applaud this young cancer survivor and his amazing father, there’s something really sick and messed up about you,” conservative commentator Charlie Kirk posted on X early Wednesday, echoing Trump Jr. and Leavitt.

Trump advisor Elon Musk took issue with one moment where the Democrats did applaud — when the president said that the U.S. has sent hundreds of billions of dollars to support Ukraine.

READ MORE: 'Bet big, move fast, and never settle': Are the 'bros' 'abandoning Trump?

“The only flag being waved and the ONLY cheer by Democrats was for another country, he posted on his website. “They hate America,” he added.

Some Democrats addressed the lack of applause.

“Mr. President, we would all applaud if you found cures to horrific diseases.” Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.) wrote on X. “But how do you expect to accomplish that when you're cutting funding from the NIH?”

“There’s no standing ovation for cutting funding for cancer research, stripping Medicaid, and raising costs for working people,” Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) posted on X.

READ MORE: Courts won't 'rescue us' from draconian Trump/DOGE Cuts — here's why

---

an 3 25

Trump's stranglehold on the Republican Party was evident when, on Monday, March 3, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California) — a GOP lawmaker in a deep blue state — tweeted, "Today I will nominate @realDonaldTrump for the Nobel Peace Prize. No one deserves it more."

But according to the Daily Beast's Sean Craig, Issa "will have to wait nearly a year" because "nominations for the 2025 prize closed over a month ago on January 31."

Issa, Craig notes, "is at least qualified to nominate" Trump. But Craig argues that Trump "would seemingly be ineligible for" the Nobel Peace Prize for a long list of reasons.

READ MORE:'These are not savings': The 5 largest DOGE cuts actually saved 99 percent less than Musk claimed

The Nobel Peace Prize, which goes back to 1901, honors those "who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations."

"Since taking office in January," Craig observes, "Trump has frequently threatened to take over the territory of multiple foreign countries, refusing to rule out using military force in some cases. On Tuesday, (March 4), he enacted 25 percent tariffs on goods imported from Canada — a country he has referred to as the 51st state and suggested he will seize using America's economic might. Last week, he shared a deranged, AI-generated video of a reimagined Gaza, rebuilt in his honor, following repeated claims that he wants to displace its residents and take over the war-torn Palestinian enclave."

Craig continues, "Trump has also said he would consider using the U.S. Armed Forces to seize Greenland, a Danish territory, and the Panama Canal. In addition, Trump cut off military aid to Ukraine on Monday and is in the process of shutting down the U.S. Agency for International Development, the latter of which an official warned could lead to death 'on a massive scale.'"Trump's stranglehold on the Republican Party was evident when, on Monday, March 3, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California) — a GOP lawmaker in a deep blue state — tweeted, "Today I will nominate @realDonaldTrump for the Nobel Peace Prize. No one deserves it more."

But according to the Daily Beast's Sean Craig, Issa "will have to wait nearly a year" because "nominations for the 2025 prize closed over a month ago on January 31."

Issa, Craig notes, "is at least qualified to nominate" Trump. But Craig argues that Trump "would seemingly be ineligible for" the Nobel Peace Prize for a long list of reasons.

READ MORE:'These are not savings': The 5 largest DOGE cuts actually saved 99 percent less than Musk claimed

The Nobel Peace Prize, which goes back to 1901, honors those "who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations."

---

an 3 25

Hours before delivering his first address to a joint session of Congress in his second term, President Donald Trump issued what some legal experts quickly condemned as an attack on the First Amendment—a statement threatening imprisonment or deportation for certain forms of campus protest. The order, seen by some as authoritarian, targets students and faculty and raises questions about whether he anticipates resistance to the announced theme of his speech, “The Renewal of the American Dream.”

“All Federal Funding will STOP for any College, School, or University that allows illegal protests,” Trump declared at 7:30 Tuesday morning. “Agitators will be imprisoned/or permanently sent back to the country from which they came. American students will be permanently expelled or, depending on on the crime, arrested. NO MASKS! Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

Legal experts and historians swiftly condemned Trump’s threats, arguing they were intended to suppress free speech and, if enforced, could constitute a violation of the First Amendment.

READ MORE: ‘Will Be Big’: Trump Faces Dangerous Warning Signs Ahead of Address to Congress

Larry Sabato, the well-known University of Virginia professor of politics and founder and director of the Center for Politics, had already written remarks about Trump’s theme for his address to Congress.

“You must admit, #Trump 2.0 has exceeded expectations. In both foreign and domestic policy, it’s far worse than most critics had predicted. You might call it the Renewal of the American Nightmare,” Professor Sabato observed.

NCRM asked him to weigh in on the President’s latest statement.

“My response is the First Amendment,” Professor Sabato replied.

READ MORE: White House Is Demanding ‘Explicit’ On-Camera ‘Public Apology’ From Zelenskyy: Report

Former U.S. Attorney Barb McQuade, a professor of law and NBC News/MSNBC legal analyst, said, “Peaceful protests, of course, are not ‘illegal.’ A government ban on peaceful protests would violate the First Amendment. The goal here seems to be intimidation and fear to chill free speech.”

Journalist and historian Paul Brandus, author of books on the presidency and the White House, asked: “The president – who swore to ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the Constitution – is accelerating his attack on the First Amendment. Protests are ‘illegal?'”

Immigration attorney Eric Lee offered this response: “Only in a dictatorship can the president deem protests against his government and its policies ‘illegal.’ Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

Constitutional attorney Casey Mattox, vice president for legal and judicial strategy at the conservative Americans for Prosperity, served up this detailed response:

“1. ‘illegal’ would have to do a whole lot of work here for this not to violate the 1st A. Enough that it would have been better to not even bother using the ‘protest’ word. So let’s assume that.

The President can’t expel students from their colleges.
Good morning.”

Joe Walsh, the former Tea Party Republican congressman turned independent talk show host blasted Trump, who just last week declared himself a “king.”

“‘Illegal protests?’ He’s not a king,” Walsh exclaimed. “He doesn’t have the authority to stop protests. Or expel students. Or tell protestors not to wear masks. He’s not a king.”

Attorney and editor-in-chief of MediasTouch, Ron Filipkowski, slammed Trump: “Presumably, this government by Truth Social posts will define exactly what an ‘illegal protest’ is, and that definition will not be so broad that it encroaches on free speech guarantees we’ve enjoyed for two centuries.”

---

an 3 25 thom 3

— Crazy Alert! Proof Trump runs Fox-So-Called-News. After Trump’s Cabinet Ass-Kissing Session in the White House this week, embarrassing in its North Korea-like obsequiousness, the president turned to a Fox “News” host and, apparently not realizing his mic was hot, demanded that he say the meeting was “Unbelievable” in its greatness. Pathetic doesn’t begin to describe how low we’ve fallen…

---

an 3 25

A pro-Trump Super PAC is selling lucrative tickets to dine and meet with President Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago, WIRED reported Tuesday.

“Business leaders can secure a one-on-one meeting with the president at Mar-a-Lago for $5,000,000, according to sources with direct knowledge of the meetings. At a so-called Candlelight Dinner held as recently as this past Saturday, prospective Mar-a-Lago guests were asked to spend $1,000,000 to reserve a seat, according to an invitation obtained by WIRED,” write Leah Feiger, Louise Matsakis and Jake Lahut.

"So-called candlelight dinners offering access to the president are known to have been held prior to Trump’s inauguration, but have not previously been reported to have occurred while he is in office," they add.

READ MORE: Arizona Republican could lose office after pulling a gun in road-rage incident

The $5 million meetings have become a “hot ticket” among businesspeople, a source told WIRED.

The invitation is on MAGA Inc. stationary and reads, “You are invited to a candlelight dinner featuring special guest President Donald J. Trump.” MAGA Inc. is a super PAC that supported Trump in his 2024 run for president.

“Donald J. Trump is appearing at this event only as a featured speaker, and is not asking for funds or donations,” the invitation states.

People were asked to contact Meredith O’Rourke to RSVP. O’Rourke was national finance director and senior advisor at Donald J. Trump for President 2024. They were also told to email Abby Mathis, who is the finance coordinator at MAGA Inc.

READ MORE: Auto Association president says plants 'will close within a week' thanks to Trump tariffs

“Michael Solakiewicz, a pro-Trump digital creator, posted photographs of the event on Instagram,” write Feiger, Matsakis and Lahut. “WIRED has also viewed photographs and videos ofElon Musk with his son X at Mar-a-Lago the following day during acharity event hosted by a group called Wine Women & Shoes that also featured Trump.”

These tickets are unprecedented, according to one expert.

“I can’t recall a sitting president in the first weeks of his administration asking for millions of dollars in fundraising,” Don Moynihan, a professor of public policy at the University of Michigan, told WIRED. “The concern is less about fundraising, and more about access and influence … People hoping to get favorable treatment view it in their interest to donate money to Trump.”

“Part of what is worrying is the lack of ethical guardrails in the current Trump administration, where there doesn’t seem to be a clear line between Trump’s businesses and the presidency,” Moynihan added.

READ MORE: 'Concerned' Republican rep. still supports Trump as federal layoffs hit his district

A source told WIRED that the money was going toward Trump’s presidential library.

---

NO LNX

'Because of his insanity': Former Republican demands Trump removed from office after fight

U.S. President Donald Trump meets with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., February 28, 2025.

REUTERS/Brian Snyder TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY

Matt Laslo and Raw StoryMarch 01, 2025

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The nation’s capital is reeling from the Oval Office brawl heard round the world but, somewhere, Vladmir Putin’s smiling, according to a former intelligence official.

After President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance tag-teamed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on live TV using Russian disinformation as their talking points, it’s become evident that this new White House is compromised, some onlookers suggested.

“The enemy is on the inside,” former Republican Virginia Congressman Denver Riggleman told Raw Story. “There’s so much fear, but we need to overcome that fear now, and the rational, the sane — those who care more about this country than securing mineral rights for their oligarch friends — might be the way we need to go now. This is America. This isn't Russia lite.”

But with Trump’s aides booting Ukranians from the White House grounds after Vance and Trump piled on Zelensky, critics fear the president is being played by propaganda

With tech billionaire and X owner Elon Musk working inside the White House, disinformation is now regularly flowing from the Oval Office, Riggleman said.

“What's happened is that we have such a disinformation and propaganda landscape based on social media and far-right alternative media that there's no way for us to understand how integrated lies are into our policy making,” he said.

What’s so dizzying to Riggleman — an Air Force veteran who went on to be a National Security Agency contractor — is that Ukraine, formally at least, remains an ally, while Russia is, formally, a foe.

After today’s White House meeting blew up, Riggleman says it’s obvious Trump and Vance are going out of their way to appease the Russian strongman.

“They're specifically trying to make Putin happy. It's interesting that the most powerful country in the world is bending the knee to a bare-chested b— horse rider,” Riggleman said. “This is absolutely unconscionable, and, because of his insanity, he should be removed on the 25th Amendment.”

The exchange makes Riggleman glad he left the Republican Party, but he also thinks it might break some of MAGA’s grip on some of his former GOP colleagues.

“All of the Republican Congress are cowards and lapdogs, because they value the power of their seat more than the future of this great country,” Riggleman said. “Trump has overplayed his hand for the first time for real when you're talking about what's happening with Ukraine and Russia, and I believe this might break the dam of those who have allowed ignorance and hubris to rule their decision making.”

America’s now on the wrong side, he said.

“It's not just a realignment of interest, it means we've become the baddies,” Riggleman said. “Really, what it comes down to is that, as somebody who is a former Republican, I never thought there would be a day where a Republican administration messages to Russia for their favorable assessment of us. I find it appalling. I find it disgusting.”

This episode is likely to rankle many Trump supporters, Riggleman predicts, especially veterans and active duty servicemembers.

“For people who fought for this country in so many different ways — real veterans that haven't been radicalized by insanity and conspiracy theories — right now, you're going to see a mobilization of the sane, I think, in a way you've never seen in foreign policy and things of that nature,” Riggleman said.

With the Democratic Party so weak and beleaguered these days, Riggleman thinks this latest Oval Office fight showcases the need for a new, viable third party.

“It’s almost like we have the crazy and the coward party, and I think we now need to understand and we need to build a third way,” Riggleman told Raw Story. “I just don't see how a two-party system survives in a social media, data-manipulated ecosystem.”

---

factchecked by macron and starm UK --> ambush? omfg feelings?!

an 2 25

President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance ganged up on and attacked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, in an Oval Office meeting that aired on national television in near-real-time. Experts decried the event, with some declaring Russia would be celebrating.

Politico described the meeting as an "ambush," and an "attack" by Trump and Vance on Zelenskyy.

In one exceptionally heated exchange, Trump attacked Zelenskyy and accused him of playing with "millions of lives."

"You’re in no position to dictate what we’re gonna feel," Trump told Zelenskyy. "You’re right now, not in a very good position."

"You're gambling with World War III," Trump alleged.

READ MORE: ‘What the Hell Is This?’: GOP Group’s Andrew Tate Invitation Draws Bipartisan Outrage

"Have you ever said thank you once?" Vance asked Zelenskyy, attacking him for "campaigning for the opposition" last year.

"You’re not acting at all thankful,” Trump later added.

IFrame Content

"So, so depressing to watch this s----show in the Oval," remarked Michael McFaul, former U.S. Ambassador to Russia.

The New Yorker's Susan Glasser, whom has written books on Trump and Putin, called it, "the most shocking behavior by Trump and Vance I’ve ever seen in the Oval Office. An ambush."

Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Steven Pifer, responded: "VP Vance, who once said he did not care about #Ukraine, despicably provoked this fight in Oval Office. Vance is not #Russia’s agent. But he could not have done more damage and caused greater joy in Moscow were he a Russian agent."

Russian intelligence operations expert Olga Lautman of the Center for European Policy Analysis remarked, "At least Zelenskyy tried but as I said Ukraine and the rest of Europe are on their own and need to tell the Kremlin owned Trump regime to go to hell."

IFrame Content

The Financial Times' chief correspondent in Kyiv, Christopher Miller, described the event as "really, really bad," and wrote: "Look at Ukraine ambassador @OMarkarova grab the bridge of her nose. She knows this is a disaster."

READ MORE: ‘Did I Say That? I Can’t Believe I Said That’: Trump’s Remarks Again Fuel Memory Questions

Tom Nichols, a former Naval War College professor, and expert on Russia and nuclear weapons, wrote: "This is the video that the Kremlin needed and will celebrate."

In a series of social media posts in recent days President Zelenskyy has praised the "bipartisan" support he has received from the U.S., declaring his gratitude as recently as late Friday morning.

When it was all over, Trump angrily declared, "That’s going to be great television, I will say that.”

IFrame Content

Watch the videos above or at this link.

---

an 2 25

Since I offered you 10 reasons for modest optimism last week, discontent with the Trump-Musk regime has surged even further. America appears to be waking up. Here’s the latest evidence — 10 more reasons for modest optimism.

Trump’s approval ratings continue to plummet.

The chief reason Trump was elected was to reduce the high costs of living — especially food, housing, health care, and gas.

A new Pew poll shows these costs remain uppermost in Americans’ minds. Sixty-three percent identify inflation as an overriding problem, and 67 percent say the same about the affordability of health care.

That same poll shows the public turning on Trump. The percent of those disapproving of Trump’s handling of the economy has risen to 53 percent (versus 45 percent who approve). Disapproval of his actions as president has risen to the same 53 percent versus 45 percent approval, which shows how essential economic performance is to the public’s assessment of presidents these days.

The Pew poll also shows 57 percent of the public believes that Trump “has exceeded his presidential authority.” By making the world’s richest person his hatchet man, Trump has made more vivid the role of money in politics. Hence, a record-high 72 percent now say a major problem is “the role of money in politics.”

Other polls show similar results. In the Post-Ipsos poll, significantly more Americans strongly disapprove of Trump (39 percent) than strongly approve of him (27 percent). Reuters, Quinnipiac University, CNN, and Gallup polls show Trump’s approval ratings plummeting (ranging from 44 percent to 47 percent).

In all of these polls, more Americans now disapprove of Trump than approve of him.

DOGE is running amusk.

DOGE looks more and more like a giant hoax. This week, reporters found that nearly 40 percent of the contracts DOGE claims to have canceled aren’t expected to save the government any money, according to the administration’s own data.

As a result, on Tuesday DOGE deleted all of the five biggest “savings” on its so-called “wall of receipts.” The scale of its errors — and the misunderstandings and poor quality control that appear to underlie them — has raised questions about the effort’s broader work, which has led to mass firings and cutbacks across the federal government.

DOGE has also had to reverse its firings. On Tuesday, Secretary of Veterans Affairs Douglas A. Collins celebrated cuts to 875 contracts that he claimed would save nearly $2 billion. But when veterans learned that those contracts covered medical services, recruited doctors, and funded cancer programs as well as burial services for veterans, the outcry was so loud that on Wednesday the VA rescinded the ordered cuts.

After hundreds of nuclear weapons workers were abruptly fired, the Trump administration is scrambling to rehire them.

After hundreds of scientists at the Food and Drug Administration were fired, they’re being asked to return.

On Wednesday, Musk acknowledged that DOGE “accidentally canceled” efforts by the U.S. Agency for International Development to prevent the spread of Ebola. But Musk insisted the initiative was quickly restored.

Wrong. Current and former USAID officials say Ebola prevention efforts have been largely halted since Musk and his DOGE allies moved last month to gut the global-assistance agency and freeze its outgoing payments. The teams and contractors that would be deployed to fight an Ebola outbreak have been dismantled, they added.

DOGE staff are resigning. On Tuesday, 21 federal civil service tech workers resigned from DOGE, writing in a joint resignation letter that they were quitting rather than help Musk “dismantle critical public services.”

The staffers all worked for what was known as the U.S. Digital Service before it was absorbed by DOGE. Their ranks include data scientists, product managers, and engineers. According to the Associated Press, “all previously held senior roles at such tech companies as Google and Amazon and wrote in their resignation letter that they joined the government out of a sense of duty to public service.”

Finally, Musk’s conflicts of interest are bursting into the open, and it isn’t a pretty sight. The FAA is close to canceling a $2.4 billion contract with Verizon to overhaul a communications system integral to its air traffic control system — and awarding the contract to Musk’s Starlink instead.

Why? A team of employees from SpaceX, Starlink’s parent company, has been working inside the FAA in recent days. And Musk himself has been criticizing Verizon’s platform on his social media company, X.

Senior FAA officials have refused to sign paperwork authorizing the switch to Starlink, so Musk’s team is now seeking help to secure the deal from Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and acting FAA Administrator Chris Rocheleau. Could Musk’s financial motive be any clearer?

Tesla is in deep s---.

Americans outraged by Musk’s outsized role in the Trump regime are targeting Musk’s Tesla.

Many Tesla owners are feeling buyer’s remorse — their cars are vandalized or they become publicly shamed by strangers upset with the car company’s CEO. Others are putting anti-Musk bumper stickers on their cars.

A video from musician Sheryl Crow that received over 20 million views on Instagram, TikTok, and Facebook features the singer waving goodbye to her Tesla Model S, as Andrea Bocelli’s “Time to Say Goodbye” plays in the background. “There comes a time when you have to decide who you are willing to align with,” Crow wrote in the caption. “So long Tesla.”

Last weekend, thousands demonstrated outside of Tesla dealerships from Philadelphia to Seattle to register their outrage with Musk’s political power.

The #TeslaTakedown campaign page on Action Network has listed 46 upcoming events at Tesla dealerships and charging stations around the country over the next week. Another organizing platform, Mobilize, includes another 32 events.

Union pension funds are getting involved. Randi Weingarten, president of the giant American Federation of Teachers, has called on the CEOs of the nation’s six largest asset management firms to review Tesla’s current valuation. “This is about safeguarding workers’ retirements,” she said in a statement. “Just this week we saw Tesla stock continue to sink faster than a Cybertruck in quicksand as European sales fell off a cliff. So, we knew we needed to act.”

The oligarchy has never been more exposed.

An important aspect of the era we’re in is that a record share of the nation’s wealth is in the hands of a small group of people who are now revealing themselves to be remarkably selfish, shameless, and insensitive to the needs of America.

This is a further reason for modest optimism because as the oligarchy exposes itself for what it is, the dangers it poses to average people become more apparent — and the odds increase of a fierce public backlash to it.

On Wednesday, at the same time Elon Musk (the world’s richest person) was lecturing Trump’s Cabinet about the importance of decimating the federal workforce, Jeff Bezos (America’s second-richest) was telling staffers at The Washington Postthat henceforth the Post’sopinions would focus on defending “personal liberties and free markets” and opposing viewpoints would not be published.

The Post’s opinion editor, David Shipley, promptly resigned, as he should.

When oligarchs talk of “personal liberties and free markets” they mean their own liberties to become even richer and more powerful, as the rest of America slides into worsening economic insecurity and fear. When the oligarchs speak of “freedom,” what they actually seek is freedom from accountability.

All this is becoming more apparent than ever.

People are rising against corporate power.

For all these reasons, a backlash is beginning. Popular rage that this country is now run by an oligarchy, a small group of billionaires and corporate elites, is surging.

Today’s “economic blackout” has enlisted millions of Americans who have stopped buying and thereby demonstrated our power.

Meanwhile, protests are breaking out against big predatory corporations. On the eastern shore of Maryland, a bright red Republican area, 20,000 have signed a petition demanding an investigation of Delmarva Power, a subsidiary of utility giant Exelon, for overcharging them. That’s almost 5 percent of Delmarva’s entire customer base.

The same anger is mounting in New York City at Con Edison. And in St. Joseph, Missouri, at Evergy.

When House Republicans were in their home districts last week, they were deluged with angry questions about corporate power, Elon Musk, and big money.

A few Senate Republicans even explained to their constituents that they voted to confirm Robert Kennedy Jr. as secretary of Health and Human Services because he’s “hated” by Big Pharma.

Meanwhile, Bernie is back. While not running for president again, 83-year-old Bernie Sanders this week launched his “National Tour to Fight Oligarchy” — to overflow crowds in deep-red Nebraska and Iowa. Bernie is showing that even in red America, opposition to oligarchy and Trump is becoming the dominant view of a large swath of the public.

Record-breaking crowds are also appearing for other notable progressives. A record-sized group showed up to Representative Jim McGovern’s town hall. The same thing happened in Massachusetts with Senator Elizabeth Warren.

As Trump and Musk trade Social Security and Medicaid for big tax cuts for the rich, Americans will go ballistic.

The budget plan passed by the House this week — at Trump’s urging — gives billionaire oligarchs and giant corporations the lion’s share of $4.5 trillion in tax cuts.

To offset the $4.5 trillion, the plan includes severe spending cuts to Medicaid, food stamps, and Social Security.

Seventy-two million Americans rely on Medicaid, half of them children. Forty-two million Americans receive food stamps — many who aren’t paid enough to put food on the table.

Federal workers at the Social Security Administration learned Wednesday that a plan was already underway to cut 50 percent of staff, as well as 1,200 field office locations.

The move is likely to affect tens of thousands of employees across the country and millions who rely on the agency for monthly checks that keep them afloat. Such deep cuts to SSA, already at historically low staffing, will cause significant degradation of services, very likely including checks missed and individuals dying before their claims can be processed.

Why do I include this outrage in my list of reasons for modest optimism? Because if nothing else awakens the slumbering giant of the American people, the Trump-Musk attacks on Medicaid and Social Security to pay for another giant tax cut for the rich will.

Polls show unequivocally that Americans across party lines reject tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the rich. In fact, more than two-thirds — 67 percent — of Americans support higher taxes on billionaires.

Democracies are joining together, minus Trump’s America.

Since it’s become clear that America has begun allying itself with Russia, the movement of the world’s other major democracies to join forces has been gaining momentum.

On February 17, eight European leaders and the heads of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and European Union met. On Wednesday, France’s Emmanuel Macron spoke with the leaders of 19 countries, including Canada, either in person or over videoconferencing. Leaders from Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, and Sweden also joined the conversation.

Britain’s PM Keir Starmer is shifting the center of UK foreign policy from the United States to Europe.

All of this bodes well for a united front of democracies against authoritarian dictatorships — even though, tragically, Trump’s America is on the wrong side.

Negative economic consequences of the Trump-Musk blunderbuss are beginning to appear.

The economy is starting to show signs of strain as the Trump-Musk moves to shrink federal spending, lay off government workers, and impose tariffs on America’s largest trading partners shake businesses and ricochet across states and cities.

Trump’s moves to halt foreign aid and freeze some federal funding have already taken a toll on domestic farmers who export billions of dollars of products as part of American foreign aid programs.

Billions of dollars of climate and infrastructure investments that were underway during the Biden administration are now in limbo.

Apollo Global Management, an investment firm, estimates that DOGE job cuts could rise to 300,000. When government contractors are included, total layoffs could be closer to 1 million.

Economic indicators are showing signs of mounting stress, with much of the anxiety focused on Trump’s tariffs. On Thursday, he said tariffs on Canada and Mexico would go into effect on March 4 and he would impose an additional 10 percent tariff on China.

A survey of consumer sentiment published by the Conference Board on Tuesday recorded its largest monthly decline in confidence since 2021 in February. The drop was attributed to growing pessimism about employment prospects and future business conditions, with concerns about trade and tariffs reaching levels last seen during the 2019 trade wars in Mr. Trump’s first term.

This week’s University of Michigan survey of American consumers shows that they expect prices will rise at a 3.5 percent yearly rate over the next decade — the highest rate of consumers’ inflation fears since 1995.

A measure of corporate activity from S&P Global published last week showed business expansion slowing in the United States in February as a result of “uncertainty and instability surrounding new government policies” such as federal spending cuts and tariff-related developments.

The National Association of Homebuilders said in its latest report that builder confidence had fallen to a five-month low because of concerns about tariffs, elevated mortgage rates, and high housing costs.

Morgan Stanley economists estimate that tariffs will raise inflation, as measured by the Personal Consumption Expenditures index, by as much as 0.6 percentage points and depress real consumer spending by as much as 2 percentage points. The overall hit to inflation-adjusted economic growth could be as high as 1.1 percentage points.

I include these gloomy economic statistics as a modest reason for optimism because they, too, signal the looming end of public support for Musk and Trump.

Elections are looking brighter.

Add up all of this and elections are looking brighter — and we don’t have to wait until 2026. This is a major election year. If you count all the seats up for election this year at the local, state, and federal levels, there are 100,000 seats open across 45 states.

Governors, mayors, city councils, state representatives, judges, school boards — these positions up and down the entire ballot in 2025 — are a vital line of defense against the Trump-Vance-Musk regime.

Wisconsin voters will fill the deciding seat on their state’s Supreme Court. This election will have huge implications for the labor rights and voting rights of everyday Wisconsinites. Musk is filling the coffers of the Republican candidate right now, but Wisconsinites won’t let Musk’s big money determine their future.

If you live in New York City and don’t like the Trump administration meddling in the federal corruption charges against current Mayor Eric Adams, you have the power to choose a new mayor.

The great states of New Jersey and Virginia will elect their next governors — and control of their state houses.

On the federal level, Florida will hold two special elections for the U.S. House of Representatives, and New York will hold another later this year. These could affect the balance of power in the House.

The sea change is already beginning.

On Wednesday, Democrat Eugene Vindman won his House race against the Republican and former army Green Beret Derrick Anderson in Virginia’s 7th Congressional District — a key victory for Democrats as they seek to regain a majority in the lower chamber.

In his first term, Trump fired Vindman and his brother, Alexander, who both held senior roles on Trump’s National Security Council, after they raised concerns about Trump’s efforts to pressure Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

As a member of Congress, Vindman will now help fellow Democratic lawmakers serve as a check on the power of Trump.

Adding it all up.

Connect the dots: Trump’s ratings continue to plummet. Musk’s DOGE is off the rails and becoming a late-night joke. Consumers are taking out their anger on Tesla. America’s oligarchs are openly defiant and behaving shamelessly. Bernie and other progressive voices are attracting record-breaking crowds. Trump and Musk are attacking Medicaid and Social Security to pay for a giant tax cut for the wealthy. The world’s leading democracies are joining together against dictatorial regimes, including Trump’s America. Economic indicators are trending downward. And elections look brighter.

What does this add up to? America is waking up, and it doesn’t like what it’s seeing in Trump and Musk.

I don’t want to sound overly optimistic. We have a huge amount of work to do. My purpose in giving you these additional reasons for modest optimism is for you to have a sense of possibility.

All is not lost. We are not doomed. The Trump-Vance-Musk regime is filled with incompetence and riddled with treachery.

If all of us maintain our courage and resolve, and do what’s necessary, we will prevail.

NOW READ:[Liberals need to stop letting Trump voters off the hook

---

rww

02/27/2025

Kyle Mantyla

Malcolm Ferguson @ The New Republic: Andrew Tate Is on His Way to the U.S. Thanks to Trump

The misogynist facing charges of human trafficking is on a plane back to the United States.

Angry White Men: Christian Nationalist Podcasters Interview Holocaust Denier Ron Unz

As part of a new interview series, white Christian nationalists C. Jay Engel and Andrew Isker spoke with Ron Unz about Charles Lindbergh and World War II. A well-known Holocaust denier, Unz has written that the Holocaust was a “hoax” and that Jews have a “notorious tendency to lie and dissemble.”

Hemant Mehta @ Friendly Atheist: GOP Congressman: It's OK if Elon fires you since "God has a plan and purpose for your life"

Republican Congressman Mark Alford of Missouri offered thoughtless religious platitudes to his constituents.

Janna Brancolini @ The Daily Beast: Johnson Tries to Shrug Off Anti-DOGE Town Halls as the Work of ‘Paid Protesters’

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) claimed Wednesday that Americans who attended recent rowdy Republican town halls were “paid protesters.”

Ahmad Austin Jr. @ Mediaite: Trump Says He Doesn’t Remember Calling Zelenskyy a Dictator When Confronted in Oval Office: ‘Did I Say That?’

President Donald Trump on Thursday acted as though he had no recollection of calling Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy a “dictator.”

Annabelle Timsit @ The Washington Post: Transgender troops will be removed from U.S. military, Pentagon says

The previous Trump administration effectively banned transgender people from joining, but the new memo says currently serving transgender troops will be discharged.

---

an 2 25

President Donald Trump’s executive order to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America might not seem like a top issue compared to, say, trying to end birthright citizenship or carrying out mass firings of the federal workforce, but events surrounding it have serious implications, authors Jeffrey Abramson and Jack E. Davis argue in a piece published at the Guardian Wednesday.

When the Associated Press continued to use the term "Gulf of Mexico," the Trump administration revoked their press access to White House events. The news organization sued last week, but on Monday, a federal judge refused to order the White House to restore access. On Tuesday, the Trump administration announced that they would choose who had access to events.

“Granting access to the White House on the suppressive conditions set by the Trump administration is a blow to the first amendment and the free press. If the retaliation against the AP is allowed to stand, more restrictions on the press are certain to follow, creating Kremlin-like conditions that will affect all Americans who might question, or be suspected of questioning, the Trump party line,” Abramson and Davis write.

READ MORE: 'Open for corruption': Conservative slams MAGA policies as recipe for 'fraud, bribery and graft'

“This is why a seemingly trivial issue – what to call the Gulf – is freighted with importance. Trump’s renaming of the Gulf unmistakably delivers his'America first' message. He has every right to his message. But he doesn’t have the right to turn the press into his messenger,” they continue.

“The press and all people in the United States have the right to choose their own words and not be retaliated against by the government. The Constitution does not allow the government to control speech,” the AP says in its complaint.

Abramson and Davis note that there is a disturbing historical precedent for renaming places. For example, when he seized power in 1933, Adolf Hitler renamed streets and public places. Joseph Stalin renamed "Tsaritsyn" to "Stalingrad."

This is not Trump’s only bold foreign policy move. He has brought up reclaiming the Panama Canal, buying Greenland, turning Canada into the 51st state, and taking over Gaza. “Even if these are mere paper ambitions, the disdain Trump shows for international law is already doing irreparable harm,” they write.

READ MORE: 'Mistake': Some Republicans worry key proposal could cost them the midterms

“The ripple effect of Trump commandeering global waters reaches beyond the sea to all Americans," they continue. "His actions must be considered alongside his other executive orders on his first day back in office, declaring the arrival of immigrants at the southern border an“invasion” and suspending grants of asylum, no matter how dire the situation of refugees. When we let Trump scapegoat vulnerable immigrants for this country’s – and the world’s – problems,

---

mma

### Trump warned of a “bloodbath” in the auto industry if he wasn't elected. The Wall Street Journal points out that he's now engineering one.

02/26/25

---

Aja Romano @ Vox: Why the Trump administration is publicly supporting an alleged human trafficker

This latest high-profile turn in Tate’s ongoing legal saga has again brought the horrifying allegations against him to the forefront — this time with apparent approval from the US government.

---

vox

no lnx

Why the Trump administration is publicly supporting an alleged human trafficker

In short? His massive influence.

by Aja Romano

:{:{Feb 25, 2025,}:

TOPSHOT-ROMANIA-BRITAIN-US-COURT-CRIME

Andrew Tate and his brother Tristan Tate (back right) speak to journalists after having been released from detention in Bucharest, Romania on March 12, 2024. Daniel Mihailescu/AFP via Getty Images

Aja Romano writes about pop culture, media, and ethics. Before joining Vox in 2016, they were a staff reporter at the Daily Dot. A 2019 fellow of the National Critics Institute, they’re considered an authority on fandom, the internet, and the culture wars.

Andrew Tate made his name as a misogynist podcast star, but has more recently been known as an alleged rapist and human trafficker as he awaits criminal trial in Romania with his brother Tristan. Last week, the Financial Times reported that the Trump administration, through special envoy Richard Grenell, had tried to pressure the Romanian government to lift travel restrictions on the brothers.

Andrew Tate, whose online course “Hustler’s University” morphed into a platform with nearly a million users, became a powder keg among far-right media influencers in the early 2020s due to his explicitly sexist worldview and its profound influence over millions of teen boys and young men.

This latest high-profile turn in Tate’s ongoing legal saga has again brought the horrifying allegations against him to the forefront — this time with apparent approval from the US government. It’s also a reminder of the cultural reach of the so-called manosphere that Tate helped popularize.

RelatedHow Andrew Tate sells men on toxic masculinity

Andrew Tate’s enormous influence rests on intense misogyny — and a lot of alleged criminal activity

Tate’s rise started with a successful kickboxing career, was followed by his removal from the British version of Big Brother, and culminated in a hugely popular podcast that anointed him the “King of Toxic Masculinity.” As Rebecca Jennings explained for Vox in 2022, his “inflammatory diatribes against women, whom he compares to property” became viral fodder on TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube. He was born in the US, raised in the UK, but now lives in Romania — first moving there in part because, he said, “the rape laws are more lenient,” but has stayed since; following his arrest, he has largely not been allowed to leave the country.

Tate helped bring to mainstream concerns about the “manosphere,” the term for the internet’s loose network of right-wing male influencers and their associated communities. Early on, Tate seemed to be such an obviously extremist node of the manosphere that he should be, as Jennings wrote, easy to ignore.

But Tate’s confident, blatant misogyny proved wildly popular: His dictums, which ranged from bragging about never having read a book to flaunting an aggressive emotional and physical dominance over women, seemed to enthrall boys and men who admired him for his flashy lifestyle, vaunted wealth, and commitment to the bit. Tate’s maxims swept across teen culture, generating horror stories from parents and teachers about his seemingly pervasive and pernicious influence. Originally, Tate presented his schtick as pure fiction, a deliberately exaggerated regressive persona. It soon appeared that was far from the case, as allegations against Tate and his brother began mounting.

Romanian officials have pursued Andrew and Tristan Tate since April 2022, when they first raided one of the pair’s mansions after receiving a tip that the Tates had allegedly abducted a woman and were holding her there against her will. The following year, the brothers and two Romanian accomplices were indicted on charges of rape, forming a criminal gang, and human trafficking. Authorities alleged that Andrew and Tristan Tate had trafficked seven women from the US and the UK to Romania by grooming them and subjecting them to physical, sexual, and psychological abuse. (The brothers promptly responded with a civil suit against two of their alleged victims.) In early 2024, the two faced new UK allegations of human trafficking, stemming from an investigation launched more than a decade prior.

Then, in August, the Tates faced additional charges of human trafficking after police raided their estate again and detained six people. The brothers have also faced multiple civil lawsuits filed by alleged victims. One such woman recently filed a suit against them in Florida, claiming they defamed her after she agreed to be a witness in the Romanian criminal trial.

Despite the severity and breadth of the charges against them, things have been going fairly well for the Tates. Last month, Andrew Tate was released from house arrest, though he and his brother are still not allowed to leave Romania and are under court supervision. This followed the return of their luxury assets in October, and a November appeals court ruling that major evidence in the first Romanian criminal case, including testimony from alleged victims, was inadmissible. A judge, citing flaws in the indictment, sent the case back to prosecutors for revision. This left the case on shaky ground — and that was before the American government came calling.

Romania’s foreign minister, Emil Hurezeanu, dismissed his conversation last week with Grenell, which took place briefly during the Munich Security Conference, as “just a repeat of a known stance.” Grenell’s position as “special missions envoy” seems to be an informal one based mainly on his status as a longtime Trump loyalist and his previous role as ambassador to Germany, but he’s made his interest in the Tate brothers public — and explicitly political.

On February 3, before the trip to Munich, Grenell quote-tweeted a reply to Tristan Tate on X and alleged that Romania had used funds from the beleaguered USAID agency to target conservatives, saying the program was “weaponized against people and politicians who weren’t woke.” There appears to be no factual basis for this claim, but it bolsters the Tates’ longtime argument that they are the victims of a political witch hunt.

“I support the Tate brothers as evident by my publicly available tweets,” Grenell told the Financial Times.

Tate’s cultural impact has been felt for years, but is this just the start?

Andrew and Tristan Tate now face three different criminal cases and multiple civil lawsuits in different countries, most for extremely serious allegations of violence and sexual abuse against women. Their most expansive alleged crime, human trafficking, became part of Andrew Tate’s online brand. He actually sold an online course to his followers on how to do it, what he called the “Pimping Hoes Degree.”

Experts say that the techniques Tate taught in this course and elsewhere could be seen as a textbook for how to engage in literal, criminal human trafficking — and the messages Tate espouses across the manosphere are replete with boasting about violence towards women, sexual assault, grooming underage girls, and emotional abuse.

RelatedHow Andrew Tate sells men on toxic masculinity

The “Andrew Tate effect” on young men has been so profound that counteracting it has become a mission across multiple public service sectors, from education to public health. Researchers in Sweden found that boys exposed to manosphere influencers were more likely to dehumanize women, while researchers in Australia found “widespread experience of sexual harassment, sexism, and misogyny perpetrated by boys towards women teachers, and the ominous presence of Andrew Tate shaping their behaviour.”

Concerns about Tate encompass real concerns about public safety, and whether boys who have prolonged exposure to him could become more aggressive toward the women around them. At the same time, Tate and others in the manosphere have been credited with helping swing the 2024 US election resoundingly for Trump among young men.

Tate is already a manifestation of extreme misogyny, the worst of what the manosphere has wrought — and his cultural, and now political, elevation is part of a larger, grimmer regression we are perhaps only just at the beginning of.

---

FOGHORN HAWLEY SMIRK , WICKER?

AN 2 25

Trump's month-old second presidency has been a major departure from the Biden Administration on foreign policy. While former President Joe Biden aggressively supported Ukraine in the Ukraine-Russia War, Trump is now attacking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as a "dictator." And unlike Trump, Biden was a blistering critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin during his four years in the White House.

Many Democrats are forcefully attacking Trump's Ukraine/Russia policy. And some GOP lawmakers are speaking out as well, although they are generally more reserved and less biting in their criticism.

Nonetheless, their frustration, as the Daily Beast's Matt Young notes in an article published on February 19, is coming through.

READ MORE:'Betrayal': Disabled veteran slams 'inhumane' firing by Trump Administration

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina) told CNN, "Make no mistake about it: That invasion was the responsibility of one human being on the face of this planet. It was Vladimir Putin in a calculation to go through Ukraine and not stop there, to go through Moldova, to go through the Balkans, to ultimately go to the Baltic states and send the signal to China that now is the time that they can take action in the South China Sea."

CNN's Lauren Fox quoted Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) as saying, "I do not agree that President Zelensky is to blame in any way. This was a rogue invasion by Russia."

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) disagreed with Trump as well, telling reporters, "I would certainly never (refer to) President Zelensky as a dictator."

Rep. Don Bacon (R-Nebraska) didn't mention Trump by name in a February 19 post on X, formerly Twitter, but he clearly disagrees with Trump's position on the Ukraine-Russia War.

READ MORE:GOP lawmaker sounds the alarm on coming ‘clash’ between Republicans and Trump

Bacon tweeted, "Putin started this war. Putin committed war crimes. Putin is the dictator who murdered his opponents. The EU nations have contributed more to Ukraine. Zelensky polls over 50%. Ukraine wants to be part of the West, Putin hates the West. I don't accept George Orwell’s doublethink."

Although Tillis, Murkowski, Bacon and Collins aren't MAGA Republicans, the conservative lawmakers aren't full-fledged Never Trumpers either. But former Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Illinois) is so anti-Trump that he passionately endorsed Kamala Harris at the 2024 Democratic National Convention. And Kinzinger is as forceful as Democrats when condemning Trump on foreign policy.

In a February 19 tweet, Kinzinger wrote, "Trump is surrendering America. Trump is the opposite of strong. He is a tiny, weak, small, scared, trembling, sissy, husk of a man. There is nothing manly about his fat, sweaty, smelly, gross, makeup'ed self."

Zelensky, meanwhile, is saying that Trump is badly misinformed.

Bloomberg News quoted the Ukrainian president as saying, "We are seeing a lot of disinformation and it's coming from Russia. With all due respect to President Donald Trump as a leader.... he is living in this disinformation space."

READ MORE: Mike Johnson's big budget bill likely dead on arrival as 'key holdouts' threaten to sink it

---

AN 2 25

Fox News host Mark Levin offered a rebuttal of President Donald Trump’s misleading claims about the war between Russia and Ukraine on his radio show Wednesday, voicing his support for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

“While Levin did not present his argument as being a rebuke of Trump, most of his points seemed to be aimed at debunking Trump’s claims over the last few days,” writes Mediaite’s Isaac Schorr.

“Now look, I don’t have a problem if it’s the position of our administration to cut back on support for Ukraine — which I oppose, by the way — then so be it,” Levin said. “Elections have consequences, so be it. But I want to make sure the facts are on the table and you, the American people, draw your own conclusion.”

READ MORE:'Not just blood that they’re after': Expert says Christian Nationalists 'want a show'

“MAGA doesn’t support Putin,” he said.

Trump recently claimed that Zelenskyy’s approval rating was at 4 percent and suggested that Ukraine started the war.

“Zelenskyy’s latest poll, he’s at 57 percent,” Levin said.

“The parliament — with all parties in the parliament — support what he’s doing,” he added. “They’re trying to survive. Ukraine did not invade Russia. Russia invaded Ukraine.”

READ MORE: 'Cowardice': GOP faces backlash after report suggests death threat may have swayed vote

"He refuses to have Elections, is very low in Ukrainian Polls, and the only thing he was good at was playing Biden 'like a fiddle,'" Trump posted on Truth Social Wednesday. "A Dictator without Elections, Zelenskyy better move fast or he is not going to have a Country left. In the meantime, we are successfully negotiating an end to the War with Russia, something all admit only 'TRUMP,' and the Trump Administration, can do. Biden never tried, Europe has failed to bring Peace, and Zelenskyy probably wants to keep the 'gravy train' going. I love Ukraine, but Zelenskyy has done a terrible job, his Country is shattered, and MILLIONS have unnecessarily died – And so it continues….."

Levin defended Zelenskyy’s actions. “Zelenskyy ordered martial law — that’s what the constitution there compelled,” he said. “Zelenskyy hasn’t called for an election — that’s what the constitution there compels. Now, I’m waiting for the first free election for Vladimir Putin. I mean, this is almost comical in a sick way that Putin is demanding an election. Why is he demanding an election in Ukraine when he doesn’t have free and real elections in his own country? And why does he — why does he get to call the shots when in fact, he murders people who dare to challenge him?”

“This is what we’re dealing with. Again, old KBG, and not just KBG, [Putin] was in like Flynn with the Stasi in East Germany. So, I don’t know why there are people that not only oppose Zelenskyy, but seem to support Putin,” said Levin.

People with this position are pushing “policies that in many ways are un-American in my view, and policies that if they had espoused these policies not that long ago, people would have wondered if they were on the take, or who they’re working for, something like that," he added. "Not that they are, but they would wonder.”

READ MORE: 'The time is now': Trump critics call out 4 ex-presidents for their silence

“Ukraine doesn’t have the industrial might that a Russia has — or a China. A relatively small population of around 40 million people, mostly an agricultural country. They didn’t start this war. What were they supposed to do? Roll over and play dead?” he asked.

“If Ukraine is making preposterous demands that cannot be met, that’s another problem, that’s another problem. But the idea that Ukraine must hold elections in violation of its own constitution as a condition for peace, or that Ukraine must give up more territory as a condition for peace… you have to understand the Ukrainian people don’t want to do that. That’s why Zelenskyy at 57%, higher than most politicians in our own country!” he said.

---

WAR CRIM PUTIN INVITE TO WHITE HOUSE, ZELENSKY DICTATOR WHO IS TO BLAME FOR THE WAR?!

TRUMP BOASTS LIES WORLD NOW RESPECTS US AGAiN, BUT OPPOSITE; HEGSETH JDV UNDO POSTWAR SYSTEM; NEGOIT UKR 3 DICTATOR PETRO-STATES SAUDI

2 25

Last week in Europe, the United States sent some very strong messages it is prepared to upend the established global order.

US Vice President JD Vance warned a stunned Munich Security Conference that Europe has an “enemy within”, referring to leaders who ignore their citizens’ concerns and values. He also advocated for right-wing political groups to be brought into the mainstream.

Meanwhile, at a meeting of NATO defence ministers, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth talked about hard power, the warrior ethos and the need for NATO members to spend up to 5% of their GDPs on defence. Most have only just climbed to about 2%, the longstanding NATO guideline.

In Poland, he reaffirmed the US commitment to the defence of Poland (and NATO) and committed to bolstering the US military presence there. So, despite the mixed messaging, the United States is not leaving Europe anytime soon. YOU SURE?

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump is reportedly demanding a significant levy from Ukraine as payback for US protection and support.

The combination of remarks has left pundits and policymakers wondering – is the US-led international order, with its multilateral institutions, nearing its end?

The demise of the rules-based order?

The United States played a leading role in establishing the rules-based international order from the ashes of the second world war.

Critics have decried the UN-related institutions that arose at this time. But the rules-based order is perhaps best viewed as Voltaire saw the Holy Roman Empire: “no way holy, nor Roman, nor an empire”. Those proclaiming the demise of the rules-based order should be careful what they wish for.

Such a system of trusted international exchanges barely existed prior to 1945. And while superpowers have carved out many exceptions for themselves, the rules-based order has nonetheless resulted in a time of remarkable stability and prosperity for the world.

So, why would the United States now appear to be retreating from this arrangement? The declining centrality of US influence goes some way to explain this.

China’s rise and the rise of Trump

To place the current events in proper context, we need to go back 25 years, when China joined the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

This move was supported by and facilitated by then US President Bill Clinton in a belief that market liberalisation would eventually lead to political liberalisation.

Since then, China’s growth has skyrocketed thanks to its ready access to global markets. But it’s retained a strong mercantilist approach, counter to the spirit of the WTO. This has generated much resentment and nervousness among Western powers about the changing global power balance.

Since Xi Jinping’s rise to power in 2012, in particular, China has taken on an adversarial position to the rules-based order, following its own set of rules.

In effect, the world got neither the political nor the trade liberalisation that it once sought from China. Rather, the rules as they applied in China (and to an extent in Russia) allowed state-owned enterprises to co-opt – if not outright steal – technology shared by their international industry partners.

Foreign companies were squeezed out of China and had difficulty competing with lower-priced Chinese products at home.

Trump’s rise is, in part, a reaction to these developments. During his first term from 2017–20, Trump fitfully attempted to take a retaliatory, transactional approach to international relations. Now, as he begins his second term, he has a much more clear-eyed plan of action.

What Trump expects now

What became startlingly clear at the Munich Security Conference was Trump’s new vision of transactional alliances with America’s traditional partners.

In his view, the United States is not so much retreating into isolationism as much as it’s acting as a great power with its own economic interests at heart. Trump is eager for the US to assert its place in a world where spheres of influence matter as much – if not more – than any particular set of rules.

Evidently, the US is no longer advocating for multilateralism, in which states cooperate as equals. Now, it’s focused more on multi-polarity – a world with several great powers, in which the US puts its own interests first. As Trump frequently reminds us, “America First”.

According to this world view, allies and adversaries have equally been taking unfair advantage of:

America’s famous openness (notably its borders)

its liberal trade policies (which, according to Trump, has led to the de-industrialisation of the American heartland).

Its allies have also taken advantage of the generosity of its security umbrella, leading to their cavalier approach to security.

The Trump administration’s remedy to all of this involves doling out sanctimonious advice. An example of this: Vance telling European allies they should.JD Vance’s speech to the Munich Security Conference.

It’s also doling out some tough medicine, apparently trying to provoke a reaction in European capitals so they significantly increase their defence spending. This would enable the US to step back from being Europe’s security guarantor and finally undertake its long-talked-about pivot to Asia and focus on its main adversary: China.

Russia evidently features as part of this plan. Trump appears intent to try to cleave Russia from its Chinese embrace in order to either isolate or weaken China. A hard-nosed deal with Russia over Ukraine may well be the price he’s willing to pay to make that happen. JUST HAD ANOTHER GREAT CALL W XI

For America’s close security and economic partners, this presents an unprecedented challenge. The old preconceptions and expectations no longer seem to apply. What’s important now is not so much America’s shared values with Europe, it’s their overlapping interests.

For America’s allies, as well as its adversaries, this is going to require some hard thinking and new strategies, both economically and militarily.

John Blaxland, Professor, Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

---

TROLLERY?

AN 2 25

On Wednesday, President Donald Trump called himself a "king" on his social media platforms. Now, journalists, commentators and academics are sounding the alarm about the second-term president's apparent embrace of monarchy.

Trump initially used the term "king" on his Truth Social platform, in a post about New York City's "congestion pricing" tolls. That policy imposes a toll on drivers entering Manhattan during peak commuting hours as a means of decreasing traffic jams in the United States' largest city. The New York Times reported that Trump intends to revoke federal approval of congestion pricing, though the Metropolitan Transit Authority of New York (MTA) has already announced litigation to keep the policy in place.

"CONGESTION PRICING IS DEAD," Trump wrote. "Manhattan, and all of New York, is SAVED. LONG LIVE THE KING!"

READ MORE:'Aren't you the boss?' Maddow supercut shows Trump being 'palpably scared' to talk about Putin

"We are a nation of laws, not ruled by a king," New York Governor Kathy Hochul wrote when announcing the MTA's intent to sue. "We'll see you in cou

A few minutes later, White House deputy chief of staff Taylor Budowich posted an AI-generated image of Trump wearing a crown and a cloak with the New York City skyline in the background, with Trump's "LONG LIVE THE KING" Truth Social post underneath. And shortly after, the official White House X account reposted the text of Trump's Truth Social post, and added an image of Trump wearing a gold crown and the text "LONG LIVE THE KING" at the bottom. Numerous commenters on social media condemned the president's posts.

"This is revoltingly un-American," Bulwark executive editor Adam Keiper wrote on Bluesky.

Keiper followed up his post by quoting President George Washington, who admonished a Revolutionary War colonel who suggested Washington coronate himself. The first president of the United States wrote: "I must view with abhorrence, and reprehend with severity [the idea]." Harvard Law Cyberlaw Clinic instructor Alejandra Caraballo reminded her followers that the United States was literally founded by "violently rebelling against a king." Political commentator Brian Tyler Cohen lamented the Trump administration's pro-monarchy stance, writing: "They're not even hiding it." And Gizmodo reporter Matt Novak wryly commented that Trump was "not talking about Elvis."

READ MORE:(Opinion) Presidents or dictators? Battle for power raises alarm as Trump turns to the Supreme Court

"Donald Trump is openly calling himself a king," wrote YouTube host Keith Edwards. "Any Republican who pretends they don't know where this is going is lying to you."

University of Michigan policy professor Don Moynihan observed that the post came on the same day that Trump called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky a "dictator" and falsely accused him of starting the war with Russia despite Russia invading Ukraine in 2022 (eight years after its illegal annexation of the Crimean Peninsula).

"Every member of the news media needs to ask every Republican, elected or not, if they believe Donald Trump is their king," podcaster Bob Cesca wrote on Bluesky.

Trump's "king" post also comes just a few days after he quoted Napoleon Bonaparte when he wrote: "He who saves his country does not violate any law." Former FBI counterterrorism official Frank Figliuzzi noted that the Napoleon quote was more recently used by far-right neo-Nazi terrorist Anders Breivik, who massacred 78 people in Norway in 2011 after writing a 1,500-page manifesto blaming feminism and diversity for the decline of Europe.

READ MORE:['People are going to get hurt': Ex-FBI official alarmed at Trump quoting 'white terrorist'

---

OMFG SEE BIZARRO

AN 2 25

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was shut out of the discussions concerning the future of his country, which took place in Saudi Arabia on Feb. 18, 2025. In fact, there were no Ukrainian representatives, nor any European Union ones – just U.S. and Russian delegations, and their Saudi hosts.

The meeting – which followed a mutually complimentary phone call between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin just days earlier – was gleefully celebrated in Moscow. The absence of Ukraine in deciding its own future is very much in line with Putin’s policy toward its neighbor. Putin has long rejected Ukrainian statehood and the legitimacy of the Ukrainian government, or as he calls it the “Kyiv regime.”

While the U.S. delegation did reiterate that future discussions would have to involve Ukraine at some stage, the Trump administration’s actions and words have no doubt undermined Kyiv’s position and influence.

To that end, the U.S. is increasingly falling in line with Moscow on a key plank of the Kremlin’s plan to delegitimize Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian government: calling for elections in Ukraine as part of any peace deal.

Questioning Zelenskyy’s legitimacy

Challenging Zelenskyy’s legitimacy is part of a deliberate ongoing propaganda campaign by Russia to discredit Ukrainian leadership, weaken support for Ukraine from its key allies and remove Zelenskyy – and potentially Ukraine – as a partner in negotiations.

Claims by the Russian president that his country is ready for peace negotiations appear, to many observers of its three-year war, highly suspect given Russia’s ongoing attacks on its neighbor and its steadfast refusal to date to agree to any temporary truce.

Yet the Kremlin is pushing the narrative that the problem is that there is no legitimate Ukrainian authority with which it can deal. As such, Putin can proclaim his commitments to a peace without making any commitments or compromises necessary to any true negotiation process.

Meanwhile, painting Zelenskyy as a “dictator” dampens the enthusiastic support that once greeted him from democratic countries. This, is turn, can translate to the reduction or even end of military support for Kyiv, Putin hopes, allowing him a fillip in what has become a war of attrition.

What Putin needs for this plan to work is a willing partner to help get the message out that Zelenskyy and the current Ukraine government are not legitimate representatives of their country – and into this gap the new U.S. administration appears to have stepped.

PIX

Then-candidate Volodymyr Zelenskyy at a polling station during Ukraine’s presidential election in Kiev on March 31, 2019.[Genya Savilov/AFP via Getty Images

Dictating terms

Take the narrative on elections.

At the meeting in Saudi Arabia, the U.S. reportedly discussed elections in Ukraine as being a key part of any peace deal. Trump himself has raised the prospect of elections, noting in a Feb. 18 press conference: “We have a situation where we haven’t had elections in Ukraine, where we have martial law.” The U.S. president went on to claim, incorrectly, that Zelenskyy’s approval rating was down to “4%.” The latest polling actually shows the Ukrainian president to be sitting on a 57% approval rating.

A day later, Trump upped the attacks, describing Zelenskyy as a “dictator without elections.”

Such statements echo Russia’s narrative that the government in Kyiv is illegitimate.

The Kremlin’s claims regarding what it describes as the “legal aspects related to his [Zelenskyy’s] legitimacy” are based on the premise that the Ukraine president’s five-year term as president of Ukraine should have ended in 2024.

And elections in Ukraine would have taken place in May of that year had it not been for the martial law that Ukraine put into place when the Russian Federation launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

The Martial Law Act – which Ukraine imposed on Feb. 24, 2022 – explicitly bans all elections in Ukraine for the duration of the emergency action.

And while the Ukrainian Constitution only includes language regarding the extension of parliament’s powers until martial law is lifted, constitutional lawyers in Ukraine tend to agree that the implication is that this also applies to presidential powers.

Notwithstanding what the law says, the Kremlin’s questioning of the democratic institutions of Ukraine and its push for elections in Ukraine have found traction in Washington of late. Trump’s special envoy Gen. Keith Kellogg declared on Feb. 1 that elections “need to be done” as part of peace process, saying that elections are a “beauty of a solid democracy.”

The ballot box trap

Zelenskyy is not opposed to elections in principle and has agreed that elections should be held when the time is right. “Once martial law is over, then the ball is in parliament’s court – the parliament then picks a date for elections,” Zelenskyy stated in a Jan. 2 interview.

And he appears to have the backing of the majority of Ukrainians. In May 2024, 69% of Ukrainians polled said Zelenskyy should remain president until the end of marshal law, after which elections should be held.

The issue, as Zelenskyy has said, is the timing and circumstances. “During the war, there can be no elections. It’s necessary to change legislation, the constitution, and so on. These are significant challenges. But there are also nonlegal, very human challenges,” he said on Jan. 4.

Even opposition politicians in Ukraine agree that now is not the time. Petro Poroshenko, Zelenskyy’s main political rival, has dismissed the idea of wartime elections, as has Inna Sovsun, the leader of the opposition Golos Party.

Apart from logistical problems of ensuring free and fair elections in the middle of a war, the conflict would present logistical hurdles to campaigning and accessing polling sites. There is also the question of whether and how to include Ukrainians in Russian-occupied territories and those who are internally displaced, as well as the 6.5 million who fled fighting and currently reside abroad.

Good elections … and bad

Russia did, of course, hold elections during the current conflict. But the 2024 election that Putin won with 87% of the vote was, according to most international observers, neither free nor fair.

Rather, it was a sham vote that only underlined what most political scientists will confirm: Elections are at best a necessary but insufficient marker of democracy.

This point is not wasted on Ukrainians, whose commitment to democracy strengthened in the years leading up to the 2022 invasion. Indeed, a survey taken a few months into the war found that 76% of Ukrainians agreed that democracy was the best form of governance – up from 41% three years earlier.

There are other reasons Ukraine might be wary of elections. The adversarial nature of political campaigns can be divisive, especially among a society in high stress.

Ukrainian politicians have openly argued that holding an election during the war would be destabilizing for Ukrainian society, undermining the internal unity in face of Russian aggression.

Outside influence

And then there is concern over outside influence in any election. Ukrainians have had enough experience with Russian meddling in their politics to take it for granted that the Kremlin will attempt to put a thumb on the scale.

Russia has since the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991 employed its substantial resources to influence Ukraine’s politics through all available means, ranging from propaganda, economic pressures and incentives to energy blackmail, threats and use of violence.

In 2004, Moscow’s electoral manipulations in favor of the pro-Russian candidate, Viktor Yanukovich, led to the Orange Revolution – in which Ukrainians rose up to reject rigged elections. Nine years later, Yanukovich – who became president in 2010 – was deposed though the Revolution of Dignity, which saw Ukrainians oust a man many saw as a Russian stooge in favor of a path toward greater integration with Europe.

Putin’s history of meddling in elections extends beyond Ukraine, of course. Most recently, the Romanian Constitutional Court annulled the country’s presidential elections, citing an electoral process compromised by foreign interference.

An impossible position

In raising elections as a prerequisite to negotiations, Putin is setting a “catch-22” trap for Ukraine: The Ukrainian Constitution states that elections can happen only when martial law is lifted; but the lifting of the martial law is possible only when the “hot phase” of the war is over. So without a ceasefire, no election is possible.

But in refusing to agree to elections, Ukraine can be cast as the blockage to any peace deal – playing to a narrative that is already forming in the U.S. administration that Kyiv is the problem and will need to be sidelined for there to be progress.

In short, in seemingly echoing Russian talking points on an election being a prerequisite for peace, the U.S. puts the Ukrainian government in an impossible position: Agree to the vote and risk internal division and outside interference, or reject it and allow Moscow – and, perhaps, Washington – to frame Ukraine’s leaders as illegitimate and unable to negotiate on the behalf of their people.

Lena Surzhko Harned, Associate Teaching Professor of Political Science, Penn State

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

---

NO LNK AN

Why is Trump bending the knee?

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump attends the America First Policy Institute (AFPI) gala at Mar-A-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, U.S., November 14, 2024. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

Thom Hartmann February 19, 2025

What if Putin owns Trump?

I mean, seriously, what the hell is up with this? The BBC reported yesterday that Trump gave Russia everything they want with regard to Ukraine, rewarding Putin’s invasion of a sovereign European nation, and even took steps to help rebuild Russia’s economy that sanctions and the war damaged:

“The Americans said they agreed to four principles with the Russians, maintaining talks between the delegations, restoring broader diplomatic ties, enabling teams to work on a path to end the war in Ukraine, and then what the US called historic economic and investment opportunities with Russia.

“But what of any concessions being demanded of Moscow? Mr. Rubio wouldn't set any out to reporters after the meeting, saying only that it would be a matter for future talks. Mr. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, made clear European peacekeeping forces were out of the question. …

“Pressed on why the US wasn’t laying down conditions for Moscow in order to agree to a durable peace, Mr Rubio said the two sides would only agree to ending the war on terms they were each happy with.” (emphasis mine)

Trump, in other words, has ordered Lil’ Marco to give Russia whatever they want and to hell with Ukraine. It’s a complete betrayal of Ukraine, America, democracy, and our European allies.

He even incoherently blamed Ukraine for Russia invading them, killing their people, stealing their children, and destroying their cities:

“Well, you've been there for three years. You should have ended it three years. You should have never started it.

“You could have made a deal. I could have made a deal for Ukraine that would have given them almost all of the land, everything, almost all of the land, and no people would have been killed and no city would have been demolished and not one dome would have been knocked down.”

This morning, Trump went even farther, lying with Russian talking points about how much money America has spent in Ukraine and calling President Zelenskyy a “dictator.”

Why?

ALSO READ: 'Outrageous lies': Trump floats kicking millions off of Social Security

What if Trump is working for Putin? What if Putin somehow owns him? And has been running him as an asset since at least 2017?

That would be more important than Russian agents Robert Hanssen (life without parole), Aldrich Ames (life without parole), or Ethel and Julius Rosenberg (death penalty).

Jack Smith’s case in Florida was limited to Trump stealing sensitive documents and sharing them on two publicly known occasions (and didn’t even reference other known acts like Kid Rock’s allegation that Trump showed him Top Secret maps in the White House: this was apparently a regular thing for Trump).

That said, you can bet your bottom dollar that the FBI and other agencies worked as hard as they could to contain the damage done by Trump’s leaving documents that could cause “grave damage” to America in public places where spies could simply waltz in and take cell-phone pictures of them by attending a wedding or paying $200,000 for essentially unlimited access Club membership.

But what if it goes beyond that? What if Putin has owned him for years?

From Russian oligarchs laundering money through his operations — real estate is the most common device used worldwide for money laundering — to keeping him alive in his most difficult times, like those multiple bankruptcies in the 1990s when he almost lost everything?

Or perhaps blackmailing him?

What if Putin got him the presidency, and he knows that if America found out for sure, it would destroy him?

Which begs the question: exactly how much damage might Trump have already done to our nation, and what does he have planned for this second term?

And is he getting ongoing day-to-day instructions from Putin, which explains why he’s so reluctant to discuss their conversations, as Rachel Maddow documented last night?

In 2019 The Washington Post revealed that, throughout his last presidency, Donald Trump was having secret phone conversations with Russia’s President Putin (over 20 have been identified so far, including one just days before the 2020 election).

The Moscow Project from the American Progress Action Fund documents more than 270 known contacts between Russia-linked operatives and members of the Trump campaign and transition team, as well as at least 38 known meetings just leading up to the 2016 election.

The manager of his 2016 campaign, Paul Manafort — who was previously paid tens of millions by Vladimir Putin’s people to install a pro-Putin puppet as Ukraine’s president in 2010 — has admitted that he was regularly feeding secret inside-campaign strategy and polling information to Russian intelligence via the oligarch who typically paid him on their behalf.

Throughout the campaign, Manafort let Russian intelligence know where Trump needed help, and when.

Trump pardoned Manafort, which got him out of prison. He’s still fabulously rich from his work for Russia.

As The New York Times noted in 2020:

“[I]nvestigators found enough there to declare that Mr. Manafort created ‘a grave counterintelligence threat’ by sharing inside information about the presidential race with Mr. Kilimnik and the Russian and [pro-Russian] Ukrainian oligarchs whom he served.”

There is no known parallel to this behavior by any president in American history — one could argue it easily exceeds Benedict Arnold’s audacity — and bringing documents to Mar-a-Lago was just the tip of the iceberg.

The Washington Post reported in 2022 that Trump had a habit of carrying top-secret information that could severely damage our national security, leaving it in hotel rooms in hostile nations.

Was he bringing these documents with him to sell? Or just to show to leaders or oligarchs in those countries to impress them? Or because Putin, who has agents in those countries, told him to?

Trump doesn’t put all that effort into hauling things around unless it’s extraordinarily important to his ego or he thinks he can makes money off them. Or he’s scared.

“Boxes of documents even came with Trump on foreign travel,” The Post noted, “following him to hotel rooms around the world — including countries considered foreign adversaries of the United States.”

When Robert Mueller’s FBI team tried to investigate Trump’s ties to Russia and his possibly sharing sensitive military information with them, they were stonewalled.

The Mueller Report identified ten specific instances of Trump trying to obstruct the investigation, including offering the bribe of a pardon to Paul Manafort, asking FBI Director Comey to “go easy” on General Flynn after his dinner with Putin, and directing Attorney General Jeff Sessions to limit Mueller’s ability to investigate Trump’s connections to Russia.

As the Mueller Report noted:

“The President launched public attacks on the investigation and individuals involved in it who could possess evidence adverse to the President, while in private the President engaged in a series of targeted efforts to control the investigation.

“For instance, the President attempted to remove the Attorney General; he sought to have Attorney General Sessions un-recuse himself and limit the investigation; he sought to prevent public disclosure of information about the June 9, 2016 meeting between Russians and campaign officials; and he used public forums to attack potential witnesses who might offer adverse information and to praise witnesses who declined to cooperate with the government.”

It adds, detailing Trump’s specific Obstruction of Justice crimes:

“These actions ranged from efforts to remove the Special Counsel and to reverse the effect of the Attorney General’s recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony.”

There are, after all, credible assertions from American intelligence that when Trump was elected, members of Russian intelligence and Putin’s inner circle were literally partying in Moscow, celebrating a victory they believed they made happen.

And apparently Putin and his intelligence operatives had good reason to be popping the champagne in November, 2016. They were quickly paid off in a big way.

In his first months in office, Trump outed an Israeli spy to the Russian Ambassador in what he thought was going to be a “secret Oval Office meeting” (the Russians released the photo to the press), resulting in MOSAD having to “burn” (relocate, change identity of) that spy.

The undercover agent was apparently working in Syria that year against the Russians, who were embroiled in the midst of Assad’s Civil War and indiscriminately bombing Aleppo into rubble.

That, in turn, prompted the CIA to worry that a longtime American spy buried deep in the Kremlin was similarly vulnerable to Trump handing him over to Putin.

As CNN noted (when the story leaked two years later):

“The source was considered the highest level source for the US inside the Kremlin, high up in the national security infrastructure, according to the source familiar with the matter and a former senior intelligence official.

“According to CNN’s sources, the spy had access to Putin and could even provide images of documents on the Russian leader’s desk.”

The CIA concluded that the risk Trump had burned or was about to burn our spy inside the Kremlin was so great that — at massive loss to US intelligence abilities that may even have otherwise helped forestall the invasion of Ukraine — they pulled our spy out of Russia in the first year of Trump’s presidency, 2017.

Similarly, when they met in Helsinki on July 16, 2018, Trump and Putin talked in private for several hours and Trump ordered his translators’ notes destroyed; there is also concern that much of their conversation was done out of the hearing of the US’s translator (Putin is fluent in English) who may have been relegated to a distant part of the rather large empty ballroom in which they met.

The Washington Postreported, after a leak six months later, that when Trump met privately for those two hours with Putin the CIA went into “panic mode.” A US intelligence official told the Post:

“There was this gasp’ at the CIA’s Langley, Virginia headquarters. You literally had people in panic mode watching it at Langley. On all floors. Just shock.”

Three weeks after Trump’s July 16, 2018 meeting with Putin in Helsinki, Senator Rand Paul made a solo trip to Moscow to personally hand-deliver a document or package of documents from Trump to Putin. Its contents are still unknown, although Paul told the press it was a “personal” letter of some sort.

Senator Paul has also consistently taken Trump’s and Putin’s side with regard to the Ukraine war: he single-handedly blocked a $40 billion military aid package in the Senate. When the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago, he responded with a call for the repeal of the Espionage Act. He further suggested the FBI may have “planted” Secret documents at Mar-a-Lago.

Ten days after Paul’s trip to Moscow, The New York Times reported that the CIA was freaked out because their sources inside Moscow had suddenly “gone silent”:

“The full reasons the sources have gone silent are not known,” the Times reported, but Trump having intentionally given a man working for the FBI to Putin — a man whose job at that time was to find and reveal Russian agents involved in or close to the Trump campaign — may also have had something to do with it.

“[C]urrent and former officials said the exposure of sources inside the United States has also complicated matters,” noted the Times. “This year, the identity of an F.B.I. informant, Stefan Halper, became public after [Trump-loyal MAGA Republican] House lawmakers sought information on him and the White House allowed the information to be shared. Mr. Halper, an American academic based in Britain, had been sent to talk to Trump campaign advisers who were under F.B.I. scrutiny for their ties to Russia.”

Things were picking up the following year, in 2019, as Putin was planning his invasion of Ukraine while Trump was preparing for the 2020 election.

In July 2019, Trump had conversations with five foreign leaders during and just before a presidential visit that month to Mar-a-Lago; they included Putin and the Emir of Qatar.

In one of those conversations, according to a high-level US Intelligence source, Trump “made promises” to a “world leader” that were so alarming it provoked a national security scramble across multiple agencies.

As The Washington Post noted in an article titled, “Trump’s communications with foreign leader are part of whistleblower complaint that spurred standoff between spy chief and Congress”:

“Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson determined that the complaint [against Trump] was credible and troubling enough to be considered a matter of ‘urgent concern,’ a legal threshold that requires notification of congressional oversight committees.”

On the last day of that month, July 31, Trump had another private conversation with Putin.

The White House spokespeople told Congress and the press that Trump said that he and Putin discussed “wildfires” and “trade between the nations.” No droids in this car…

But the following week, on August 2nd, The Daily Beast’s Betsy Swan reported that Trump had that week asked the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for a list of all its employees (including all our “spies”) who had worked there more than 90 days, and the request had intelligence officials experiencing “disquiet.”

Perhaps just by coincidence, months after Trump left office with cases of classified documents, The New York Times ran a story with the headline Captured, Killed or Compromised: C.I.A. Admits to Losing Dozens of Informants:

“Top American counterintelligence officials warned every C.I.A. station and base around the world last week,” the Times’ story’s lede began, “about troubling numbers of informants recruited from other countries to spy for the United States being captured or killed, people familiar with the matter said.

“The message, in an unusual top secret cable, said that the C.I.A.’s counterintelligence mission center had looked at dozens of cases in the last several years involving foreign informants who had been killed, arrested or most likely compromised. Although brief, the cable laid out the specific number of agents executed by rival intelligence agencies — a closely held detail that counterintelligence officials typically do not share in such cables.”

And now, to complicate matters, Elon Musk has access to the payroll records of all of our nation’s spies and other foreign intelligence agents. The Elon Musk who, himself, has also reportedly been having secret conversations with Putin.

If it turns out the Trump has been acting as an agent for Russia, how long might this have been going on?

Czechoslovakia’s Státní bezpečnost (StB) first started paying attention to Trump back in 1977, as documented by the German newspaper Bildwhen the StB’s files were declassified, because Trump married Czech model Ivana Zelnickova, his first wife, recently buried on his golf course in New Jersey.

Czechoslovakia at that time was part of the Warsaw Pact with the Soviet Union, and Ivana and her family had been raised as good communists. Now that a Czech citizen was married into a wealthy and prominent American family, the StB saw an opportunity and started tracking Trump virtually from his engagement.

As 2016 and 2018 investigations by The Guardian found:

“Ivana’s father, Miloš Zelníček, gave regular information to the local StB office about his daughter’s visits from the US and on his celebrity son-in-law’s career in New York. Zelníček was classified as a ‘conspiratorial’ informer. His relationship with the StB lasted until the end of the communist regime.”

An investigative reporting breakthrough by Craig Unger for his book American Kompromat led Unger to Uri Shvets, a former KGB spy who’d been posted to Washington, DC for years as a correspondent for the Soviet news agency TASS.

Shvets told the story — from his own knowledge — of how Trump and Ivana visited Moscow in 1987 and were essentially recruited or seduced by the KGB, a trip corroborated by Luke Harding in his book Collusion: Secret Meetings, Dirty Money, and How Russia Helped Donald Trump Win.

Their trip was coordinated by Intourist, the Soviet travel agency that was a front for the KGB, and the Trumps’ handlers regaled Donald and Ivana with Soviet talking points, presumably about things like the horrors of NATO.

The KGB’s psychological profile of Trump had determined he was vulnerable to flattery and not much of a deep thinker, so they told him repeatedly how brilliant he was and that he should run for president in the US.

Much to the astonishment and jubilation of the KGB, Trump returned from Moscow to the US to give a Republican presidential campaign speech that fall in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.

He then purchased a large ad in The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Boston Globe on September 1, 1987 that questioned America’s ongoing support of Japan and NATO, both thorns in the side of the USSR and their Chinese allies.

Trump’s ad laid it on the line:

“Why are these nations not paying the United States for the human lives and billions of dollars we are losing to protect their interests? ... The world is laughing at America’s politicians as we protect ships we don’t own, carrying oil we don’t need, destined for allies who won’t help.”

As The Guardian reported in 2021:

“The bizarre intervention was cause for astonishment and jubilation in Russia. A few days later Shvets, who had returned home by now, was at the headquarters of the KGB’s first chief directorate in Yasenevo when he received a cable celebrating the ad as a successful ‘active measure’ executed by a new KGB asset.

“’It was unprecedented,’ [Shvets said.] … It was hard to believe that somebody would publish it under his name and that it will impress real serious people in the west but it did and, finally, this guy became the president.’”

Meanwhile, Putin was making friends with powerful influence over American foreign policy.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who flipped his nation into a strongman neofascist state following an unsuccessful attempted coup in 2016 (he imprisoned and tortured numerous journalists and political opponents), has been deepening his relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin ever since that US election year.

In 2017, Erdoğan apparently gained access to America’s deepest secrets by secretly paying off General Michael Flynn even as Flynn became Trump’s National Security Advisor, who also had at least one secret phone conversation with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak after Flynn started working in the White House.

Flynn pleaded guilty in December of 2017 to “willfully and knowingly” making “false, fictitious and fraudulent statements” to the FBI about one of those conversations with Russian Ambassador Kislyak. Flynn was also an unregistered agent of a foreign government while working in the White House: he had also taken about a half-million dollars from Erdoğan.

Around the time he was leaving office, Trump pardoned Flynn, essentially burying the entire story.

The plot thickened when America learned, from a blockbuster 2022 report in Axios by Jonathan Swan, that just before leaving office, back on October 21, 2020, Trump had signed Executive Order 13957, aka Schedule F.

It would allow him to instantly fire as many as 50,000 senior federal employees encompassing the Civil Service management of every government agency including the FBI, CIA, NSA, large parts of the Pentagon, and DHS, and allow Trump to replace all of them with nakedly political loyalist appointees.

And now Musk is doing it for him. Deconstructing the American government. For Trump. Or for Putin.

From campaigning to destroy NATO to selling out Ukraine this week to demolishing the free world’s confidence in America’s ability to keep top secret information confidential, Trump’s goal appears to be, to paraphrase Ron DeSantis, to “Make America Russia.”

After all, it’s not like we’ve never had a rightwing coup attempt before in this country: wealthy Republican industrialists tried to kidnap and kill President Franklin Roosevelt 92 years ago and turn America into an Italian/German-style fascist state “friendly to capitalism.”

Not a single one of those traitors, some aligned with Hitler, was ever arrested or tried; why not try again?

NOW READ: Trump's view of the world is becoming clear

---

AN 2 25

Two already vulnerable groups, transgender people and undocumented immigrants, are feeling increased fear since Trump took office. Both groups face increasing discrimination and are changing their day-to-day behaviors. Trump has signed multiple executive orders targeting the groups as well.

“Regardless of how President Trump's executive orders shake out in the courts, experts say the widespread fear and micro and macro changes to daily life will have lasting implications for these groups,” Erica Pandey writes at Axios. "Life is already changing for members of both communities, in ways big and small — with bigger changes likely coming."

For many undocumented immigrants, fear of ICE raids has meant staying home, avoiding work and school. Trump’s presidency has affected documented immigrants as well, some of whom have begun carrying their papers with them.

READ MORE:'Not just blood that they’re after': Expert says Christian Nationalists 'want a show'

An immigration lawyer in Albany, N.Y., L.J. D'Arrigo, told Axios his "phone has been ringing off the hook."

Transgender people are losing access to crucial gender-affirming care and protections in the workplace.

"The messaging is, 'It's okay to discriminate against transgender people,' Corinne Goodwin, the executive director of the Eastern Pennsylvania Trans Equity Project, told Axios. "The cruelty is the point."

Trump signed at least four executive orders slashing trans rights. He banned trans people from women’s sports, signed an order saying there are two sexes and they are “not changeable,” barred trans people from the military and restricted access to gender-affirming care for people under 19.

READ MORE:'A lot of MAGA': 20 million Americans could lose health coverage under new GOP bill

“The barriers and actual impacts are already coming hard and fast” for trans Americans, said Erin Reed, a trans rights activist and writer.

"For transgender youth, if your government is telling that they don’t want you, if your society is telling you that they don’t want you, how does that make you feel?" she said. "And the message to cisgender youth is that this is an acceptable group of people to hate and that this is an acceptable group to bully."

Trump’s executive orders have targeted immigrants as well. On Wednesday, the president signed an executive order to end federal benefits for undocumented people. Earlier in his presidency, he signed a controversial order banning birthright citizenship, which is being tried in court.

The consequences of Trump’s actions are felt strongly across the country. In Texas, an 11-year-old died by suicide after classmates bullied her by claiming her family was in the country illegally.

READ MORE:'A lot of disinformation': GOP lawmakers reach the breaking point with Trump

“This week, the White House's X account shareda video of people in shackles preparing to board a deportation flight and called it ‘ASMR,’ referring to an online trend of posting videos with pleasant, gentle sounds,” Pandey writes.

---

an 2 25

Trump is known for being highly litigious, often filing civil lawsuits that his critics regard as frivolous. Trump typically targets political or media figures in the United States, but Politico's Kyle Cheney reports that Trump's media company, Trump Media & Technology Group, is suing a Brazilian judge "who is involved in the potential prosecution of" former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro.

The far-right Bolsonaro, who was voted out of office, is among Trump's top non-U.S. allies and is — like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and Russian President Vladimir Putin — popular in the MAGA movement.

The case is Rumble Inc. and Trump Media & Technology Group v. Alexandre De Moraes, filed in Florida. Justice De Moreas is part of the Brazilian government, and Trump is drawing plenty of mockery on Bluesky for suing a Brazilian official in a U.S. court.

READ MORE:Mike Johnson's big budget bill likely dead on arrival as 'key holdouts' threaten to sink it

Bluesky user Jorge C. Santos posted, "How can you sue a foreign judge in US courts? US Courts can’t compel him to do anything? What's their standing? What is this?"

Attorney Justine Andronici argued, "This seems odd. Wondering what they are worried might come out? Never thought I'd be rooting for other countries justice systems to save us."

Similarly, Bluesky user Russ Novack wrote, "Ok, so where's the federal question here? And why is this being brought in Tampa? (I know the answer to that one) How can a US court enjoin a foreign court from acting? How is an EO binding on the judicial system of a foreign country?"

Video editor Deirdre Bell posted, "Now Trump is conducting foreign policy through his personal businesses? This is off the charts bonkers. He's supporting his coup buddy & pressuring a foreign judge. Can he sue a judge? The principle of judicial immunity is the foundation of judicial independence. Right? Are we in bizarro world???"

READ MORE:How Ron DeSantis is gaslighting Black Floridians

Writer Linda James commented, "Trump thinks his EO's extend to foreign judges? And that his business has the ability to enforce it through a lawsuit? Which U.S. prosecutor will take that on?

Self-described "reformed Republican" Gail Lane wrote, "Seriously, I know lots of words but they are all beginning to either be overused or lack the necessary importance to express my disgust.

---

AN 2 25

Trump signed an executive order Tuesday that vastly expands his influence over the federal government. At the heart of the order is the unitary executive theory, a controversial idea that says the president has the sole authority over the Executive Branch. The order makes it so that Trump controls several independent agencies.

“The action is likely to face court challenges and test a once-fringe legal theory,” according to Politico. They later add: “many mainstream legal scholars still believe it is illegal.”

The theory has also come into question in the case of Trump's firings throughout the federal government, including watchdogs and the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

READ MORE:'Utter incompetence': Federal agency rehires crucial workers after 'accidentally' firing them — again

The agencies affected by Tuesday’s executive order include the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Trade Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission, all of which were set up by Congress to act at least semi-independently.

Project 2025 architect Russell Vought, Trump’s budget chief, is a champion of the unitary executive theory. The executive order places him as supervisor to these agencies, saying he will “establish performance standards and management objectives.”

“The unitary executive theory has always been a dangerous idea given the risk of presidential overreach and abuse of power,” Christopher Wright Durocher, vice president of policy and program at the American Constitution Society, wrote earlier this month. “And Trump is practicing a unitary executive on steroids, brazenly stepping on Congress’s constitutional power and daring a House and Senate controlled by his party to stop him. Congress can and should reclaim its role, and as litigants file suits, the federal judiciary can also weigh in. Without pushback from the other two branches of government, however, there’s no telling how hulking Trump’s unitary executive may become.”

“The most controversial aspect of the UET is the president’s removal power,” according to the Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School. The theory says that the president can remove subordinate appointees — multiple presidents have used this theory to remove executive officials who the previous president appointed.

READ MORE:'Congress can‘t do anything': Top GOP senator says he has no power to stop Musk and DOGE

The 2021 Supreme Court case Collins v. Yellen established that the president is able to remove agency officials who were appointed by Congress at will. This decision allowed President Joe Biden to remove Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Mark Calabria, a Trump appointee. He later fired Trump appointee Andrew Saul, who was Social Security commissioner.

“Democrats may have rejoiced at President Biden’s decision to remove Trump holdover Andrew Saul as the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. But they should think twice about the long-term effects of claiming a constitutional power to fire a commissioner appointed to a six-year term without invoking the statutory provision allowing for-cause removal,” Syracuse University College of Law professor David M. Driesen wrote at the time.

“The unitary executive theory, which embraces presidential removal of agency heads for political reasons, provides a pathway to autocracy,” he wrote. He added: “A President with autocratic tendencies can use just about any government power to reward his friends and punish his enemies. President Trump showed this on numerous occasions.”

"This is where the debate is: at what point does the kind of power that Trump wants and the way he exercises his power cross over from a constitutional vision about presidential power to an a-constitutional vision," Bob Bauer, a law professor at New York University and former White House counsel under President Barack Obama told ABC News.

READ MORE:GOP senator slammed after urging Trump work around law to 'make president's job easier'

"He's going to do an enormous amount of damage that the courts can't in all cases readily remediate," he added. "By the time he's finished emptying out some of these agencies and in some cases closing them, putting all that back together again is going to be very challenging."

---

AN 2 25

'Aren‘t you the boss?' Maddow supercut shows Trump being 'palpably scared' to talk about Putin

---

AN 2 25

'Unthinkable': 'Massive layoffs at VA' as Trump tries to balance 'the budget on the back of veterans'

---

2 13 25 trump talks to putin fo 90 min war crim invite to US, he to russia

vuln to flattery, putin ex kgb handler

no nato crimea

'Palpable harm': Hegseth slammed for 'screwup' of 'biggest foreign policy issue'

--==

---

trump 3x dn short term pain long term gain

tariff max hypoc bad faith common sense BS all caps?

what? cruel strict fr? trolling?

Greg Gutfeld: Tariffs create higher food prices that “disincentivizes” eating}:

02/13/25 MMA

February 13, 2025, edition of Fox News' The Five

GREG GUTFELD (CO-HOST): Harold, let me try to break this down for you, because I know that some of these concepts are a little complicated. We know that high taxes disincentivizes work -- why work more if the government takes more? Whereas a tariff disincentivizes consumption, so -- "I have to pay for this, maybe I won't eat as much." So, isn't the international tariff an international consumption tax? And why are you against it, commie?

---

an 2 25

Trump appointed Pastor Paula White-Cain as head of his “Faith Office” last week, a controversial figure due to her belief that faith is transactional. She has had a long relationship with Trump, helping him appeal to the religious right throughout his political career. Daniel N. Gullotta outlines what her leadership looks like in a piece at the Bulwark published Wednesday.

“While I’m in the White House, we will protect Christians in our schools, in our military, in our government, in our workplaces, in our hospitals, and in our public squares,. “And we will bring our country back together as one nation under God, with liberty and justice for all.”

“White-Cain has long held that Trump was divinely chosen to lead the nation and that he is engaged in an ongoing battle against demonic forces,” Gullotta writes. In 2019, she said that Christians who voted against Trump would have to “stand accountable before God one day.” In 2020, she said "demonic confederacies" were trying to steal the election.

READ MORE:'Worse than I feared': Pastor unleashes plan to fight 'heretical Christian nationalism'

Gullotta is a Postdoctoral Research Associate at the Declaration of Independence Center for the Study of American Freedom at the University of Mississippi.

“She advocates a kind of “hard”prosperity gospel that makes the case for faith in explicitly transactional terms, with material rewards for personal fidelity sometimes quite clearly enumerated,” Gullotta writes. “Befitting her spiritual theme, her ministry fuses entertainment, self-help, and economic empowerment, making her a singular figure in the American religious landscape.

Like Trump, White-Cain -- who is married to Jonathan Cain of the band Journey -- believes that wealth is a measure of success.

Gullotta points out that the prosperity gospel is not popular among mainstream Christianity. “Most Christian traditionsreject andcondemn the prosperity gospel on theological, ethical, and biblical grounds; within mainstream evangelicalism, it is often labeled a heresy. Where is the room for essential Christian doctrines such as suffering, grace, and God’s sovereignty in a paradigm that puts success above all? The movement White-Cain represents has a reputation for corruption and the exploitation of the vulnerable, who are promised divine rewards in exchange for financial contributions.”

READ MORE:Trump’s new 'White House Faith Office' pick claimed 'demonic' forces stole 2020 election

Indeed, theologian Michael Horton wrote in the Washington Post last month that “Evangelicals should be deeply troubled by Donald Trump’s attempt to mainstream heresy,” naming White-Cain in the article.

Trump and White-Cain met in 2002 after Trump saw her on television. Soon, she was giving him guidance and helping him curry favor with the religious right. “When Trump announced his candidacy in 2015, White-Cain helped him navigate his relationship with religious voters, a bloc initially skeptical of the celebrity playboy,” Gullotta writes.

Mixed reactions to her appointment, Gullotta writes, show that Trump’s Christian base is not monolithic. “The reality is that Donald Trump’s Christian supporters are an uneasy alliance of factions that often disagree with one another and that each support him for different reasons and in pursuit of different goals,” he writes.

“It is maximally fitting for Paula White to be the chosen religious representative of a regime fueled by a naked pursuit of profit,” Malcolm Foley, a special adviser to the president of Baylor University and the author of The Anti-Greed Gospel, told the Bulwark.

READ MORE:Apocalypse Now: Extreme interpretation of Christian nationalism now guides Pentagon policy

:{:{“This is without question Trump's worst appointment. There's no defending this. Virtually any Protestant minister would be better,” podcaster and academic Anthony Stine, who is Catholic, posted on X.}:

---

AN 2 25

In 2023, then-Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) doubled down on his position that presidents should disobey federal court rulings — even from the Supreme Court — if they contradict the actions of the president. Now as vice president, Vance may be advising President Donald Trump to do exactly that.

In a Tuesday article, Politico's Ian Ward reprinted excerpts of an interview he conducted with Vance shortly after he was sworn in as Ohio's junior U.S. senator. In that interview, Vance defended comments he made in a 2021 podcast in which he said Trump should "fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, [and] every civil servant in the administrative state" if reelected. He then argued that if the courts intervened to stop those firings, Trump should "stand before the country like Andrew Jackson did and say: ‘The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.'"

Ward recalled that when asking Vance if he still held that view, he responded: "Yup." And Vance communicated over the weekend that he still holds this viewpoint, writing in a Sunday tweet: "Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power."

READ MORE:'Fake news': Law professor schools JD Vance after he suggests Trump ignore federal judges

Ward pointed out that should Trump appeal a decision against him all the way to the Supreme Court, and if the High Court upheld the lower courts' ruling and Trump disregarded it, it would provoke "a full-fledged constitutional crisis of a different sort, one that would entirely upend the existing rules governing the separation of powers between the courts and the executive branch."

"Although there is some historical precedent for a president defying a Supreme Court order, no showdown between the executive branch and the judiciary has risen to the level of crisis that would follow a move of the sort that Vance is suggesting," Ward wrote. "As several legal commentators have pointed out in response to Vance’s post, the ability to determine the constitutionality and legality of executive action is core to the courts’ power, meaning that denying them of that authority would profoundly upset the constitutional system of checks and balances as currently understood."

And as Yale Law Professor Akhil Reed Amar said in a Tuesday segment on CNN, the Andrew Jackson quote Vance referenced is "apocryphal," meaning its origins are hazy and that it's unlikely Jackson ever made such a statement. In fact, while Jackson disagreed with the Supreme Court's ruling in the 1832 Worcester v. Georgia case, he ultimately stated that the Court's orders were final and that presidents were duty-bound to abide by them.

The Trump administration appears to already be testing the waters of the judiciary's enforcement mechanisms. On Tuesday, a top Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) official instructed FEMA's Office of Grant Administration to withhold millions of dollars in Department of Homeland Security grant money despite a federal judge ordering that those funds be disbursed, as Congress already appropriated the money in question.

READ MORE:Trump's DHS freezes FEMA grant money hours after judge orders funding to be distributed

Click here to read Ward's full article in Politico.

---

an 2 25

in a “meandering” speech filled with off-script jokes, recycled campaign lines, and religious-themed policy announcements, President Donald Trump addressed religious and political leaders at the controversial National Prayer Breakfast at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Thursday. He pledged to “protect Christians” and announced plans to direct the U.S. Department of Justice to create a task force to “eradicate” what he called “anti-Christian bias.”

“Well, we wanna bring religion back stronger, bigger, better than ever before. It’s very important,” the President declared. “We have to have religion and it suffered greatly over the last few years, but it’s coming back.”

“We have to bring religion back. We have to bring it back much stronger. It’s one of the biggest problems that we’ve had over the last fairly long period of time. We have to bring it back.”

IFrame Content

He promised to “protect Christians” in schools, the military, in government, workplaces, hospitals, public squares, and said, “I will always protect religious liberty,” as he continued unveiling religious policy promises.

READ MORE: ‘Democracy Weeks Away From Disintegrating’: Democratic Senator Issues Warning — and a Plan

“And that is why today,” he declared, “I’m announcing that I will be creating a brand new presidential commission on religious liberty. It’s gonna be a very big deal, which will work tirelessly to uphold this most fundamental right. Unfortunately, in recent years, we’ve seen this sacred liberty threatened like never before in American history. There’s nothing happened like the last four years what’s happened with so many things have gone bad, but religion, what they’ve done, and the persecution that they’ve executed, have been just horrible.”

“The mission of this task force will be to immediately halt all forms of anti-Christian targeting and discrimination within the federal government, including at the DOJ, which was absolutely terrible. The IRS, the FBI, terrible, and other agencies,” Trump alleged. “In addition, the task force will work to fully prosecute anti-Christian violence and vandalism in our society and to move heaven and earth to defend the rights of Christians and religious believers, nationwide. We’ve never had that before, but this is a very powerful document I’m signing, you’ve got it, you get it now.”

IFrame Content

Trump praised himself for “showing up to the Prayer Breakfast,” falsely implying that his predecessors had not. He also hinted at the possibility of running for a third term—an idea some Republicans are backing with congressional legislation—and firmly asserted that the President of the United States should be a person of faith.

READ MORE: ‘Demagoguery’: Comer and Republicans Melt Down When Democrat Tries to Subpoena Musk

“We have a mandate and lets say the most consequential election in 129 years, and that’s good because I’m a believer, like you’re a believer, and we want to have a believer in this position,” Trump said.

“I really believe you can’t be happy without religion, without that belief,” he added. “Let’s bring religion back. Let’s bring God back into our lives.”

IFrame Content

The President mentioned the tragic loss of 67 lives in a recent mid-air crash near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, saying their time on earth was over but they are now with God. He swiftly transitioned to talk about the assassination attempt on his life in Butler, Pennsylvania, declaring, “It was God that saved me,” and claiming his son Don’s embrace of religion had increased as a result.

IFrame Content

Before falsely claiming, as he has countless times before, that his election allowed Americans to once again say, “Merry Christmas,” Trump said that “from the very beginning of our republic, America has always been a nation founded by people of faith and strengthened by the power of prayer and united by four simple, but very beautiful words: ‘in God we trust.’ And you all know there was a movement to get that out.”

“In God We Trust,” was officially adopted as the motto of the United States in 1956.

He also told attendees, “we get rid of woke over the last two weeks.”

The American Humanist Foundation on Thursday declared that the “National Prayer Breakfast and its ties to the Fellowship Foundation, an extreme Christian Nationalist organization, are a sham. Holding a government-run, taxpayer-funded Christian ceremony in the U.S. Capitol disrespects the secular ideals that founded this country.”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: Democrats Vow to Hold the Floor ‘All Night’ to Block Trump ‘Project 2025’ Nominee

---

mma

Right-wing media defend Trump's call to “take over” Gaza and expel Palestinians

Fox host Jesse Watters: Trump “can finally bring peace and prosperity and seaside condos” to Gaza

Written by Noah Dowe

Research contributions from Helena Hind, Jane Lee, Isabella Corrao, Alicia Sadowski, Alex Kaplan & Tyler Monroe

Published 02/05/25

On Tuesday, during a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Donald Trump said the United States “will take over” and take “ownership” of Gaza, displacing its population and redeveloping it into “the Riviera of the Middle East.”

Right-wing media immediately justified — and in some cases, outright endorsed — Trump’s statements, with some figures arguing Palestinians and others in the region “should be grateful” and declaring that “the strategic goal in Gaza is now and has always been ethnic cleansing.” Others argued Trump was “negotiating” or “playing four-dimensional chess” by “just kind of floating an idea.”

Trump proposed that the U.S. “take over” Gaza, displacing the Palestinian population

On Tuesday, Trump declared the U.S. “will take over the Gaza Strip” and force the Palestinian population to relocate into “other countries.” At a press conference with Netanyahu, Trump proposed that “all of” Gaza’s population could be removed so the strip could be redeveloped and turned into “the Riviera of the Middle East,” adding that U.S. troops could be used “if it’s necessary.” NPR, [2/5/25; The New York Times, 2/5/25; CNN, 2/4/25]

Trump suggested last fall that Gaza “could be better than Monaco” if rebuilt, complaining that Palestinians “never took advantage” of its oceanfront location. The Guardian, [10/8/24]

- Jared Kushner said earlier last year that “Gaza’s waterfront property could be very valuable,” adding that “from Israel’s perspective I would do my best to move the people out and then clean it up.” The Guardian, [3/19/24]

Human rights organizations and experts in international law said the forced displacement of Gaza’s population would violate international law — It “would constitute a crime against humanity,” said Amnesty International.A number of institutions, including Amnesty International, the United Nations, and the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law, and Armed Conflict, quickly denounced Trump’s proposal; as reported by The New York Times, forced displacement “is prohibited by multiple provisions of the Geneva Conventions, and the Nuremberg Tribunal after World War II defined it as a war crime.” Amnesty International, [2/5/25; Barron’s, 2/5/25; The New York Times, 2/5/25]

Some right-wing media figures directly endorsed Trump’s proposal...

---

an 2 25

Trump recently suggested he was preparing to investigate California's high speed rail project between Los Angeles and San Francisco, but the entity behind it is unfazed.

While signing an executive order in the Oval Office on Tuesday, Trump pivoted to the mass transit project being built in the Central Valley, calling it waste of "hundreds of billions of dollars." But the San Francisco Chronicle reported that the California High Speed Rail Authority's (CAHSRA) X account responded to Trump's threat with a shrug, and promised to continue its work.

"Ignore the noise," the @CASHSRA account tweeted. "We're busy building."

READ MORE:'First of many': internet erupts after judge blocks Trump's 'blatantly unconstitutional' order

The CAHSRA noted that so far, it has completed construction of 50 major structures, 60 miles of guideway, obtained full environmental clearance the entire length of the track from San Francisco to Los Angeles and created more than 14,600 jobs. Rep. Jim Costa (D-Calif.), who represents the Fresno area, also forcefully responded to Trump's attacks on the project, and reminded him that "big things are hard to do."

"Unwarranted investigations threaten job security — let’s focus on infrastructure and water investment to strengthen our communities," Costa tweeted.

During Trump's remarks on Tuesday, he rejected the idea of taking a train between California's two most prominent cities, encouraging Californians to either drive or "take an airplane." And while he said he would lead the investigation, he offered no details on how he would carry it out.

“[The project] wasn’t even necessary,” Trump said. “I would have said, ‘You don’t buy it. You take an airplane. It costs you $2, it costs you nothing.’”

READ MORE:'Where did he get this idea?' MAGA think tank behind 'reckless and ruthless' Trump policy

Click here to read the Chronicle's full report (subscription required).

---

MMA

Trump is trying to throttle the free press — and U.S. moguls are going along with it

Written by Matt Gertz

Published 02/04/25

President Donald Trump is wasting no time in carrying out his goal of throttling the free press. Over the first two weeks of Trump’s presidency, his appointees have wielded federal regulatory authority to punish outlets the president dislikes — and American media moguls are responding with submission.

Trump has turned standard conservative attacks on journalists into one of the hallmarks of his political agenda.

He takes as his model Hungary’s autocrat Viktor Orban, who has “effectively dismantled the news media in his country” as “a central pillar of Orban’s broader project to remake his country as an ‘illiberal democracy,’” as New York Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger noted in an extraordinary warning last year.

During his first term in office, Trump repeatedly tried to leverage state power against his despised “fake news,” and together with his Project 2025 allies has developed a playbook to attack, defund, and delegitimize news outlets in his second.

Major media companies began signaling before Trump took office that they were willing to play ball with his administration in order to preserve their business interests. But since Inauguration Day, as Trump’s appointees have begun showing their intentions, executives at several news outlets have gone into full retreat.

CBS News preps for a Trump settlement

In the final weeks of the 2024 presidential campaign, Trump denounced CBS News’ editing of a 60 Minutes interview with Vice President Kamala Harris as “the biggest scandal in broadcast history” and declared that CBS should be stripped of its broadcast license. But in addition to invective and threats, Trump also filed a lawsuit against the outlet for producing journalism which displeased him.

The suit, which alleged that CBS airing different portions of Harris’ answer to a question in different venues constituted “partisan and unlawful acts of election and voter interference,” drew derision from First Amendment attorneys, who described its legal theory to CNN as “ridiculous junk” and “a frivolous and dangerous attempt by a politician to control the news media.”

But over the past few weeks, reports have indicated that CBS News’ parent company, Paramount, may be preparing to settle the suit with Trump. Such a settlement would be “an extraordinary concession by a major U.S. media company to a sitting president, especially in a case in which there is no evidence that the network got facts wrong or damaged the plaintiff’s reputation,” as The New York Times put it.

But Paramount needs federal approval for its proposed merger with Skydance Media, the production company founded by filmmaker David Ellison, and apparently sees giving the president a payoff as a valid way to smooth the path. Pressure for the settlement is coming from top Paramount shareholder Shari Redstone, the Times reported, who “stands to clear billions of dollars on the sale of Paramount.”

LA Times’ biotech industry owner goes all-in for RFK Jr.}:

Billionaire doctor Patrick Soon-Shiong once drew plaudits for using a small fraction of the vast fortune he made in the biotech industry to purchase and sustain his hometown newspaper, the Los Angeles Times.

But Soon-Shiong’s involvement in the paper’s operations has become more heavy-handed since the final months of the presidential campaign, with the owner repeatedly weighing in on Trump’s behalf. Over the past few weeks, Soon-Shiong, whose medical patents are subject to federal oversight, has begun cheerleading for the confirmation of the anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as secretary of health and human services.

“‘I truly believe [Kennedy] has the American public's best interests at heart,’ Soon-Shiong tweeted Tuesday in a post he pinned to the top of his account on X, formerly Twitter, for much of last week,” NPR reported. “It was one of 18 messages promoting Kennedy that Soon-Shiong — a billionaire surgeon and medical inventor — posted over the course of four days, which included Kennedy's confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill.”

Soon-Shiong’s support for Kennedy appears to have bled into his paper’s operations as well. On Friday, an op-ed contributor accused the paper of deceptively editing the piece he submitted in order to remove his criticisms of Kennedy’s nomination.

CNN tries to move on

Journalists at CNN regularly drew vicious attacks from Trump and his supporters during the president’s first term. During a tone-setting press conference shortly before he took office, Trump lashed out at then-White House correspondent Jim Acosta as “fake news” and “terrible.” And Trump’s salvos at the network went beyond just words — his Justice Department tried to block a merger involving CNN’s then-parent company..

This time, CNN’s corporate leadership appears less willing to leave the network vulnerable to Trumpian retribution. Network chief Mark Thompson led an editorial meeting the day before Inauguration Day in which he instructed CNN talent “to be forward-thinking and to avoid pre-judging Trump” and to avoid “expressing any outrage of their own” or “relitigat[ing] the past,” former CNN reporter Oliver Darcy reported in his Status newsletter.

As for Acosta, he left CNN last week rather than accept Thompson’s offer to anchor the network’s coverage from midnight to 2 a.m. ET.

Trump’s FCC targets ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR, and PBS

The tip of the president’s anti-press spear is Brendan Carr, a Republican member of the Federal Communications Commission whom Trump elevated to chair. Carr authored Project 2025’s chapter on the FCC and has notably refused to reject Trump’s repeated calls for the commission to yank the licenses of broadcast networks whose reporting he dislikes.

Following his promotion, Carr sent a letter to Bob Iger, the CEO of ABC parent company Disney, in which he denounced the network for having “contributed” to the “erosion in public trust” and pointedly referenced the FCC’s regulatory power.

Carr also restored a right-wing group’s bias complaints targeting NBC, CBS, and ABC for purportedly biased coverage of the presidential campaign, which his predecessor had dismissed. In response to the CBS complaint, the FCC demanded that CBS News provide the unedited transcript and tapes of Harris’ 60 Minutes interview, adding government pressure to the benefit of Trump’s private lawsuit. The network ultimately submitted to what one legal expert described as a “highly partisan intervention” with “no historical antecedent.”

And on Wednesday, Carr announced a new FCC probe of underwriting announcements produced by NPR and PBS, “with an eye toward unraveling federal funding for all public broadcasting.”

Defense Department retaliates against news outlets

The Pentagon announced Friday night that the defense correspondents at NBC News, The New York Times, Politico, and National Public Radio are all required to vacate their dedicated workspaces. Their spots will instead go to the right-wing One America News Network, New York Post, and Breitbart — and theoretically to the progressive HuffPost, which does not have a Pentagon reporter and did not request space.

The move came a week after the Senate confirmed former Fox News host Pete Hegseth as defense secretary.

Take Trumpist threats to jail journalists seriously

:{:{09/23/24}:

Donald Trump’s authoritarian playbook to crush the free press in a second term}:

:{:{10/29/24}:

“Fake News Networks”: Trump and Project 2025’s goal to attack, defund, and delegitimize the press}:

10/16/24

---

FLOODING THE ZONE WITH SHIT

'Chaos and fear' at CDC amid order to retract journal articles to purge 'forbidden terms'

AN 225

---

AN 225

"States' rights" has long been a major rallying cry on the right. Many conservatives and libertarians maintain that what is right for Massachusetts and Maryland isn't necessarily right for deep red states like Alabama, Idaho, Mississippi and North Dakota — and that liberals and progressives are too quick to push a national solution to issues that should be addressed on a state-by-state basis.

But The New Republic's Matt Ford, in an article published on February 3, emphasizes that President Donald Trump, during his second term, is "steamrolling" individual states along with "separation of powers."

"In a series of executive orders since taking office," Ford explains, "Trump has sought to pressure, command, and even intimidate state and local officials across the country into carrying out his whims. Tensions between state and federal power are hardly new to American history. But the president's eagerness to bulldoze state and local power is a disturbing escalation of his autocratic approach to government."

READ MORE:Donald Trump’s tariff wallop demonstrates the brute power of an imperial presidency

Ford continues, "Education, for example, is a policy area that is typically guided by state and local governments. The federal Department of Education exercises some influence through its funding programs; Trump and other conservatives have long sought to abolish it and claimed they wanted greater local control over what students learn. That goal appears to be on hiatus for now: Trump issued an executive order last week titled 'Ending Racial Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling' that hopes to use the Department as an ideological cudgel."

Trump, according to Ford, isn't calling for states' rights when it comes to education or immigration, but rather, is demanding his own national standard.

"Trump's most aggressive efforts to alter the state-federal relationship can be seen in immigration policy," Ford observes. "Where education is traditionally a state responsibility, immigration exclusively falls within federal jurisdiction. To that end, the White House is targeting 'sanctuary' cities and states that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement."

Ford adds, "One of his initial executive orders directed the federal government to 'evaluate and undertake any lawful actions to ensure that so-called sanctuary jurisdictions.… do not receive access to federal funds'…. Trump is not interested in rewriting the balance of power between Washington, D.C., and the states. He is simply steamrolling anything that stands in his way."

---

AN 2 25

President Donald Trump’s Justice Department last week distributed a survey to FBI agents asking about their roles in the investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol — and some agents are taking the questioning as a sign of a potential purge of those perceived as disloyal to the president, Politico reported Sunday.

The 12-question survey, due Tuesday, asks agents about their role in the Jan. 6 investigations. It asks, for example, about whether they handled arrests, conducted surveillance, or testified in trials, among other types of involvement.

Concerns about mass firings are by no means unfounded. Last week, the Justice Department fired at least two dozen prosecutors who worked on cases related to Jan. 6. According to a memo, their employment has "hindered the ability" of the D.C. U.S. attorney to "faithfully implement the agenda that the American people elected President Trump to execute." Trump ended the four-year criminal investigation into the attack on his first day in office, pardoned Jan. 6 rioters, and ordered the DOJ to drop pending charges.

READ MORE:'Donald Trump's promised revenge tour is likely just getting started': military analyst

As the DOJ probes FBI involvement, not all agents are complying. An anonymous lawyer representing several FBI agents told Politico that some employees are pushing back against the inquiry, telling subordinates not to turn the surveys in.

“There’s growing resistance from among the SACs [special agents in charge],” they said. “Some are telling people beneath them, don’t submit it, or don’t submit it right away … Some are saying, we will submit it as leadership only.”

The Justice Department also asked for a list, due Tuesday, of employees who worked on Jan. 6 cases.

The FBI Agents Association, a group providing advocacy for active and retired FBI agents, wrote to members that employees carrying out their jobs legally should not be treated as though they had carried out any wrongdoing.

READ MORE: Another 'hair on fire' moment as Elon Musk further buries his nose into the US government

“We understand that this feels like agents and employees are being targeted, despite repeated assurances that ‘all FBI employees will be protected against political retribution,’” the association wrote. “Employees carrying out their duties to investigate allegations of criminal activity with integrity and within the rule of law should never be treated as those who have engaged in actual misconduct.”

“We continue to hear rumors of dismissals/security revocations, or individuals who have been told to expect dismissals on Monday,” the association wrote. “Again, we have no confirmation of any such events. Please be cautious in sharing and spreading what could be misinformation. We do not need any more stress on those potentially impacted.”

---

an 2 25

President Donald Trump has taken credit for distributing water to Southern California, but Fox News Chief National Security Correspondent Jennifer Griffin said otherwise. In fact, she said in a post on X on Monday, the water went to farmers whose dormant crops did not need it.

“President Trump again said he ‘turned the water on’ in California and that water could have been used to fight the wildfires,” Griffin wrote. “A few facts: The water released by the Army Corps of Engineers from 2 dams in Central California has no way to reach Southern California. The sudden rush alarmed local farmers whose land was nearly flooded.”

She added: “The water is usually kept in reserve to help farmers in Central California during summer drought months. There are no crops that need the water right now. They are dormant. The water was released by the Army Corps of Engineers from Terminus Dam at Lake Kaweah and Schafer Dam at Lake Success but has no way to connect to the aqueduct to deliver water to Southern California to be used for wildfires (most of which are now no longer burning).”

READ MORE: 'Exaggerated his own made-up claim': CNN rapid-fire fact-check busts Trump’s presser talking points

Griffin was responding to a post from Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency: “Congratulations to the Administration and DOI’s [Department of Interior] Bureau of Reclamation for more than doubling the Federally pumped water flowing toward Southern California in < 72 hours. Was an honor for the DOGE team to work with you. Great job!”

Trump repeated the claim during a press conference Monday.

More water from Northern California would not have changed the outcome of the fires that destroyed parts of Los Angeles, a spokesperson for California Gov. Gavin Newsom told the Los Angeles Times.

“There is no shortage of water in Southern California,” Newsom’s spokesperson, Tara Gallegos, said. “Water operations to move water south through the Delta have nothing to do with the local fire response in Los Angeles. Trump is either unaware of how water is stored in California or is deliberately misleading the public.”

READ MORE: 'Steamrolling anything in his way': How Trump is 'bulldozing state and local power'

Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) also questioned the move. “Unscheduled water releases require close coordination with local officials and safety personnel, as well as downstream agricultural water users, in order to reduce flood risks to communities and farms,” he wrote to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. “Based on the urgent concerns I have heard from my constituents, as well as recent reporting, it appears that gravely insufficient notification was given, recklessly endangering residents downstream.”

“Today, 1.6 billion gallons and, in 3 days, it will be 5.2 billion gallons. Everybody should be happy about this long fought Victory!” Trump posted on X last week. “I only wish they listened to me six years ago — There would have been no fire!

---

AN 2 25

NO LNX

On Monday afternoon, February 3 — two weeks after President Donald Trump started his nonconsecutive second term — he spoke to reporters inside the White House. And Trump forcefully defended his new tariffs, which include 25 percent across-the-board tariffs on any goods coming into the United States from Canada or Mexico. For goods coming from Mainland China, Trump imposed a 10 percent tariff.

Following the press conference, CNN's Daniel Dale gave Trump a comprehensive fact-check — pointing out Trump's ability to build on his own exaggerations and false claims.

Dale told CNN hosts Brianna Keilar and Boris Sanchez, "There's a concept I think of as Trumpflation, where he makes a false claim — and then, it keeps getting falser and falser over time. The numbers keep rising."

READ MORE: 'Congratulations, America!' Trump mocked over his response to WSJ’s scathing tariff rebuke

Sanchez noted that Trump previously claimed that the United States, under former President Joe Biden, was sending $50 million to Gaza to buy condoms for members of Hamas — a number Trump increased to $100 million during the presser.

Sanchez told Dale and Keilar, "Trump actually exaggerated his own made-up, exaggerated claim during this. He doubled it." And Keilar added that the $100 million figure "is doubly incorrect."

Dale, during the fact-check, pushed back against Trump's claim that Canada and the European Union (EU) aren't buying as many U.S. exports as they should be buying.

Dale told his CNN colleagues, "He said, when talking about Canada: They don't take our agricultural products, for the most part. In fact, Canada is the third largest export market for U.S. agriculture: about $28 billion in purchases in 2023. There is a dispute about milk exports that he referred to, but in terms of agriculture as a whole, it's not true."

READ MORE: Donald Trump’s tariff wallop demonstrates the brute power of an imperial presidency

Dale continued, "He said that the European Union doesn't take our farm products. The European Union is the fourth largest export market, about 12 billion per year. He said we have about a $350 billion trade deficit with the EU — another gross exaggeration. It's about 125 billion. And he repeated this claim about aid to Ukraine that he repeatedly makes: He said that the EU provides way less aid to Ukraine than the U.S. does — they need to catch up and so on. In fact, according to the latest numbers we have, the EU has committed about double the aid to Ukraine during this war than the U.S. has."

READ MORE: 'Big government populist demagogue': Right-wingers slam Trump tariffs as markets plummet

---

mel and kids also cryto?

an 1 25

'Perfect bribery vehicle': Creator of major cryptocurrency rips Trump’s 'meme coin'

Carl Gibson

---

an 1 25

'Single greatest threat': Ted Cruz defiant after Trump attempts to curb his subpoena power

---

all fuckery clawed back bc of oppos from indivisible, courts, etc? 1/30/25

indiv: If you’ve been following our emails or checked the news this week, you’re aware that on Tuesday, Trump’s Office of Management and Budget issued a memo freezing virtually all federal spending -- funds allocated by Congress for things like Medicaid, housing assistance, scientific research, food for hungry families, and a million other things.

These were funds that the Constitution does not allow the president to withhold. So before the freeze was set to take effect (and after a tremendous amount of chaos and fear was unleashed), a federal judge blocked it. Then, amidst massive public backlash, and nonstop calls to House and Senate offices (thanks to all of you), the White House backpedaled and rescinded the memo.

We wish that were the end of the story. But it is not. Quickly after the memo was rescinded, Trump’s press secretary volunteered that they were only rescinding the document, not the intent behind it. That statement was confusing, but clear enough about the administration’s illegal intentions that another judge felt the need to issue a second order blocking the funding freeze.

Obviously, the administration bungled this. And clearly, they’re not done trying. That’s why Trump wants Russell Vought at the helm of OMB.

What does Vought have to do with the funding freeze?Well, the entire concept is kind of his "Hot to Go" (or depending on your generation, perhaps his "Free Bird"). Read his academic writings, and he waxes on about the president remaking government by withholding funds from programs that don’t align with his ideological agenda. Watch his Senate hearings, and he croons about the president’s right to do it, Constitution and Supreme Court guidance be damned.

In fact, while serving as OMB Director for a brief time during Trump’s first term, he tried it on a much smaller scale -- freezing funds allocated for Ukraine (an impeachment resulted). The move was later deemed blatantly illegal.

The Office of Management and Budget is often called the "most important agency you’ve never heard of" because it really does hold a lot of power -- coordinating policy across all government, overseeing budgets, and more.

Russell Vought has an even more expansive view of the agency’s power -- he views it the “nerve center” of the federal bureaucracy and believes that under the right leadership (his), it can totally bypass Congress and give Trump king-like powers. He wrote an entire chapter about it in Project 2025 -- the Heritage Foundation blueprint for an autocratic second Trump term. You may recall Trump disavowing the plan on the campaign trail. But surprise, now that he’s president, he’s seeking to install its authors in the highest positions of government.

If Vought is confirmed, chaotic funding freezes like we saw this week will only be the beginning. Together, Trump and Vought will seek to transform the government into a tool of far-right ideology,Christian Nationalism, and political revenge against Trump’s enemies.

We’ll be honest. Vought is not going to be the easiest of Trump’s nominees to block. His MAGA bona fides and extensive experience in Washington give him a lot of cred with Republican senators.

But this week, senators also witnessed his plans put into action -- and the mayhem it caused in their states as millions who rely on government grants nearly had their lives, businesses, and education upended. All senators, especially Republican senators, need to understand that a yes for Vought is a yes for the exact funding freeze that was just rescinded.

No amount of expert questioning during a senate hearing could have better illustrated the danger Vought poses. We all witnessed it. Now, it’s up to us to make sure senators don’t hear the end of it -- and to demand they vote no.

Trump action stalls studies of deadly bird flu as outbreak escalates across the U.S.

---

AN 125

Donald Trump's list of orders just seven days as the 47th president of the United States is getting longer — and receiving more and more pushback from journalists and political experts.

The Associated Press reported on Monday that "U.S. public health officials have been told to stop working with the World Health Organization, effective immediately."

Per the news outlet's report, :Experts said the sudden stoppage was a surprise and would set back work on investigating and trying to stop outbreaks of Marburg virus and mpox in Africa, as well as brewing threats from around the world. It also comes as health authorities around the world are monitoring bird flu outbreaks among U.S. livestock.

READ MORE:[Trump in for rude awakening as some Republicans less than enthusiastic about his agenda: report

Former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan slammed the latest Trump move via social media, writing: Self-destructive insanity

John Pelissero, political scientist and Government Ethics scholar at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics of Santa Clara University, wrote: "Not surprising that Trump is back with an uncaring approach to public health. This is not a policy area for disrupters."

Washington Post contributing editor David E. Hoffman commented: "Sure, everyone drinking up detergent will stop the next pandemic. Brilliant."

---

mma

January 27, 2025, edition of Fox News' Outnumbered

HARRIS FAULKNER (FOX HOST): Well, exactly a week ago this hour, we got a brand new president, number 47, for his second term and there are already calls to put his face on Mount Rushmore. A growing number of conservatives are pushing to add Trump to the legendary monument. They claim he's already done enough to be immortalized alongside George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Teddy Roosevelt, and Abraham Lincoln. And Republican Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna says she's already filing the legislation to make it happen. Make Mount Rushmore great again? Jason?

JASON CHAFFETZ (FOX CONTRIBUTOR): Hey, if there's room up there, I think it'd be great. I think what Donald Trump has done and is in the process of doing is transforming the United States of America and putting America first. And I think America loves it and I think there's a great case for it.

FAULKNER: Kayleigh?

KAYLEIGH MCENANY (FOX HOST): Yeah. I'm fascinated by this because that would be some sweet irony after President Joe Biden stopped the fireworks display from Mount Rushmore. So if you did the, like, 250th anniversary of the country at Mount Rushmore with President Trump's face, it would be epic. There's also a petition now in Congress to change Dulles Airport's name to Donald Trump International Airport. So you have Trump and you have Reagan in D.C. And wouldn't that be something special for the swamp?

### On Presidents Day, Sinclair's Boris Epshteyn said the “presidents on Mount Rushmore may have to make room” for Trump

02/19/19 4:47 PM EST

### CBS’ Stephen Colbert mocks Sinclair chief political analyst Boris Epshteyn for suggesting Trump will end up on Mount Rushmore

02/22/19 9:50 AM EST

### Rush Limbaugh Pushes To Add George W. Bush To Mt. Rushmore

09/12/1x

---

NOTE MASSIVE TOADYING TO EVERY WHIM AND WACKO NOTION, JDV WHIPSAWED ON J6 PARDON

### Ben Shapiro: “These inspectors general tend to be Democratic plants very often”

01/27/25 2:18 PM EST

### Ben Shapiro on FEMA: “It is a bizarre thing that area-specific crises ought to be thrust on the federal government”

01/27/25

---

MMA

CNN’s Daniel Dale fact-checks Trump’s claims that CA water policy exacerbated LA fires

Special ProgramsClimate & Energy

Written by Allison Fisher

Published 01/24/25

On January 20, as part of his day one executive orders, President Donald Trump directed several U.S. agencies to restart a policy from his first term that reroutes water from Northern California to Southern California. The order ties Trump’s policy to the devastating fires in California that are so far responsible for 28 deaths and more than $250 billion in damages, effectively canonizing the false right-wing media claim that current California water policy impeded efforts to contain the LA fires.

Right-wing media wildfire misinformation underpins Trump’s executive order on California water policy

At the outset of the LA fires, the most costly in California history, Trump blamed “federal and state protections for California’s endangered delta smelt fish. He falsely claimed that those regulations led to inadequate water availability for firefighting efforts.”

As The New York Times explained at the time:

Peter Gleick, co-founder of the Pacific Institute, a California research organization that focuses on water, said Mr. Trump was spouting “complete nonsense.”

“There’s no link between California’s water policies and efforts to protect endangered species and water availability for firefighters,” Mr. Gleick said. “They’re completely unrelated."

He noted that Southern California reservoir levels, including ones that feed Los Angeles, are above normal for this time of year. “There’s no water shortage,” he said. “The real issue is that urban water systems are not built or designed to fight massive, urban wildfires.”

Despite this and other fact-checks confirming Trump’s claims are inaccurate, right-wing media elevated this misinformation while firefighters raced to suppress the fires. As firefighters continue their battle to contain the blazes, Trump and right-wing media have continued to spread this falsehood, undeterred by the facts.

During Trump’s first sit-down interview since his swearing in, the president and Fox host Sean Hannity continued to push falsehoods about the LA fires, saying they were caused by poor forest management and lack of water due to California’s water policies. During the interview, Hannity asked Trump whether aid to the state would “be contingent on them practicing the science of forestry.” In response Trump said, “I don't think we should give California anything until they let water flow down.”

Video

Citation

From the January 22, 2025, edition of Fox News' Hannity

Most recently, Trump repeated the false claims while visiting North Carolina (and hours before visiting California):

But much more importantly, in California, just to revert to it for a second, millions of gallons of water are waiting to be poured down through, already, the halfpipes that are already built. … And about 20 years ago they turned off the water. And it is the water that comes from the Pacific Northwest, some of it comes out of Canada. And it flows there and it probably has flowed there for a million years and they turned it off and they route it out to the Pacific. And in the meantime, you don't have water in the hydrants, you don’t have water in the sprinkler systems. … Everyone is trying to figure out, “Why aren't they turning it back” — they say it’s the delta smelt, it’s a fish. But I find that hard to believe.

Moments after Trump’s comments, which aired live on Fox News and CNN, CNN’s Daniel Dale fact-checked the claim that water policy played a role in the LA fires:

The fact is that whatever happened in Los Angeles has nothing to do with a little fish in Northern California, like President Trump keeps saying. He keeps saying or suggesting that there was insufficient water in Los Angeles. You know, those dry hydrants we heard about in Pacific Palisades because the state didn't send enough water down from Northern California to L.A., instead was doing environmental protection like protecting the delta smelt. I've talked to a bunch of experts in California water policy. Complicated stuff. But on this subject, it's not complicated. Those two things have nothing to do with each other. If you look at California water data, it's available online. You'll see that there is no shortage of water in the Los Angeles area.

Trump’s January 22 interview with Hannity and his visit to California on January 24 came just days after the president signed an executive order that directs U.S. agencies to restart work “to route more water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to other parts of the state for use by the people there who desperately need a reliable water supply.” The order reads: “The recent deadly and historically destructive wildfires in Southern California underscore why the State of California needs a reliable water supply and sound vegetation management practices in order to provide water desperately needed there, and why this plan must immediately be reimplemented.”

---

an 1 25

Former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan shut down President Donald Trump's claim that he knows more than Federal Reserve when it comes to interest rates.

During a Thursday press conference, a reporter said to the president, "You said you think the Fed should listen to you. Can you elaborate on why you think it should?"

Trump asked, "With regards to interest rates?"

READ MORE:Trump has threatened to fire the Federal Reserve chair — that could be bad news for inflation

"Correct, yes," the reporter replied.

"Because I think I know interest rates better than they do," Trump said. "And I think I know it certainly much better than the one who's primarily in charge of making that decision. But, no I'm guided by them very much. But if I disagree with them I will let it be known."

Former MSNBC host Medhi Hasan responded via X, writing: "You could take out 'interest rates' from this sentence and replace it with almost any other word, phrase, or phenomenon and it would still be an untrue statement."

---

an 1 25

In his farewell address, outgoing US President Joe Biden warned “an oligarchy is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power and influence that literally threatens our entire democracy”.

The comment suggests that, under Donald Trump’s second term as president, it will be billionaires rather than the people who shape public policy.

There is certainly some evidence Biden’s ominous caution should be taken seriously. The world’s richest man and the owner of X, Elon Musk, has been a vocal supporter of the Republican candidate. Other billionaire tech moguls to visit Trump at his Mar-a-Lago mansion after his 2024 election victory include Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Apple’s Tim Cook and Google chief executive Sundar Pichai.

There is nothing unusual about business leaders wanting the ear of an incoming president. What has concerned Biden and others is that so many of Trump’s influential backers also own media platforms and have the ability to sway public opinion.

Should these new tech titans be thought of as oligarchs?

What is an oligarchy?

Like many of the academic and scientific categories we still use today, oligarchy was originally defined by the Greek philosopher Aristotle.

In The Politics, he argued people are “political animals”, social by nature, and instinctively want to live in a community. He studied different governments of the ancient world and concluded there were six essential types.

A state could be ruled by a single leader, a small group of elites, or through mass participation of the people. If the leadership acted in the common advantage (koinê sumpheron), he termed these constitutions to be monarchy, aristocracy or polity, respectively.

If the constitutions became corrupt and the leadership acted only to advance their own self-interest, he labelled them tyranny, oligarchy and democracy.

[

So for Aristotle, an oligarchy is a corrupt form of government. It is when power is in the hands of a small group of elites who advance their own interests rather than the common good.

In Aristotelian terms, democracy is also a corrupt form of government in which the majority uses its power to abuse minorities. While the term democracy has been rehabilitated and is usually seen as a positive, the word oligarchy has retained its negative connotations.

When the United States was created, the founding fathers looked back to Aristotle, Polybius, Cicero and other ancient thinkers to try and create the best kind of constitution.

Following the Aristotelian tradition, they tried to design a mixed constitution where neither the one, the few nor the many could dominate the others. The president has great power. But their power is kept in check by Congress and the judiciary, which is in turn kept in check by the media and, ultimately, the people through regular elections.

Modern oligarchies

In modern politics, the term oligarch is most often used in a Russian context. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, opportunistic tycoons made enormous fortunes from buying up state assets such as energy companies and financial institutions, which also brought them significant political influence as a result.

Since Vladimir Putin became president in 2000, however, Russia has become increasingly authoritarian. While there is still an oligarchic class, their power has been reined in. They must not challenge Putin’s power or vision for the state.

Although China is ostensibly a communist state, the Gini index (the measure of social inequality) has blown out in recent years as a small group of elites become increasingly wealthy.

Despite the state’s official commitment to socialist principles, political scientist Ming Xia has argued China is now transitioning into a modern oligarchy.

What about the United States and Australia?

Despite Biden’s warning of a potential oligarchy, political scientists Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page argued back in 2014 the US already was one.

The US has the essential features of a liberal democracy (fair and regular elections, freedom of speech, and an independent press). But Gilens and Page worried large businesses and a small group of affluent citizens had a disproportionate influence on policy.

In Australia also, it could be argued an oligarchy is either emerging or has already taken hold.

Australia has a similar-sized economy to Russia and a growing list of billionaires who appear to have significant influence over government policy.

The power of the Murdoch family and their media empire is well-documented. We have also seen increased political activity from other billionaires including Gina Rinehart, Andrew Forrest and Clive Palmer – who went as far as to start his own political party.

There is no question billionaires in the US and Australia have enormous power and influence. But that in itself does not make an oligarchy.

In Aristotelian terms, the defining feature of an oligarchy is the ruling elite blatantly use their status for their own personal gain rather than the public good.

This is a moral judgement, and one that is increasingly hard to make when so many of the ultra-wealthy own traditional news media and social media platforms that can shape public opinion.

Nevertheless, any shift towards oligarchy should be a cause of alarm to all who value the long democratic tradition in both the US and Australia.

Whether it is a symptom of Trumpism, as Biden suggests, or part of a longer trend, strengthening our democratic institutions and curtailing the disinformation and misinformation that are all too prevalent on social media, is part of the solution.

Benjamin T. Jones, Senior Lecturer in History, CQUniversity Australia

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

---

no lnx

Alternet

Reminder: Trump is a demented criminal president

John Stoehr January 23, 2025

I just want to remind everyone that America elected a demented criminal president and as a consequence, we can no longer assume what we used to assume when it came to matters of law and politics.

I know that sounds like a sweeping generalization, but sometimes you gotta swing hard if you’re going to get people’s attention, and right now, given that liberals and Democrats got their heads in the sand, I think it’s prudent to swing hard, even if I’m proven wrong in the end.

And I know that saying something as sweeping as this can sound pessimistic, as if I’m suggesting that nothing can be done about a demented criminal president, but I don’t see it that way. I think liberals and Democrats still believe Donald Trump is going to overreach, and they still believe public opinion is going to turn, and when it does, thank God! Liberals and Democrats won’t have to fight so hard!

Again, we elected a demented criminal president.

We can no longer assume what we used to assume.

Case in point is the reaction to Donald Trump’s executive order claiming to “end birthright citizenship,” in the words of USA Today.

Liberals and Democrats were correct to point out that the president can’t do any such thing on his own, as ending the legal right to be called a US citizen due to being born on US soil would require a constitutional amendment. It was said that the order would be stopped almost immediately by the courts. Yesterday, 18 attorneys general from states run by Democrats filed suit to do just that.

While this reaction is correct as a matter of fact, it is wrong as a matter of politics. This is a demented criminal president we are talking about, and while the courts may end up stopping his order, the courts can’t stop a demented criminal president from ignoring the courts and acting, you know, like a criminal. We assume that a demented criminal president will obey the law and I don’t see why we should assume that.

Even if the president himself said OK, OK, I can’t end birthright citizenship by myself, there are plenty of people in his administration, not just political appointees, who would be happy to break the law and just pretend that the children of immigrants who are born on US soil are not citizens. They would also be happy to stop doing for them what they would do for any other (white) baby born on US soil, such as issuing Social Security cards or other important federal documents.

Even if it came to light that this rogue federal agency was responsible for infringing the rights and privilege of tens of thousands of natural-born citizens, who would prosecute the offense? The same Justice Department that is, right now, planning payback against the members of the Congress who investigated the J6 insurrection?

Even if that Justice Department actually did manage to prosecute and convict these rogue federal agents (who were only doing what Trump wanted them to do), should we assume that the same demented criminal president who pardoned virtually all the paramilitaries who sacked and looted the US Capitol would not pardon them as well.

And even if public opinion turned against Trump’s lawlessness, what reaction could we reasonably expect? The Philadelphia Inquirer’s Will Bunch said the inauguration was “a dangerous display of rapid mental decline” and that the biggest takeaway was “seeing how rapidly the oldest new president in America is declining right in front of us.”

“We’ve just flipped the car keys of this 248-year-old republic to a grandpa who starts his four-year road trip already in a serious state of mental decline, with all the guardrails of yesteryear stripped away by a corrupt Supreme Court, a feckless and increasingly useless Democratic Party, and a bended-knee elite media,” he said (my italics).

Again, it bears repeating: this is a demented criminal president we are talking about. The things that would normally constrain a president – the institutions, the courts and public opinion – are probably not going to constrain this one. I would suggest that they almost certainly won’t.

And while liberals and Democrats console themselves into believing the only way to end birthright citizenship is by amending the Constitution, they’re missing the real goal, which is getting around all those quaint little rules that everyone else plays by and going straight to the US Supreme Court. Trump’s executive order really could end birthright citizenship if he can force five justices to agree with it.

Like a lot of liberals and Democrats, I don’t yet know how to resist a president who is criminal enough to ignore the courts (or turn a blind eye to crimes committed in his name) and demented enough to ignore public opinion. I don’t yet know how to think about politics as applied to a president who won’t act like any president who came before him.

What I do know is we have to try – if not for ourselves, then for our children, and for those who came before us and did figure it out.

NOW READ: Trump's MAGA America revives a Confederate nightmare

---

aha a 3 fer?

punish CA for not voting for him, gov and AG fight/sue call him out, beat up on immigrants dem gt replace theory BS; // dems did not want to help NC hurricane?

an 1 25

'Not good': Trump proposes 'getting rid of' FEMA and conditioning California aid on voter ID

Trump intensified his attacks on the Federal Emergency Management Agency during a visit to Hurricane Helene-damaged parts of North Carolina on Friday, announcing he is planning on reforming or “getting rid of FEMA,” and proposed an unprecedented move to condition disaster relief on the passage of a voter ID law by California’s lawmakers, “as a start.” Trump’s trip, which will include travel to California later Friday, appears designed to target the emergency management agency, which he has been criticizing for months.

In what appeared to be scripted remarks, Trump later elaborated that he would “sign an executive order to begin the process of fundamentally reforming and overhauling FEMA, or maybe getting rid of FEMA. I think frankly, FEMA’s not good. I think when you have a problem like this, I think you want to go and, uh, whether it’s a Democrat or Republican governor, you want to use your state to fix it and not waste time.”

“Calling FEMA and then FEMA gets here and they don’t know the area,” Trump claimed. “They’ve never been to the area and they want to give you rules that you’ve never heard about, they wanna bring people that aren’t as good as the people you already have,” he alleged.

“FEMA turned out to be a a disaster. And you could go back a long way, you could go back to Louisiana, you could go back to some of the things that took place in Texas. And it turns out to be the state that ends up doing the work. It just complicates it. I think we’re gonna recommend that FEMA go away. And we pay directly and we pay a percentage to the state, but the state should fix it.”

RELATED: Is Trump Using Project 2025 to Eliminate FEMA?

In his wide-ranging remarks, President Trump also claimed that “rather than going through FEMA,” disaster relief aid to California and North Carolina “will go through us,” meaning, through his administration. FEMA is a federal government agency under the wide umbrella of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The president nominates the HHS Secretary, a cabinet level official, and the FEMA administrator.

IFrame Content

And Trump appeared to say that he will assign Republican National Committee chairman Michael Whatley to manage financial aid to North Carolina, removing FEMA from the state.

“Trump also said FEMA would not be involved in further relief efforts and instead suggested that Whatley, North Carolina Governor Josh Stein (D), and a trio of Republican House members would be working with the White House directly because the agency ‘hasn’t done the job,'” The Independent reported.

“I wanna see two things in Los Angeles,” Trump also told reporters late Friday morning, “voter ID so that the people have a chance to vote, and I want to see the water be released and come down into Los Angeles and throughout the state. Those are the two things. After that, I will be the greatest president that California ever has ever seen.”

“I want the water to come down and come down to Los Angeles and also go out to all the farm land that’s barren and dry,” Trump claimed. This week the President appeared to suggest that water runs only north to south.

READ MORE: Danish MP Follows Profane Message to Trump With Warning to Greenlanders on US Civil Rights

“So, I want two things,” Trump repeated, “I want voter ID for the people of California. They all want it. Right now you have no, you don’t have voter ID. People want to have to voter identification. You wanna have proof of citizenship. Ideally, you have one-day voting, but I just want voter ID to start, and I want the water to be released, and they’re gonna get a lot of help from the U.S.”

---

mma

1 25

During the inaugural prayer service, Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde urged President Donald Trump to “have mercy” on undocumented migrants and LGBTQ kids, and right-wing media responded by calling her a “fake bishop” with “deranged political beliefs,” saying her sermon was “heretical” and “satanic,” and claiming she was “forcing left-wing platitudes down everyone’s throat.”

Budde’s comments about mercy provoked Trump

- The bishop leading the inaugural prayer service at Washington National Cathedral made a plea to Trump to “have mercy” on behalf of LGBTQ kids and migrants.“In the name of our God, I ask you to have mercy upon the people in our country who are scared now,” said Budde, the Episcopal bishop of Washington, D.C. “There are gay, lesbian and transgender children in Democratic, Republican and independent families. Some who fear for their lives.” She added, “They may not be citizens or have the proper documentation, but the vast majority of immigrants are not criminals. They pay taxes and are good neighbors. They are faithful members of our churches and mosques, synagogues.” NBC News, [1/21/25]

Trump attacked Budde the next day and demanded an apology. He wrote on Truth Social: “The so-called Bishop who spoke at the National Prayer Service on Tuesday morning was a Radical Left hard line Trump hater. … She was nasty in tone, and not compelling or smart. She failed to mention the large number of illegal migrants that came into our Country and killed people. Many were deposited from jails and mental institutions. It is a giant crime wave that is taking place in the USA.” Rolling Stone, [1/22/25]

Appearing onThe View, Budde clarified that her responsibility “was to reflect, to pray with the nation for unity” and that her remarks were an attempt to “say we need to treat everyone with dignity, and we need to be merciful.”She stated, “I also realized that unity requires a certain degree of mercy, mercy and compassion and understanding and so knowing that a lot of people, as I said, in our country right now, are really scared, I wanted to take the opportunity in the context of that of service for unity, to say we need to treat everyone with dignity, and we need to be merciful.” She also said she would be open to a one-on-one with Trump, saying, “I could assure him and everyone listening that I would be as respectful as I would with any person, and certainly of his office, for which I have great deal of respect.” Deadline, [1/22/25]

Right-wing media attacked Budde’s sermon as “heretical” and “satanic”

Fox News host Laura Ingraham called Budde a “radical leftist.” Ingraham claimed it was “not compassionate to have an open border, violent crime, murders of Americans, human and drug trafficking that kills hundreds of thousands and brutalizes others.” Fox News, The Story with Martha MacCallum, [1/21/25]

Fox News’ Sean Hannity said the bishop “made the service about her very own deranged political beliefs with a disgraceful prayer full of fearmongering and division.”He then dismissed her concerns about the demonization of migrants, saying, “If you come in the country illegally, you didn't respect our laws, our borders, and our sovereignty, that would make you a criminal by definition.” Fox News, Hannity, [1/21/25]

Daily Wire host Matt Walsh said that “hell exists for people like Mariann” and called her “exhibit A for why women should not be pastors, priests, or bishops."He added that “she would rather engage in emotional blackmail and blasphemy than preach the word of God” and said that trans kids “fear for their lives because they've been exploited and brainwashed by wicked witches like Mariann.” [The Daily Wire, The Matt Walsh Show, 1/22/25]

Walsh also said that, “If evil had a face and a haircut, this is what it would look like. It would look exactly like Mariann Budde, the fake bishop of Washington for the Episcopal church.”The Daily Wire, The Matt Walsh Show, [1/22/25]

Fox anchor Martha MacCallum said Budde’s call for compassion was “really a gotcha moment on her part, which I find very uncharitable.” She added, “I thought it was massively inappropriate.” Fox News, America’s Newsroom, [1/22/25]

The Daily Wire’s Michael Knowles belittled the bishop, calling her a “fake priestess lady” and her sermon “heretical.” He said, “It is no wonder that a woman who would mistake herself for a bishop might also confuse a foreign national for an American citizen, or even a little boy for a little girl.” The Daily Wire, The Michael Knowles Show, [1/22/25]

Fox & Friendsco-host Lawrence Jones said Budde “went into some political radical leftist” rhetoric and suggested she “speak to any of the families that were killed by illegals” about mercy.Co-host Ainsley Earhardt declared that people who share Budde’s opinion “are reading the whole border situation in the wrong way,” adding, “It’s not that he [Trump] doesn’t have compassion. … Everyone is God’s child. It’s not about that. It’s about taxpayers paying so much for other people — we’re pouring into the tax base and they’re giving that money to people who are not here legally and are not contributing.” Fox News, Fox & Friends, [1/22/25]

Fox host Jesse Watters said Budde is “the new face of the resistance: woke bishops and insufferable blue hairs.”After playing the clip of Budde asking Trump to have mercy, Watters joked, “I’m sorry, is that the National Cathedral or the DNC?” Fox News, Jesse Watters Primetime, [1/22/25]

Fox’s Will Cain accused Budde of using “a house of worship as a place to project her own politics."He continued: “It wasn't honest. She wasn't seeking to have a conversation out of real earnestness or concern. I think most offensive, Ainsley, is that her concerns were so cliched and wrong. It’s like it was written by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. I mean, it wasn’t sincere in that no one believes LGBTQ kids should be fearing for their lives today. There’s no grounding for that. To go on from that to talking about the human dignity of illegal immigrants, which is not something disputed by Donald Trump — simply their right to remain in America — shows a real dishonesty, and from the pulpit, from that bishop.” [Fox News,Fox & Friends, 1/22/25]

Right-wing Rumble host Dan Bongino called Budde a “fake bishop” who was “forcing left-wing platitudes down everyone's throat on a moment of supposed national unity.”Rumble, The Dan Bongino Show, [1/22/25]

Right-wing podcaster Steven Crowder called the bishop’s sermon “satanic.”He then attacked her for “chastizing a sitting president over things that he’s never done and threats of actions that will never happen.” Louder with Crowder, [1/22/25]

Anti-LGBTQ social media account Libs of TikTok posted a photo of Budde and wrote, “This is the Bishop who lectured Trump today with trans propaganda. Always the eyes.”Twitter/X, [1/21/25]

Right-wing radio host Bill Mitchell shared Libs of TikTok’s post and commented, “Good Lord. This Bishop looks demon-possessed.”Twitter/X, [1/21/25]

Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk called Budde’s sermon “disgraceful,” adding, “She embarrassed herself.” Twitter/X, [1/21/25]

White nationalist podcaster Stew Peters demanded, “Why does the Episcopal Church allow bull-dykes as bishops?” Telegram, [1/21/25]

Priest and conservative commentator Calvin Robinson claimed that Budde was “breaking the Church law, by being at the pulpit in the first place,” and accused her of lecturing Trump on “her leftist, radicalist, extremist politics, which just goes to show the mess the Church is in at the moment.” Robinson said, “The Scriptures are very clear on this, that women cannot become bishops. … It goes as far as saying, ‘A woman should be silent in church.’ I know some people with modern ears will cringe at that. But this is what the Scriptures teach us. If we follow the Scriptures, we wouldn’t be in the mess we’re in right now.” Salem News Channel, The Charlie Kirk Show, [1/22/25]

Fox News contributor Mollie Hemingway blamed Budde’s speech on the Episcopal Church as a whole: “We’ve seen a church that really used to be quite large and dominant in American culture that has lost a lot of membership as it traded a clear teaching on Jesus Christ and his life, death, and resurrection for left-wing, usually Democrat Party associated politics." Fox News, The Story with Martha MacCallum, [1/22/25]

Fox host Will Cain said Budde is “somewhat symbolic” of the “woke virus,” which “hasn’t just, you know, government and sports and every other aspect of American culture. It has also infected the church.” His guest and Fox & Friends Weekend co-host Charlie Hurt claimed, “You have a situation where you have the president of the United States who comes in to church to be prayed for and then this is what he’s had to listen — some stupid political lecture from some tinpot politician who couldn’t succeed … in the real political world.” Fox News, The Will Cain Show, [1/22/25]

OnThe Five, co-host Jeanine Pirro called Budde a “nasty clergy woman.” Watters later added, “She's lucky this didn't happen on day one when he was a dictator because he would have put her in prison.” Fox News, The Five, [1/22/25]

Fox's Greg Gutfeld called Budde “Satan.”Gutfeld: “Satan isn't going to show up in red tights holding a pitchfork. It's going to show up like that. She's an imposter, she exploits compassion for terrible, terrible beliefs.” Fox News, The Five, [1/22/25]

OANN host Matt Gaetz attacked Budde, saying she “chose a time honored national and religious tradition to make a noxious political speech.” OAN, The Matt Gaetz Show, [1/22/25]

Fox contributor Tyrus: “She's an activist, and she was pretending to be a person of God.”Fox News, Gutfeld!, [1/22/25]

---

an 1 25

'Blood, feces and terror': Judge Chutkan unleashes on Trump in response to Jan. 6 pardons

---

an 1 25

'Road to chaos': Trump orders 'thousands' of troops and 'illegal' arrests at border

---

RWI WILL LEVERAGE KACI KLEPTO

AN AH 1 25

Less than a week from now — on Monday, January 6, 2025 — Donald Trump will once again become president of the United States. And he will return to the White House with small Republican majorities in both branches of Congress as well as a 6-3 GOP-appointee supermajority on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Senate confirmation hearings have already been held for some of Trump's presumptive nominees, including former Fox News host Pete Hegseth (Trump's pick for defense secretary) and former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi (the president-elect's choice for U.S. attorney general).

In an article published on January 16, The Hill's Brett Samuels lays out some reasons why Trump's second term could have a greater impact than his first.

READ MORE:Torture? Shoot protesters? Greenland? Questions Hegseth refused to answer

"This Trump knows more about how Washington works," Samuels explains. "Trump 1.0 wanted to change Washington, but Trump 2.0 is set up better to succeed. And the president-elect is equipped with a highly capable chief of staff in Susie Wiles, who has infused more discipline into his operation…. Trump's team retains its outsider appeal, and the frenzy that was a defining element of Trump's first term is unlikely to disappear. But it's also a team with more insiders who can reach into the halls of American power."

Samuels continues, "One of Trump's top allies now is tech entrepreneur Elon Musk, the richest person in the world. Other tech and business titans, including Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg, are signaling they want to work with Trump, underscoring how the next four years won't be like the president-elect's first four in office."

Sean Spicer, the first of four White House press secretaries during Trump's first term, stresses that the president-elect is in a much different "environment" than he was eight years ago.

Spicer told The Hill, "When it comes to the three big things — the people, the process and the priorities — these guys are in a totally different league than we were in 2016…. It's not just lessons learned. It has to do with the environment."

READ MORE:'Hope bending the knee was worth it': Nikki Haley mocked after Trump's 'birdbrain' barb

Samuels notes that in 2017, Trump "frequently clashed with" then-House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) — whereas in 2025, he has an "established relationship with" Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana).

"Trump has also met, in recent weeks ,with Republicans in the Senate and House to ensure he has the full backing of the GOP upon taking office," Samuels observes. "And he'll have a cavalcade of outside supporters pushing his agenda, in the form of think tanks, conservative media influencers and powerful allies such as Musk, who has already hinted he could use his enormous wealth and megaphone to pressure Republicans who do not back Trump's agenda."

Samuels adds, "Taken together, these factors amount to a second Trump term that will feature many of the same players but look drastically different in its ability to implement his agenda, especially in its early days."

READ MORE:'Cringe': Legal expert explains how Senate Dems dropped the ball with Trump AG pick

---

AN 1 25

The Right Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde, the Episcopal bishop of Washington — who led the inaugural prayer service Washington, DC Tuesday received fierce backlash from a Republican congressman after asking President Donald Trump to "have mercy" on LGBTQ people and immigrants.

“In the name of our God, I ask you to have mercy upon the people in our country who are scared now,” said Budde, as Trump, Vice President Vance, and their families looked on.

"There are gay, lesbian and transgender children in Democratic, Republican and independent families. Some who fear for their lives. They may not be citizens or have the proper documentation, but the vast majority of immigrants are not criminals. They pay taxes and are good neighbors. They are faithful members of our churches and mosques, synagogues."

READ MORE:Trump Inauguration dubbed 'a coronation of our country's descent into oligarchy'

Rep. Mike Collins (R-GA) shared the video via X, writing: "The person giving this sermon should be added to the deportation list."

Several journalists and immigration experts immediately slammed the Georgia lawmaker over his remark.

Religion News Service national reporter Jack Jenkins replied: "Note: The person giving the sermon in question is Bishop Mariann Budde, the Episcopal Bishop of Washington. Collins is suggesting deporting a U.S. citizen and bishop for delivering a sermon in accordance with their faith."

Longtime journalist John Harwood commented: "dangerous lunacy"

American Immigration Council senior fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick added: "A sitting member of Congress calls for the deportation of a bishop who asked Trump to show mercy to those in the country who are afraid. We are in a dark moment in this country and have abandoned our founding principles. God have mercy on us."

Center for International Policy Vice President for Government Affairs Dylan Williams commented: "You know wanting to punish and purge people for exercising freedom of speech and other basic American rights makes you a fascist, right?"

---

god grifters really hate it when an actual xian calls out the fake one

1 25

01/22/2025

Peter Montgomery

Donald Trump and his Christian nationalist supporters are demonstrating once again that much of the harshest anti-Christian rhetoric in our political life doesn’t come from secular leftists, it comes from right-wing Christian leaders and activists who bitterly trash the faith of Christians who don’t share their religious and political worldviews.

Their most recent target is Episcopal Bishop Mariann Budde, who spoke at the National Prayer Service held at the Washington National Cathedral on Tuesday. Budde talked for about 15 minutes on the topic of unity, using her last few minutes to directly and respectfully address Trump and ask for mercy on behalf of gay, lesbian, and transgender people, immigrants, and refugees.

The same religious-right leaders and activists who have embraced or explained away Trump’s relentless lying, cruelty, corruption, and criminality, were outraged by Budde’s willingness to challenge him over the harmful impact his actions as president will have on many people.

Sean Feucht, a dominionist musician, political activist, and ardent Trump supporter, was contemptuous, referring to Bishop Budde as “the priestess” and saying, “They should let Christians preach next time.”

In a video posted from within the Cathedral, Feucht literally sneered at the interfaith service’s inclusion of “all these random religions and faiths,” concluding, “this was not a church service.” He continued:

We’re gonna go have a real church service with a bunch of folks that were in here. We’re gonna go lift up the name of Jesus because we are one nation under God, not all these other random religions. We don’t all worship the same God. And we definitely don’t worship the God of the LGTBQ mafia.

Feucht’s comments are a reminder that religious-right activists leaders are be quick to claim anti-Christian persecution when they are criticized for their harmful agendas or dishonest rhetoric, but they are themselves quick to attack other Christians. (Marjorie Taylor Greene recently provided another example, attacking the Catholic faith of Martin O’Malley because of his pro-choice position on abortion.)

“The Washington National Cathedral has become the Sanctuary of Satan,” ranted pundit Todd Starnes. He went on to denounce the Episcopal Church as “barely a religion.” He charged that “the blasphemous bishop at National Cathedral preached hate from her pagan pulpit.”

MAGA “prophet” Shave Vaughn declared Budde “a Bishop of Babylon.” Anti-LGBTQ activist John Amanchukwu denounced Budde as “a wolf in Bishop garments,” calling her “heretical” and “diabolical.” Dominionist Jim Garlow complained that it was “torture” to listen to Budde.

The kind of religious-right figures who constantly complain that conservative pastors aren’t preaching enough about politics complained that Bishop Budde would “lecture us about contemporary political positions,” in the words of Choral Ridge Ministries’ Rob Pacienza.

Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins denounced Budde’s comments as “rather pathetic,” tweeting that “The cause of America’s decline was not what was sitting in the pew but what was standing behind the pulpit.” Wallbuilders’ Tim Barton had the gall to complain about Budde “making a political speech from the pulpit” and griped about the service including people of other faiths.

Pastor and Trump apologist Robert Jeffress complained that Budde had “insulted rather than encouraged our great president.” Rep. Mike Collins of Georgia declared on X, “The person giving this sermon should be added to the deportation list.” Alex Jones denounced Budde as a “wokist cult leader.”

Trump himself demeaned Budde on his Truth social feed, calling her a “so-called Bishop.”

Meanwhile, Feucht also posted a celebratory video sharing his excitement that Secretary of Defense nominee Pete Hegseth has invited him to hold one of his Christians-only religious revivals in the Pentagon.

It’s worth noting that other Christians have praised and welcomed Budde’s remarks as an example of the kind of moral courage and leadership that is required in an era when Trump’s MAGA movement has been fully embraced by dominionists and white Christian nationalists. rww

---

an 1 25

Only one day into Donald Trump's second term, The Atlantic's David A. Graham is able to pinpoint the biggest factors that make this time around so "different" from the MAGA leader's first presidency.

Noting that, in 24 hours, the 47th president of the United States has already "pardoned more than 1,500 January 6 rioters, including some involved in violence," moved "to end birthright citizenship," removed the US from the "World Health Organization, attempted to turn large portions of the civil service into patronage jobs, and issued an executive order defining gender as a binary," Graham submits these actions "would have caused widespread outrage and mass demonstrations if he had taken them during his first day, week, or year as president, in 2017."

Furthermore, The Atlantic staff writer adds that these steps have "been met with muted response, including from a dazed left and press corps," when just eight years ago, "hundreds of thousands of demonstrators gathered in Washington, and Americans flocked to airports at midnight to try to thwart Trump’s travel ban."

READ MORE:'Like a unicorn': Legal analysts demolish Trump’s 'lunatic fringe' arguments on key issue

Graham submits,"The difference arises from three big factors. First, Trump has worked hard to desensitize the population to his most outrageous statements. As I wrote a year ago, forecasting how a second Trump presidency might unfold, the first time he says something, people are shocked. The second time, people notice that Trump is at it again. By the third time, it’s background noise."

He added, "Second, Trump has figured out the value of a shock-and-awe strategy. By signing so many controversial executive orders at once, he’s made it difficult for anyone to grasp the scale of the changes he’s made, and he’s splintered a coalition of interests that might otherwise be allied against whatever single thing he had done most recently."

Finally, "American society has changed," Graham emphasizes. "People aren’t just less outraged by things Trump is doing; almost a decade of the Trump era has shifted some aspects of American culture far to the right."

READ MORE:Trump kept his promise — and made some Democrats look like fools

---

TRUMP INAUG SP ANTI-DEI BS

an 1 25

The World Economic Forum begins its 54th annual confab of CEOs and billionaires this week in Davos, Switzerland. Among its attendees are some who attended Trump’s inauguration yesterday to kiss his derriere, and then promptly private-jetted to the Swiss Alps.

Since its inception, the Davos confab has justified itself — and thereby sought to justify global corporate capitalism — by embracing “corporate social responsibility.”

The basic idea is that big global corporations can — and should — be good for everyone. Sure, they may make a few CEOs and big shareholders fabulously wealthy. But they can and should also protect the planet and spread their financial gains.

Hence, Davos attendees’ annual commitments, in myriad sessions and presentations, to “ESG” (environmental, social, and governance — that is, sustainability), “DEI” (diversity, equity, and inclusion), and global and social responsibility in general.

In recent years, Davos has become a choice venue for splashy corporate announcements of such commitments.

In 2020, Marc Benioff of Salesforce issued a goal to plant a trillion trees. The same year, Larry Fink of BlackRock (which manages more than $10 trillion in investments) announced a series of initiatives to invest in ways that better protect the environment. The CEOs of JPMorganChase and Goldman Sachs trumpeted their Net-Zero Banking Alliance.

Other corporate poobahs have used the venue to make grand promises to share profits with their workers, their communities, and the less fortunate around the world. Jamie Dimon, then head of the Business Roundtable, touted his and the Roundtable’s pledges to their workers, their neighborhoods, and the nation as a whole.

But wait. These are exactly the goals Trump and MAGA have railed against, calling them “woke” capitalism.

Now that CEOs of the largest corporations in the world are demonstrating cringe-worthy cowardice when it comes to all things Trump, what’s to become of corporate social responsibility?

Presto! Davos has gone through an ideological cleansing. This time, few if any sessions will be devoted to ESG or DEI. The perennial theme of “corporate social responsibility” has almost vanished.

The CEOs who used to trumpet their corporate social responsibility won’t be doing so this year. (BlackRock’s Fink has already expressed regret over becoming the face of ESG). JPMorganChase and Goldman Sachs have departed their Net-Zero Banking Alliance.

Instead, after years of calling for “responsible” global corporate capitalism, the CEOs gathering in Davos are now openly focusing on their bottom lines.

In other words, the jig is up. The pretense is over. The blather about corporate social responsibility is revealed for what it really is and always has been — PR designed to make the public believe that big global corporations care about anything other than making as much money as possible, as soon as possible.

I, for one, think this is a good thing.

All the artifice about corporate responsibility, echoed year after year at Davos and by the Business Roundtable and in business schools, gave lawmakers who wanted one an excuse to sit on their hands, because, they’d say, big global corporations can be trusted to do what’s right.

The truth is, they can’t. They never could. They won’t sacrifice shareholder returns to tackling climate change or social injustice.

Anyway, these are jobs for governments responsible to the people, not for corporations responsible to shareholders.

The Trump regime won’t do a damned thing about these problems, of course. If anything, it will take us and much of the world backward. (Trump is expected to appear at Davos via videoconference, and god knows what he’ll say.)

But at least we will know where the blame lies. And we will have the chance in future years — I fervently hope — to elect governments that tackle them head-on.

---

proud boys parade at inaug

List of people pardoned or granted clemency by the president of the United States - Wikipedia

on January 20, 2025, Trump issued roughly 1,500 pardons and 14 commutations to people charged in connection to the January 6 United States Capitol attack.[109] This included former leader of the Proud BoysEnrique Tarrio and founder of the Oath Keepers Stewart Rhodes.[110]

---

1 25 no vids

wASHINGTON — President Donald Trump on Monday issued roughly 1,500 pardons and commuted the sentences of 14 of his supporters in connection with the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, when thousands of them stormed the building amid his false claims that the 2020 presidential election was rigged against him.

Trump commuted the sentences of individuals associated with the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, who were convicted of seditious conspiracy. He then issued "a full, complete and unconditional pardon to all other individuals convicted of offenses related to events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021," a category that included people who assaulted law enforcement officers.

Capitol riotTrump's Jan. 6 pardons face pushback from Republican senators

"This is a big one," Trump said in the Oval Office while signing the document, adding, "We hope they come out tonight, frankly."

The family of Enrique Tarrio, the Proud Boys leader convicted of seditious conspiracy, said in a media statement Tuesday that he was released late Monday from FCI Pollock, a medium-security federal prison in Louisiana, and expected to arrive in Miami on Tuesday.

Tarrio was serving 22 years in federal prison after he was convicted of seditious conspiracy.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who was speaker of the House during the attack, called Trump's actions "an outrageous insult to our justice system" and the law enforcement officers who protected the Capitol that day.

"It is shameful that the President has decided to make one of his top priorities the abandonment and betrayal of police officers who put their lives on the line to stop an attempt to subvert the peaceful transfer of power," she said in a statement. "Despite the President’s decision, we must always remember the extraordinary courage and valor of the law enforcement heroes who stood in the breach and ensured that democracy survived on that dark day.”

The pardons fulfill one of Trump's central campaign promises.

Immediately after the Jan. 6 attack, Trump sought to distance himself from the attack, saying those who broke the law should be held accountable. But over the next few years, a new narrative emerged, and Trump soon began openly signaling his support for Jan. 6 rioters, calling them "hostages."

The unprecedented attack on the Capitol, when the peaceful transfer of power was interrupted, was one of the most significant moments in American history.

It resulted in the largest FBI investigation ever, with criminal charges against more than 1,500 people and criminal convictions against more than 1,100 defendants. Many low-level riot defendants were sentenced to probationary periods after having been convicted of misdemeanor offenses, like unlawful parading inside the Capitol.

But hundreds of others who committed serious felonies, such as assaulting police with deadly or dangerous weapons, got significant prison sentences.

At the time Trump issued the pardons, there were about 700 defendants who either never received prison sentences or had already completed their sentences, meaning pardons or commutations would have little practical impact on them, beyond restoring voting rights and gun rights for those who were convicted of felonies.

More than 600 people were sentenced to incarceration, but only a small fraction of them are still behind bars. Many of those who are in the custody of the federal Bureau of Prisons were convicted of violent attacks on police officers protecting the Capitol during an assault in which Jan. 6 defendants were armed with firearms, stun guns, flagpoles, fire extinguishers, bike racks, batons, a metal whip, office furniture, pepper spray, bear spray, a tomahawk ax, a hatchet, a hockey stick, knuckle gloves, a baseball bat, a massive “Trump” billboard, “Trump” flags, a pitchfork, pieces of lumber, crutches and even an explosive device.

More than 140 police officers were injured and several Trump supporters died during the attack, including one who was shot trying to breach the House Speaker's Lobby and another who died in the middle of a brutal battle at the lower west tunnel, where some of the worst violence of the day took place.

IFrame Content

Trump did not speak about Jan. 6 in his inauguration address, in which he said he hoped he would someday be remembered as a "peacemaker and unifier."

But shortly thereafter, he spoke to an overflow crowd of supporters in the Capitol and addressed the Jan. 6 defendants, once again airing his baseless claim that the 2020 presidential election was "rigged."

"I was going to talk about the J6 hostages," Trump said in that speech, using the term "hostages" to refer to criminal defendants, including hundreds who admitted to their criminal offenses under oath and others who were convicted by either judges or juries of their peers. "But you’ll be happy because, you know, it’s action, not words, that count. And you’re going to see a lot of action on the J6 hostages."

An attorney who worked on Jan. 6 cases as a federal prosecutor told NBC News that it was always possible that Trump would return to power and pardon Capitol riot defendants but that the Justice Department "pressed ahead anyway" because "political considerations should not play any part in the Justice Department’s evaluation of facts and law, which showed that these were crimes — some of them terribly serious crimes — that warranted prosecution.”

The source said that they and, they suspected, many of their colleagues "have no regrets about having pursued these cases" and that the effort remains highly consequential because it created "a definitive, public factual record of what actually transpired" on Jan. 6.

"These cases assured police officers and civilians who were assaulted at the Capitol that there were people, and there was a Department of Justice, who recognized what they endured and sacrificed. These cases led to hundreds of defendants' acknowledging their crimes by pleading guilty in open court and hundreds of others' being found guilty at trial," the source said. "The work is likely be terminated before it can be fully completed, most significantly by the abrupt termination of the special counsel’s work. But the record stands

---

alternet-

Trump's poorest supporters are in for a rude awakening

John Stoehr January 19, 2025

Since the election, you have probably heard a lot about FAFO (“f--- around and find out”). It’s the idea that voting is a choice and voters must face the consequences of their choices. If you are, say, a poor person, you shouldn’t have voted for Donald Trump or any Republican, because in the end, they’re going to betray you. But if you did, well, f--- around and find out.

Low-income voters did indeed vote for Trump.

According to the Post, “50 percent of voters from families with an income of less than $50,000 a year cast their ballots for Trump, according to [exit polls], compared with 48 percent for Vice President Kamala Harris. Four years ago, President Joe Biden carried those voters by 11 percentage points; Hillary Clinton won them by 12 points in 2016 and former president Barack Obama by 22 points in 2012.”

They’re anxious now, the Postsaid.

Some believed his promise to put them first, but the Republicans around him keep talking about cutting spending and slashing services.

“Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy – whom Trump has chosen to lead a new nongovernmental advisory panel, the ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ – have said they want to trim $2 trillion from the government’s annual budget, a cut that some experts say could be accomplished only by slashing entitlement programs,” the Post said.

ALSO READ: We're watching the largest and most dangerous 'cult' in American history

The Post continued: “Trump’s pick for White House budget director was a key architect of Project 2025, a plan drawn up by conservatives to guide his second term that calls for steep cuts to programs such as food stamps. And GOP leaders in Congress and Trump advisers are considering significant changes to Medicaid … and other federal aid.”

Low-income supporters want him to honor his promise.

The Post report isn’t alone. Since the election, I have seen many stories about Trump voters who are now concerned about what Trump is going to do – sick people who fear the repeal of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare); Latinos who fear their families being deported; and now poor people who survive on food stamps but fear them being cut.

These stories never fail to get the attention of the FAFO crowd, which is to say, of liberals and Democrats who are still smarting from defeat.

They take some comfort in the idea that Trump voters will feel the consequences of their actions. The more literate among them might even cite HL Mencken: “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”

But the FAFO crowd is giving Donald Trump too much credit.

They assume that the Trump administration’s policies and programs will affect everyone equally. They do not assume, as they should, that Trump will reward his friends and punish his enemies. If he ends up in the process looking like a hypocrite, or committing a crime, so be it.

The incoming administration is going to be fantastically corrupt. It’s going to take a large, serious and sustained counteroffensive to fight against it. But we might end up underestimating the enormity of the project by continuing to focus on FAFO, as if Trump would not spare supporters from facing consequences if doing so suited his interests.

He will try if it does.

Even if that means breaking the law.

Take immigration. Trump vowed to deport millions of “illegal” workers. If successful, he’d decimate the labor supply and hurt the big farming states like Nebraska and Kansas that cannot function without “illegal” workers to pick their crops. Knowing that they voted for him anyway, by huge margins, the FAFO crowd is expecting them to find out.

They probably won’t. Immigration and Customs Enforcement will almost certainly focus on “illegal” immigrants in states like New York and California, especially in cities like New York City and Los Angeles, because they voted against Trump. Meanwhile, “illegal” immigrants in Nebraska and Kansas will be overlooked, because it’s convenient to.

Take tariffs, too. Trump vowed to impose across-the-board levies on imported goods from China and elsewhere. The impact could, in effect, be as much as a 20 percent sales tax on everything from sneakers to video games. Knowing that poor people voted for Trump, because prices are too high, the FAFO crowd is expecting them to find out.

Again, they probably won’t. First, Trump’s tariffs will be unequal. They will depend on who’s willing to bribe him and for how much. Those who won’t or can’t will face a levy. Those who can and will won’t.

And if tariffs make things more expensive for Trump voters, and they will, because they’re inflationary, there’s nothing saying Trump can’t “offer” them a “tax rebate” to offset the increase. That such a thing would be illegal and unconstitutional and impossible to implement is beside the point. The point is that Trump will be fantastically corrupt.

Same thing with entitlement programs – Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and the rest. The FAFO crowd is expecting Trump supporters to suffer the consequences of their choices. If they didn’t want cuts to food stamps, for instance, they shouldn’t have voted for a Republican.

But they do want cuts, not for them but those who don’t “deserve” them, which is to say, people who are not like them. This is clear when you read the Post report carefully, especially quotes from the “longtime Democrat” who “struggled over whether to vote for Trump.” She “kept coming back to the conclusion that Trump would put Americans like her first and improve her economic prospects” (my italics).

“We helped get you in office; please take care of us,” she told the Post.

“Please don’t cut the things that help the most vulnerable.”

You’re not vulnerable if you’re not one of them.

Trump won’t help, because he never put you first.

NOW READ: It's time for liberals to abandon MSNBC's 'sweet little lies'

---

AN 1 25

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon has denied the Department of Justice’s request to share Special Counsel Jack Smith’s report on his investigation into Donald Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents with Congress. Her order came just hours after now-President Trump signed an executive order to hold former government officials accountable for “unauthorized disclosure” of “sensitive” information, and “for election interference.”

Judge Cannon, a Trump appointee whose rulings have been highly criticized, refused to allow members of Congress to review Smith’s final report. Trump was investigated for alleged unlawful removal, retention, and refusal to return sensitive, classified, and top secret documents, reportedly including nuclear and defense secrets. The FBI executed a lawful search warrant on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort and residence to retrieve some of the documents.

Part of her reasoning, Politico’s Kyle Cheney reports, is that Congress “hasn’t asked for it and it’s not clear they need it, she says.”

“The ruling will make it easier for Trump to bury the report on the special counsel’s criminal probe,” Politico adds.

Late Monday night, one of the reportedly dozens of executive orders President Trump signed also addressed sensitive and classified information.

READ MORE: Skipping Hand on Bible, Trump Declares ‘We Will Not Forget Our God’ at Inauguration

In it, he revoked the security clearances of dozens of former federal government officials, including some who had worked in his first administration, like former U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton, whom he criticized.

The list includes the 51 former U.S. intelligence officials who signed a letter reportedly stating that the disclosure of emails purportedly from Hunter Biden’s laptop “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

“Many of the former officials are long retired and no longer hold active clearances — meaning that the move may have limited practical impact on their careers — but the order nevertheless suggests that Trump intends to act on threats he’s made to penalize national security and intelligence professionals whom he deems to be his enemies,” CNN reported.

“They should be prosecuted for what they did,” Trump had said.

“National security is … damaged by the publication of classified information,” the executive order reads. “Former National Security Advisor John R. Bolton published a memoir for monetary gain after he was terminated from his White House position in 2019. The book was rife with sensitive information drawn from his time in government. The memoir’s reckless treatment of sensitive information undermined the ability of future presidents to request and obtain candid advice on matters of national security from their staff. Publication also created a grave risk that classified material was publicly exposed.”

In 2023, Bolton commented on the classified documents criminal case against Trump, at the time 37 felony charges, most of which were under the Espionage Act.

“Trump appeared to have a ‘pattern’ of wanting to collect materials ‘of interest to him,’ including classified documents,” Bolton said, as The Hill reported. He also “knocked Trump’s behavior as ‘very disturbing.'”

Bolton told MSNBC, “there were some [documents] that we did get back. Others, the most famous, to me, it demonstrates why I don’t need to read the indictment or believe its allegations are true, although I’m pretty confident they are — was the famous tweet that he did after getting an overhead picture of a failed Iranian missile launch, which he was shown during an intelligence briefing. [He] didn’t give [it] back, and it was tweeted before the intelligence officials got back to their office.”

Bolton was “referring to a 2019 tweet from the then-president.”

READ MORE: Trump Expected to Target Citizenship of Children With Undocumented Parents

Trump’s order on Monday also stated: “It is the policy of the United States that individuals who hold government-issued security clearances should not use their clearance status to influence U.S. elections.”

Among the intelligence professionals the order revokes security clearance from are well-known cable news commentators, and political and national security experts.

In addition to Bolton, some on the list include: James Clapper, Michael Hayden, Leon Panetta, John Brennan, Jeremy Bash, and Nada Bakos.

Margaret Brennan, CBS News Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent and “Face the Nation” moderator noted that Trump revoking “the security clearances of a long list of former intelligence officials … makes it hard for his own team to seek informed counsel from them.”

Mark Zaid, an attorney who specializes in national security issues, including security clearances, noted, “no President has ever done this before.”

Watch video of Trump below or at this link.

---

an 1 25

no vids

After being sworn in for a second term by U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Roberts on Monday, January 20, President Donald Trump gave his inaugural address — which was followed by a different speech later in Emancipation Hall.

CNN's Daniel Dale gave Trump many fact-checks during his first term as president. And he wasted no time fact-checking Trump's Emancipation Hall speech.

Dale's colleague Jake Tapper told him, "I know there are a lot of familiar lies that were just told, but bring us up to speed on what you think the biggest ones were." And Dale responded, "There were a bunch, Jake."

READ MORE: Biden preemptively pardons members of January 6 panel and other Trump targets

Dale noted that while there was only a "smattering of falsehoods" in Trump's "scripted" inaugural speech, he "returned to his familiar lie-a-minute style" during the "unscripted" Emancipation Hall speech.

"He said the 2020 election was totally rigged," Dale told Tapper. "We know that's a lie. He said his opponents tried to rig it this time; that is more nonsense. He said California Democrats tried to cheat, and that he thinks he would have won the state this time if it were not rigged. Well, it was a free and fair election in that state as well; he lost by more than three million votes."

Dale continued, "He claimed he won Alabama this time by 48 points — more like 30, 31. And then, on immigration, he spoke of the jails of every country in the world being emptied into this country. He has never provided any evidence for his familiar claim that foreign countries are deliberating emptying prisons to send people here as migrants."

The CNN fact-checker also debunked Trump's false claims about the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol Building.

READ MORE: Trump expected to target citizenship of children with undocumented parents

"He repeated the claim that former House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi has admitted that she rejected a Trump offer of 10,000 National Guard troops on January 6, 2021," Dale told Tapper. "First of all, there is no basis for the claim Trump even made her such an offer. It wouldn't even have made sense, given he, the president, is the commander of the DC National Guard — the speaker of the House has no authority to deploy them or for a deployment."

Dale added, "And second of all, (Pelosi) never admitted that such an offer was made. She has steadfastly rejected that. She is on tape, on January 6, expressing frustration with the security failure that day, and saying: I take responsibility for not having them better prepared."

---

an ah 1 25

Shortly after noon on Monday, January 20, 2025, Joe Biden's presidency officially ended when President Donald Trump was sworn into office by U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. Vice President JD Vance, moments earlier, was sworn in by Roberts' colleague, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, officially replacing former VP Kamala Harris.

Politico's Josh Gerstein, in an article published after Trump's second got underway, offers some reasons why Roberts "played a significant and perhaps surprising role in making Trump's second term a possibility."

"Roberts' court issued a pair of decisions that dramatically affected the trajectory of Trump's 2024 campaign," Gerstein explains. "First was a unanimous ruling in March that blocked efforts in states to knock Trump off the ballot based on the Constitution’s provision barring insurrectionists from public office. Second was a 6-3 ruling in July on presidential immunity that complicated and delayed the federal criminal case against him for trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election. Roberts wrote the immunity opinion."

READ MORE:'Maddening': How Teflon Don avoided accountability — again

Gerstein stresses, however, that Trump and Roberts "have long had a difficult relationship."

"While a candidate in 2016," the Politico reporter recalls, "Trump called Roberts 'an absolute disaster' and 'disgraceful.' Two years later, the men clashed openly over Trump's penchant for attacking judges and accusing them of ruling for partisan political reasons. Roberts issued an unusual public statement defending his colleagues, writing, 'We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges.'"

But Trump, Gerstein remembers, angrily responded, "Sorry Chief Justice John Roberts, but you do indeed have 'Obama judges.'"

Gerstein expects Roberts and his colleagues to hear more Trump-related matters now that his second term as president has begun.

READ MORE:Biden preemptively pardons members of January 6 panel and other Trump targets

Gerstein notes, "Another wave of those challenges is expected to reach the High Court in the coming weeks or months, as opponents of Trump policies on immigration, the environment, transgender rights and other issues seek to block executive actions the incoming president is set to issue almost immediately."

READ MORE:Trump expected to target citizenship of children with undocumented parents

---

an 1 25

Trump's inauguration speech was an outright insult both to the American people and the English language, as critics online painted it.

CNN commentator Maria Cardona weighed in on Trump's claim that California's wildfires were being allowed to spread “without even a token of defense.”

"What an insult to all the amazing firefighters who put their lives on the line to bring the LA fires under control! Trump starts out with a speech filled with massive lies, deceit, insults as he trashes the country to uplift his own deviance," she said on X.

AFJustice editor Zack Ford, on the other hand, pointed out some of the speech's grammatical errors and observed that "I don't think you can be 'far more exceptional.'"

He also noted Trump's ongoing ignorance about what "asylum" means. Trump has long believed that those seeking asylum are also those who come from insane asylums and are being sent to the U.S. Applying for asylum is a legal distinction for those leaving their countries under fear of persecution and under fears of serious human rights violations. They are refugees before the international community has recognized them as such, explained Amnesty International.

"Even in his scripted inauguration speech (Stephen Miller-written?), Trump is pushing the inane idea that asylum-seekers are coming from mental asylums," commented former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan.

New York Times reporter Glenn Thrush noted Trump is already preparing to take credit for former President Joe Biden's work, "Many of the crises Trump has vowed to address (taming inflation, ridding cities of violent crime, building the world's most formidable military...) are already well on the way to be solved..."

CNN's Jim Acosta mentioned Trump's announcement the United States would take back the Panama Canal, and he wondered if this meant a war with Panama.

Reporter James Fallows called this Panama obsession "one million percent total insane bull s--t."

Mother Jones' Washington Bureau chief David Corn referred to the irony of Trump invoking "law and order" while speaking "in the spot where his violent brownshirts, incited by his lies, brutally assaulted law enforcement officers and injured 140 cops. It’s nuts."

Yale Law School professor Scott Shapiro saw one inaugural photo of Trump pointing to Chief Justice John Roberts while shaking his hand. “Thanks Judge for the permission to commit crimes," Shapiro imagined Trump saying.

---

mma

### Trump’s corrupt TikTok flip-flop exposes his craven national security cabinet

01/16/25

---

an 1 25

Days before he becomes president of the USA — and minutes after the release of a prosecutor’s bombshell report into the Jan. 6 election interference case — Donald Trumptook to Truth Socialearly Tuesday to attack a comedian.

“How bad is Seth Meyers on NBC?" the president-elect asked at 1:24 a.m.

It came just minutes after special counsel Jack Smith’s report revealed that he believed he had the evidence to convict Trump.

Trump was reacting to a 10-minute segment on Meyers show Monday in which he mocked infighting in the MAGA movement which has seen allies like Steve Bannon and Elon Musk go head to head.

“Trump is caught in the middle between the MAGA diehards and the rich oligarchs who helped him get elected,” Meyers said. “And he doesn’t even really know what the hell they’re talking about.”

Trump hit back that the comedian was a “moron” and that his network, NBC, was “run by a truly bad group of people.”

ALSO READ:Fox News has blood on its hands as Trump twists the knife

“Remember, they also run MSDNC,” he added.

“I got stuck watching Marble Mouth Meyers the other night, the first time in months, and every time I watch this moron I feel an obligation to say how dumb and untalented he is, merely a slot filler for the Scum that runs Comcast.

“These guys should be paying a lot of money for the right to give these “in kind” contributions to the Radical Left Democrat Party. These are not shows or entertainment, they are simply political hits, 100% of the time, to me and the Republican Party. Comcast should pay a BIG price for this!”

Watch the Seth Meyers video below or at this link.

---

an 1 25

Republicans laugh off idea of Trump invading Greenland

---

AN 1 25

The top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee said Tuesday that President-elect Donald Trump's proposed creation of an "External Revenue Service" to collect tariff proceeds can't conceal his plans for a massive tax giveaway to the wealthy and large corporations.

"No amount of silly rebranding will hide the fact that Trump is planning a multitrillion-dollar tax hike on American families and small businesses to pay for another round of tax handouts to the rich," Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said in a brief statement after Trump announced his proposal in a social media post.

The president-elect wrote that on the first day of his new term, he intends to create "the EXTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE to collect our Tariffs, Duties, and all Revenue that come from Foreign sources."

"We will begin charging those that make money off of us with Trade, and they will start paying, FINALLY, their fair share," Trump added. "January 20, 2025, will be the birth date of the External Revenue Service."

Only Congress can establish new executive branch agencies, so it's unclear how Trump's proposed External Revenue Service would be established. Currently, U.S. Customs and Border Protection collects tariff revenue.

Outside advisers to Trump anonymously toldThe Washington Post that the president-elect's plan "could involve renaming an existing office within the Treasury Department."

Trump and Republican lawmakers have pointed to tariff revenue—along with deep cuts to Medicaid, federal nutrition assistance, and other key programs—as a potential way to help offset the huge projected cost of their proposed extension of the 2017 tax cuts, parts of which are set to expire at the end of the year.

But the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) noted in an analysis conducted shortly before the November election that the sweeping tariffs Trump has floated "would largely be passed onto consumers as increased prices." Those price increases "would more than offset" Trump's proposed tax cuts "for all income groups outside the richest 5%."

"If these proposals were in effect in 2026, the richest 1% would receive an average tax cut of about $36,300 and the next richest 4% would receive an average tax cut of about $7,200," ITEP found. "All other groups would see a tax increase, with the hike on the middle 20% at about $1,500 and the increase on the lowest-income 20% of Americans at about $800."

Trump's call for the creation of an "External Revenue Service" comes days after CNNreported that the president-elect is "considering declaring a national economic emergency to provide legal justification for a large swath of universal tariffs on allies and adversaries."

"The declaration would allow Trump to construct a new tariff program by using the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, known as 'IEEPA,' which unilaterally authorizes a president to manage imports during a national emergency," the outlet continued, citing unnamed sources. "Trump, one of the sources noted, has a fondness for the law, since it grants wide-ranging jurisdiction over how tariffs are implemented without strict requirements to prove the tariffs are needed on national security grounds."

The emergency declaration could come as soon as Inauguration Day, according to*Axios.

---

an 1 25

During the United States' 2024 presidential race, Democratic nominee and Vice President Kamala Harris laid out a variety of reasons why she believed that Republican Donald Trump's policies would be terrible for working-class Americans if he won — from health care to tax policy to tariffs. But right-wing media outlets repeatedly attacked Harris as an "elitist," praising Trump as the "populist" in the race — which, in the end, President-elect Trump narrowly won.

Salon's Amanda Marcotte examines the MAGA movement's "populism" in a scathing article published on January 16, arguing that Trump and MAGA's alliance with billionaire tech bros exposes their "populism" as an "illusion."

"Trump's Diet Coke addiction has long been used by the grifter-in-chief to sell his fans on the big lie of his career: that, beneath all the private jets and over-the-top gilded decor, he's a 'regular' guy just like them," Marcotte observes. "He, too, houses the sugar-free caffeinated beverages as a vague gesture towards 'health' in between housing vegetable-free greasy meals of cheap hamburgers and sugary desserts. He must be an ordinary, salt-of-the-earth man! After all, he drinks a product found at every common supermarket."

READ MORE: Torture? Shoot protesters? Greenland? Questions Hegseth refused to answer

Marcotte adds, "Never mind that Trump would never sully himself by entering a grocery store. He pays people to do that for him.

Trump, the Salon journalist laments, is able to "trick" MAGA voters "into thinking the rich former reality TV star is one of them."

"On Tuesday, (January 14)," Marcotte observes, "NBC News reported that tech billionaires Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg will all have prominent seats on the platform at Trump's inauguration. The symbolism is unmistakable."

Marcotte continues, "Those seats are usually reserved for family members, former presidents, and prominent politicians. Giving those seats to billionaires signals loudly that this is a new era of oligarchy, without even an attempt to feign allegiance to pre-Trump notions of government for and by the people. President Joe Biden was alarmed enough to make this issue the focal point of his final speech in office."

READ MORE:Why this Trump nominee is 'a pleasant surprise' for Dems

During a recent appearance on the New Republic's "Daily Blast" podcast, economist and former New York Times columnist Paul Krugman was vehemently critical of Trump's "extremely regressive economic program" — warning that "working-class voters are going to face higher prices and upper-income voters are going to benefit from tax cuts."

"Sure, you may never be able to retire or own a home," Marcotte laments, " but it seems the r-word is coming back into fashion! I'd call that a bad trade-off."

READ MORE:Economist Paul Krugman explains why Trump voters are being 'brutally scammed'

---

an 1 25

Although Paul Krugman retired from his New York Times column after almost 25 years, the liberal economist is still keeping busy and making media appearances — including an interview with The New Republic's Greg Sargent posted on January 14.

Trump aggressively campaigned on the economy last year. But Krugman, during an appearance on The New Republic's podcast, laid out a variety of reasons why he believes Trump voters will suffer economically after he returns to the White House.

Krugman told host Greg Sargent, "A lot of people are going to get brutally scammed. Those are his most fervent supporters…. Probably the local business elites are the most fervent MAGA types out there — more so even than the working class, but that doesn't mean that Trump cares about their interests. Small businesspeople are the people that he's, all through his life, hired as contractors and then not (paid), right? Scamming people like that is what his whole life has been (about)."

READ MORE:DC hotel bookings way down for Trump inauguration as even protesters decide to skip

Small businesses and consumers, the economist warned, will suffer the consequences if Trump follows through on the aggressive tariffs and mass deportations he is proposing.

"Trump has really radical policy ideas," Krugman told Sargent. "I obviously think they're terrible, but they are radical. He wants Smoot-Hawley-level tariffs. He wants mass deportations. He wants to take away the independence of the Federal Reserve. How do you justify all of that when we're pretty much a Goldilocks economy?"

Trump hammered President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris relentlessly over inflation during his 2024 campaign, but Krugman warned that the tariffs Trump is proposing will be quiet inflationary.

The economist told Sargent, "If we take the totality of stuff that Trump seems to want to do — he wants to raise tariffs but cut taxes on high incomes — it's basically working-class voters (who) are going to face higher prices and upper-income voters (who) are going to benefit from tax cuts. This really is very much contrary to their interests, then you add in all the other stuff. Even more than usual for a Republican, he appears to have an extremely regressive economic program in mind — one that really will effectively redistribute income away from working-class voters to the top."

READ MORE:'Quite unlikely': Analysis exposes key Trump campaign promises as unrealistic — if not 'impossible'

---

pluto tv entre an 1 25

Davos, Switzerland used to be one of the world's top hotspots for the wealthy elite to hobnob with global heads of state. But one investor is skipping this year's Davos summit to be in President-elect Donald Trump's orbit.

The Daily Beast reported Wednesday that Shark Tank star Kevin O'Leary — who has a net worth of roughly $400 million — isn't planning to go to Switzerland for this year's gathering at Davos, which will take place between January 20th and 24th. Instead, the Canadian businessman views Mar-a-Lago as the most worthwhile destination to represent his interests.

"It’s the new Davos but with much warmer weather," O'Leary wrote for the Daily Mail. "This is where America's business is now being transacted."

READ MORE:'MAGA friendly' Fetterman blasted for accepting Trump Mar-a-Lago invite

To attend Mar-a-Lago, a potential visitor has to either purchase a membership for $1 million, or be the invited guest of a current member. O'Leary wrote that when he visited Trump's Palm Beach County, Florida estate on January 4, he rubbed elbows with Alberta, Canada Premier Danielle Smith, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Trump himself.

O'Leary wrote that he attended Mar-a-Lago earlier this month as a guest of wealthy philanthropist Bill Pulte, who Trump was considering to lead the Department of Housing and Urban Development (he ultimately nominated retired NFL player and former Texas state representative Scott Turner). He noted that upon entering the 17-acre, 126-room mansion, maitre'd Carmen de Oliveira — who he called "the most powerful woman in America you've never heard of" — will decide where a guest will sit, and how close that guest will be to the president-elect. O'Leary referred to Trump's table as "the center of the universe, the sun" and that all the other tables "rotate around it."

"If you don't yet know Carmen, she may seat you on Pluto," he wrote. "But if you're in good standing with her (I was fortunate that she is a fan of Shark Tank), then you get to sit close to the center and rub shoulders with the men and women, who will determine the direction of the country for the next four years."

The Shark Tank star sarcastically referred to as "Mr. Wonderful" has made a bid to buy TikTok in conjunction with billionaire investor Frank McCourt, as the popular short-form video app will be banned in the United States on January 19 unless it's sold to an American company. He argued that his bid "offers the best opportunity to purchase TikTok and keep it operational."

READ MORE:'Increased unhappiness' at Mar-a-Lago with Mike Johnson as GOP remains 'traumatized'

"[E]veryone that I need to speak to about my plans – from Secretary of State nominee Marco Rubio to incoming national security adviser Mike Waltz – is there at Mar-a-Lago," O'Leary wrote.

"You couldn't pay me to get on a plane to Davis[sic] right now," he added. "I'm just hanging around southern Florida, and when I'm invited, I'll drive up to Winter White House."

---

an 1 25

One of two volumes of former U.S. Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith's final report on his cases against Donald Trump was released early Tuesday morning, January 14: the volume focusing on his election interference case against the president-elect. The other volume addresses the Mar-a-Lago/classified documents case.

Never Trump conservative David Frum, a former George W. Bush speechwriter, examines in Smith's report in an article published by The Atlantic the day of its release. And Frum's takeaway is that the report underscores the "post-constitutional moment" the United States is facing.

"No prosecution will now take place…. Instead, the special counsel’s report delivers a confession of the helplessness of the U.S. government," Frum writes. "Smith asserts that the evidence was sufficient to convict Trump of serious crimes — and then declares the constitutional system powerless to act: The criminal is now the president-elect, therefore his crime cannot be punished."

READ MORE:'You degrade them': Gillibrand rips Trump defense nominee over 'harmful' comments on women in military

Frum continues, "The report suggests that if the law had moved faster, then Trump today would be a convict, not a president. But the law did not move fast. Why not? Whose fault was that? Fingers will point, but the finger-pointing does not matter. What matters is the outcome and the message."

Trump, Frum notes, "swore to uphold the Constitution in January 2017" but "violated that oath in January 2021."

" Now, in January 2025, he will swear it again," Frum laments. "The ritual survives. Its meaning has been lost…. Now comes the Smith report with its simpler answer: If a president wins reelection, he has immunity for even the worst possible crimes committed during his first term in office."

Frum adds, "The incentives contained in this outcome are clear, if perverse. And they are deeply sinister to the future of democracy in the United States."

READ MORE:'Humiliation will escalate': Foreign diplomat says 'hamstrung' Rubio won’t last long as sec of state

1 25

aileen cannon tries quash jack smith report

---

an 1 25

'Nothing is off the table': Trump may claim emergency to pass major policy without Congress

---

--}:

alternet

It's not just social media that's giving violent white supremacists a pass

Thom Hartmann January 11, 2025

— The fossil fuel industry is apparently paying off Republicans — in a practice legalized by Republicans on the Supreme Court — to make sure Congress never passes legislation to hold them accountable for all the death and destruction they’ve caused by lying about climate change for the past 50 years. }:

Here, for example, are the biggest recipients of their largesse, according to OpenSecrets:

Romney, Mitt (R-UT) $8,291,262; Cornyn, John (R-TX) $4,678,062; Cruz, Ted (R-TX) $4,138,421; McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) $2,852,107; McCarthy, Kevin (R-CA) $2,581,832; Hutchison, Kay Bailey (R-TX) $2,332,021; Inhofe, James M (R-OK) $2,320,139; Pearce, Steve (R-NM) $2,236,714; Barton, Joe (R-TX) $2,211,987; Brady, Kevin (R-TX) $2,087,396; Scalise, Steve (R-LA) $1,847,013; Murkowski, Lisa (R-AK) $1,792,602.

If you haven’t yet noticed the trend, just check out the party affiliation of each…}:

— Convicted Felon Trump now has the “Scarlet F”: Our first felon President. There was a time that many of us remember when America — for all our faults, history, and stupid international meddling — was seen around the world as a beacon of morality and the staunchest defender of democratic values. Now, we’re the laughingstock — or the terror — of the developed world, since a grifting adjudicated sexual abuser, Putin lackey, and chronic liar is about to become president again. Alexander Hamilton warned us, but our media was far too busy fluffing Trump’s ego and sanewashing his BS to remind us that our first Secretary of the Treasury and the main author of the Federalist Papers wrote, in 1792:

“Those then, who resist a confirmation of public order, are the true Artificers of monarchy... When a man unprincipled in private life, desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper, possessed of considerable talents, having the advantage of military habits—despotic in his ordinary demeanour—known to have scoffed in private at the principles of liberty—when such a man is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity—to join in the cry of danger to liberty—to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion—to flatter and fall in with all the non sense of the zealots of the day

It may justly be suspected that his object is to throw things into confusion that he may ‘ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.’” (Emphasis added)}:

And “directing the whirlwind” of racial hate, fear, and bigotry — as I regularly point out here on Hartmann Report— is exactly what Trump thinks he can do to reverse the Civil Rights movement and the New Deal (I’m skeptical he can pull it off). The Founders — and FDR and LBJ — must be rolling in their graves…

— It's not just social media that's giving violent white supremacists a pass... Without telling us, so far as I can tell, Bloomberg is reporting that the FBI (and the DHS more generally) stopped seriously monitoring and infiltrating violent white supremacist groups two years ago, around the time they were being trashed for such investigations by sedition-, Putin-, and Trump-loving Republicans in the House. The pressure seems to have worked.

“In 2022, DHS closed its Disinformation Governance Board, designed to offer best practices in countering viral conspiracies,” reports Bloomberg, adding that, “DHS also recently shuttered a unit that swept the internet for threatening materials in public posts, social media messages and online forums…”

Putin’s internet trolls, operating with huge budgets and the resources of the Russian state behind them, have since become a major force on the top social media sites, and both X and Meta are no longer suppressing their lies and attacks on democracy. Is it fossil fuel billionaires or social media billionaires who are the greatest threat to the future of world peace and democracy? Hard to choose…

— Greedy insurer interrupts cancer surgery in shocking mid-procedure call... Dr. Elisabeth Potter was in the middle of surgery on a breast cancer patient when a nurse ran into the operating theater to say that UnitedHealthcare was on the phone demanding to speak with her. She interrupted the surgery, leaving the unconscious patient whose chest was cut open on the table, to take the call. Here’s her story in her own words, as she told it on Instagram and later confirmed with Newsweek:

“So, I scrubbed out of my case and I called UnitedHealthcare, and the gentleman said he needed some information about her. Wanted to know her diagnosis and whether her inpatient stay should be justified. And I was like, ‘Do you understand this? She's asleep right now and she has breast cancer?’ And the gentleman said, ‘Actually, I don’t — that’s a different department that would know that information.’ And I was like, ‘Well, she does need to stay overnight tonight, and you have all the information with you because I got approval for this surgery, and I need to go back and be with my patient now.’ But, yeah, it’s out of control. Insurance is out of control. I have no other words.”

I can think of a few words: Parasitic, thief, malefic, heinous, flagitious, depraved, monstrous, mephistophelean, godless, loathsome, psychopathic, cruel, sadistic, maleficient, and vile for a start… Feel free to add your nouns or adjectives in the comments below.

— Indiana Republicans want to threaten rape victims with felonies if they try to get an abortion. Over at her brilliant “Abortion Every Day” substack newsletter, Jessica Valenti tells us that Indiana State Senator Mike Young has proposed legislation that would subject a woman in that state to 2.5 years in prison if she were to claim rape to get an abortion (about the only way to get an abortion in Indiana, unless your life is in danger) and then can’t subsequently prove to the satisfaction of the state’s GOP that she was actually raped.}:

The bill also makes it a crime to possess the abortion drug mifepristone, evoking the possibility of midnight raids with Indiana police kicking in the doors of women who Indiana Republicans think may have purchased the drug from an online telehealth physician. Freedumb!!}:

— Wondering why Trump is on a jeremiad against Panama? Some suggest his rant was timed to coincide with Jimmy Carter’s funeral to give rightwing media an excuse to trash Carter’s signing the Panama Canal Treaty that Nixon first started negotiating. But consider this story from Newsweek titled “Trump Organization Accused of Tax Evasion in Panama.” Just like the way he scammed New York State out of tax dollars (for which he was adjudicated and sentenced last year) his failed hotel in Panama hadn’t been paying its taxes either. Trump’s involved in a huge lawsuit down their right now, and some speculate that toppling the Panamanian government might work out well for his personal interests. Keep an eye on this one!

— James Carville suggests Jeff Bezos is trying to buy Trump via Melania. Amazon has just announced that they’re going to spend $40 million on a documentary about Melania Trump, who got her legal status in the US with a “genius visa” that’s typically reserved for the world’s top scientists and Nobel Prize winners (there are only around 3,000 issued every year). Carville, who was himself the subject of a recent Netflix documentary, implies that this number stinks of a payoff:

“This is something I’m going to claim some expertise in, the subject of documentaries because I’ve been the subject of two and I’ve been the subject of a recent one… You can produce a world class documentary for $2 million. I know it. You couldn’t spend $40 million on a documentary if you tried 10 times harder to do it, so where’s the money going? Well, we know where the money is going.”

Why? Well, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and 17 state attorneys general are suing Amazon for allegedly maintaining a monopoly through anticompetitive practices, and Bezos apparently hates unions and might want help stopping them in his warehouses…

— Crazy Alert! Greenlanders really hate Trump, so Don Jr. had to hire homeless people to make it look like somebody was welcoming him. Danish Radio (which once loaned me a studio for two weeks to do my show: great people!) is reporting that after having Greenlanders give him the finger in the airport and post “Yankee go home” on Facebook, Don Jr. had to hire a few local “homeless and socially disadvantaged” people to pretend to be Trump supporters for his recent stunt visiting that country. As one local, Tom Amtof of the town of Nuuk, told DR News: “All they have to do is put on a cap and be in the Trump staff’s videos. They are being bribed, and it is deeply distasteful.” Yeah, distasteful. Again, there are other words…

NOW READ: Trump and his minions attempt to make America small, stupid and mean

---

an 1 25

Historian: Trump’s 'us v. them' response to LA wildfires shows inability to handle 'moments of crisis'

---

an 1 25

President-elect Donald Trump took his complaints about the wildfire disaster in California to a new level on Thursday, with a Truth Social post baselessly suggesting that Gov. Gavin Newsom was withholding water firefighters could be using to protect homes and businesses.

"Governor Gavin Newscum should immediately go to Northern California and open up the water main, and let the water flow into his dry, starving, burning State, instead of having it go out into the Pacific Ocean," Trump said. "It ought to be done right now, NO MORE EXCUSES FROM THIS INCOMPETENT GOVERNOR. IT’S ALREADY FAR TOO LATE!"

Trump has repeatedly claimed that California officials are somehow blocking firefighters from accessing water — which appears to be a confused misinterpretation of long-running political battles in the state over how to allocate water between agricultural, commercial, residential and environmental use.

He made similar accusations in 2018 about water being denied to firefighters during an aggressive fire season in Northern California, prompting the state fire agency to issue a statement clarifying this is not true.

Firefighters have struggled to maintain water pressure as they have tried to save neighborhoods like Pacific Palisades Experts say it's because aging water infrastructure in Los Angeles is being overstressed by the sudden spike in demand, depleting tanks faster than they can be refilled.

In previous fire disasters, Trump has also accused California officials of failing to properly manage forests, at one point suggesting they should have raked leaves to prevent wildfires, like Finland does — a remark that led to widespread mockery from Finns on social media.

He made similar claims about the latest fire disaster, which forced a reporter on Fox News to point out that forest management was irrelevant given that the fire in Malibu began in a residential area.

---

had q in advance and still wacko?

an 1 25

Donald Trump’s ambitious demand that the United States regain control of the Panama Canal would be “a mess” for the country, according to the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board, which added that it is just the latest example of the incoming president’s “bully tactic diplomacy.”

Trump’s “America First” agenda was on full display during a disjointed news conference Tuesday at his Mar-a-Lago golf resort, where he turned heads for again repeating his desire for the U.S. to acquire Canada, Panama and Greenland.

But the trick to deciphering Trump’s remarks “is figuring out when Mr. Trump is trolling and when he means it,” the Journal’s conservative editorial board wrote Wednesday.

“A Greenland deal has potential if he’s artful. Panama would be a mess, and his Canada trolling could hurt the Conservatives,” according to the board. “Mr. Trump often prefers to talk tough, but using the bully pulpit to bully America’s friends is no help against the real bad guys.”

Trump told reporters Tuesday that “the Panama Canal is vital to our country,” adding that it was “a big mistake” for the U.S. to sign over the canal in a treaty under former President Jimmy Carter. But his tough talk on Panama seemed to be a bridge too far for the board, which noted that the president-elect refused to take using military force off the table.

“If he means that, he’s asking for trouble,” the board wrote in their op-ed. “It would turn an ally in the Western Hemisphere into an adversary. Does he want a forever guerrilla war?”

The Journal’s editorial board suggested that Trump’s threats may be aimed at a deal on canal fees “or maybe the Panamanian ports managed by a Hong Kong entity.”

“But he’s simply making it up that Chinese soldiers are running the canal,” the board wrote in a fact check of Trump’s claims the canal is being operated by Chinese soldiers.

They concluded that Trump – who famously penned “The Art of the Deal” with ghostwriter Tony Schwartz – would benefit from a piece of his advice.

“One possible option might be a defense free association compact with Greenland, similar to U.S. arrangements with Pacific island states,” the board wrote. “The subtle art of persuasion would be required.”

---

an 1 25

Yesterday, Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta (Facebook, Instagram, and Threads), announced he was effectively ending efforts to curtail lies on his platforms. Here’s what you need to know and what it means. Today’s Office Hours question is the significance of this change.

Zuckerberg said the new protocol, soon to begin in the United States, is similar to the one used by X, called Community Notes. But Community Notes has proven to be no protocol at all. Musk put out vicious lies targeting Kamala Harris and obsequious lies favoring Trump during the recent presidential campaign, without any Community Notes warning readers they were lies.

Meta’s trust and safety and content moderation teams will be relocated to Texas from California, in order to “help remove the concern that biased employees are overly censoring content,” Zuckerberg added — thereby endorsing the rightwing view that Californians are somehow less trustworthy than Texans.

Make no mistake. This is all about currying favor with Trump before he takes over on January 20. Trump has long railed against Zuckerberg, claiming Meta’s fact-checking is unfair to conservatives.

It’s also about dealing with Elon Musk, who’s busily positioning X to be a right-wing megaphone. Zuckerberg doesn’t want to be outflanked on the right.

Meta executives told Trump officials about the change before they announced it to the public. Meta’s announcement coincided with an appearance by Joel Kaplan, Meta’s newly installed global policy chief, on “Fox & Friends” — a favorite show of Trump that’s popular with conservatives. Kaplan told the hosts that there had been “too much political bias” in the fact-checking program, again confirming rightwing talking points.

Kaplan, not incidentally, is a former Republican lobbyist with close ties in the Trump administration. His recent promotion is viewed as another attempt to curry favor with Trump.

Meta also added Dana White to its board. White is the C.E.O. of Ultimate Fighting Championship and a staunch Trump ally.

---

an 1 25

A Republican’s vigorous defense of Donald Trump supporters who stormed the Capitol four years ago turned an on-air CNN discussion into a full-on debate about who was peacefully protesting, who was trespassing, and who should’ve been prosecuted.

The moment came Monday evening on CNN’s“The Source” when GOP strategist David Urban said that not only was the issue of Jan. 6 litigated in the courts, but also in the last election – “and the American people dismissed it as well.”

“I agree the beating of police officers – Donald Trump said it himself – violence is never acceptable,” Urban said Monday. “Those people that beat the police officers, that injured a police officer, should go to jail. There's no ifs, ands or buts.”

However, Urban added, “there’s a completely different story” on the Supreme Court side of the Capitol, where he said people “were allowed in” and officers “didn't seem frightened or outnumbered.”

He also told the panel that “to be factual” Ashli Babbitt “was the only person who died” on that day.

ALSO READ:'Bring it on': Defiant Raskin responds to GOP threats of retaliation for J6 investigation

But the longtime Republican’s separation of the violence didn’t sit well with CNN’s Kate Bedingfield or Sarah Matthews, Trump’s former deputy press secretary who resigned on Jan. 6, 2021, over the Capitol riot.

“That is beyond splitting hairs,” Bedingfield said referencing the Capitol police officer who died the day after the attack. “Come on."

“She wouldn't have been there that day if Donald Trump didn't spread conspiracy theories about an election that he knew was not stolen,” Matthews told Urban. “And he told those people to go to the Capitol. And so, she was there as a result of him telling her. She would not have died if it weren't for Donald Trump refusing to accept the results of the election, and you know that.”

Urban concluded the dust-up by adding that he doesn't believe that Trump should pardon Jan. 6 defendants on day one.

“I think there are lots of things the American people care about much more so than January 6," he said.

---

an 1 25

Data proves Trump 'inheriting an economy that is about as good as it ever gets': report

---

an 1 25

Trump has placed 'For Sale' sign on White House with chief of staff pick: watchdog

Jake Johnson Common Dreams

---

an 1 25

After defeating Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential race, President-elect Donald Trump didn't back down from his promise to impose stiff new tariffs. Trump, in fact, doubled down, vowing to charge 25 percent across-the-board tariffs on all goods coming into the United States from Canada and Mexico.

Many Trump critics have been warning that those tariffs, if implemented, will make inflation much worse. Some companies are already raising their prices.

According to The Guardian's Callum Jones, however, some companies that donated to Trump's 2016 campaign dodged tariffs during his first term as president.

READ MORE:Faced with Trump's tariffs, Mexico is weighing retaliatory options

"With Donald Trump threatening to impose steep tariffs upon his return to office this month," Jones explains in an article published on January 6. "U.S. firms are bracing for impact. But an analysis of Trump's last presidency identified one way to boost their chances of avoiding the levies: donating to the Republican Party."

Jones continues, "While the initial stage of the president-elect's tariff agenda is designed to hit America's largest trading partners — Canada, Mexico and China — it is U.S. firms that pick up the bill, paying duties imposed on the goods they buy from these markets. Such additional costs can prove devastating."

The Guardian reporter cites a study published on July 29, 2024. The study names some of the companies that dodged tariffs during Trump's first term.

"The federal government typically allows a carefully selected group of businesses from paying such levies," Jones notes. "Thousands of companies applied for exemptions, and permission to import items without paying a new tariff, during Trump's first presidency."

READ MORE:Trump's tariffs on Mexico could devastate border region: TX economists

Jesus Salas, an associate finance professor at Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, anticipates that the same thing will happen during Trump's second term and finds it "shocking" that companies that supported Democrats in 2016 were, according to the study, less likely to avoid tariffs.

Jones quotes Salas as saying, "(There are) many reasons to think some of this behavior is going to continue…. It's going to be the same staff, probably the same ideas, so we'd assume it's going to be the same behavior."

READ MORE:['Sickening!' Trump slammed over comments at mysterious Mar-a-Lago party

*Read The Guardian's full article at this link.

==---

an 1 25

A frustrated Jim Acosta unleashed on a Republican operative for defending Donald Trump after the president-elect continued to tie the issue of illegal immigration to the New Year's Eve terror attack in New Orleans.

Neil Chatterjee, who served under Trump as commissioner and chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, spoke with Acosta on CNN Thursday.

Acosta referred to Trump's TruthSocial post from Wednesday where he wrote, "When I said that the criminals coming in are far worse than the criminals we have in our country, that statement was constantly refuted by Democrats and the Fake News Media, but it turned out to be true. The crime rate in our country is at a level that nobody has ever seen before. Our hearts are with all of the innocent victims and their loved ones, including the brave officers of the New Orleans Police Department.”

"I mean this this is a problem!" Acosta said. "And, you know, you were saying a few moments ago, you can't take him literally. The president — why — shouldn't you take the president of the United States literally? Isn't that isn't that sort of a baseline expectation that he should stick to the facts?"

ALSO READ:Trump is already walking back on his promises

Chatterjee answered, "I don't think he was saying that this individual crossed illegally, or if he was, it was based on initial reporting that was incorrect, that somebody had crossed at Eagle Pass —"

"We can show it up on screen again, I mean he's talking about, he's blaming Biden's 'open borders policy', and he's talking about that on Truth Social."

Acosta continued, "What he is saying in that Truth Social post is false! That is false!"

Chatterjee pushed back: "He's not saying that this individual crossed the border illegally, but there were 400 people on the terrorist watch list —"

"Of course, but when there's an act of terrorism in this country, the incoming president should tell the truth to the American people. I mean, that is just — isn't that what the president should do at all times?" Acosta asked.

"He's talking about securing the border, and he's been talking for years about securing the border. And I think the data bears out that he won the election, partially because —"

Acosta interjected, "I mean, i just have to say, here he goes again! He talks about everybody else being fake news, and he's the one peddling fake news."

Watch the CNN clip below or click here.

---

an 1 25

GOP proposes repealing Biden’s student debt relief to fund new tax cuts for the rich

---

an 1 25

vid]

During the 2024 presidential race, many supporters of — from lifelong Democrats to right-wing Never Trump conservatives — argued that Ukraine would be much better off if she won, as Donald Trump has been highly critical of the Biden Administration's aggressive support for military aid to that country.

President-elect Trump, however, defeated Democratic nominee Harris. And his pick for national intelligence director, former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (an ex-Democratic turned MAGA Republican), has been an outspoken defender of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Gabbard's comments, critics say, have been so pro-Kremlin that state-operated Russian media outlets have dubbed her "Russia's girlfriend."

The Daily Beast's Julia Davis, in an article published on 2024's penultimate day, lays out some reasons why the Kremlin is glad to see Trump returning to the White House.

READ MORE:['Will never be for sale': Trump’s proposal to buy Greenland gets 'resounding no'

Trump and the MAGA movement have often been described as "isolationists." Yet Trump's recent post-election comments about Greenland and the Panama Canal have had a more expansionist or imperialist quality — which, according to Davis, "delights" the Kremlin.

"President-elect Donald Trump's social media posts about annexing Greenland, Canada, and the Panama Canal startled America's allies and delighted foreign foes," Davis reports. "In Russia, the statements were interpreted to mean that Trump isn't really opposed to foreign wars of conquest after all. To them, Trump's tirades revealed that — just like Russian President Vladimir Putin — Trump would be delighted to invade any country that couldn't fight back."

Davis adds, "He would expect accolades and a lavish victory parade after seizing foreign territories, just like the fallout from Russia stealing Crimea in 2014. Trump infamously described the annexation of Crimea as a 'genius' and 'savvy' move."

The Daily Beast reporter notes that in pro-Kremlin Russian media outlets, Trump's "stated intentions towards Greenland, Canada, and Panama" are "being celebrated as implicit validation for Russia's current and future land grabs."

READ MORE:'Nuclear demolition': Columnist flags 'MAGA's real World War III' the media is missing

On the Russian program "Vesti Nedeli" ("The Weekly News"), for example, host Dmitry Kiselyov argued, "Trump isn't joking. He is determined to expand American territorial possessions…. If Trump gets away with all of this, inspired by his success, he might look at the rest of the globe, focus on vulnerable spots, and keep going. Where will he stop? Doesn't it mean that others can do the same?"

On Russia's "The Evening With Vladimir Solovyov," host Solovyov said of Trump, "No, he is not joking.... of course he isn't joking. Do you think I’m kidding when I say that Finland, Warsaw, the Baltics, Moldova, and Tallinn should come back home? Do you think I’m joking? No! They should all rejoin the Russian Empire, followed by Alaska, by the way. Give it back…. The way he is rationalizing, it is tremendous. We should follow his example and quietly take everything back."

READ MORE:[Trump’s 'dangerous' Greenland talk could 'embolden' tyrants globally: ex-US ambassador to Russia]

---

an 12 24

BS?

In a slew of social media posts on Christmas Day, President-elect Donald Trump reiterated something that he suggested last month following his victory over Kamala Harris: that the United States "should own Greenland, annex Canada and reclaim the Panama Canal."

In a Thursday Politico report, breaking news reporter Myah Ward asserts that "if Trump’s overtures are evidence that his America First policy agenda may have an interventionist component, they also served as an early reminder of how the incoming president conducts foreign policy: Lots of threats, confusion, freewheeling and a dose of unpredictability."

Ward writes, "And Republicans are largely writing it off as saber rattling, an approach that sometimes helped Trump get what he wanted out of allies and adversaries during his first term, but also at times threw his administration into chaos or sowed confusion like the famous late-night 'Covfeve' tweet."

READ MORE:['Dumpster fire': Democrats reportedly watching with 'glee' as Republicans self-destruct

Matthew Bartlett, Republican strategist Matthew Bartlett — who served under Trump's first administration — told Politico, "I was there at the State Department when a tweet would be issued, and then, every intellectual in the building had to somehow figure out if there’s any logical sense to this and policy to this and if there’s any upside, or if this actually is Covfefe."

He added, "But from a foreign policy context, crazy worked just fine the first time. If leaders are like, we may not respect you but we absolutely think that you’re bonkers, and we don’t know what’s coming at us next, great. Full send. And if that leads to better peace and prosperity in Ukraine, in Israel, with terrorists on watch, with foreign states. Great. They should be put on notice."

Another GOP strategist, Dave Carney, told the news outlet that the president-elect could be "trying to soften the ground for negotiations," Ward reports, "recalling his threats during his first term to withdraw from NATO — which some Republicans credited with pressuring other countries to increase their defense spending."

Carney suggested that "Trump’s unpredictability can be an asset in some scenarios," Ward added.

"With the president, there’s, I think, always the possibility that other countries think, ‘holy shmoly, he may actually do that, we should try to accommodate him,’” the former Trump appointee said.

---

marcotte

'Poor information ecosystem': How QAnon-style 'disinformation' made Trump victorious

Trump could make it harder to vote — with Congress’ help

These low-income Rust Belt voters supported Trump — and pray he won’t slash their benefits

an 12 24

---

TPUSA WANTS PAnMa canal back

New York Democrat thinks he knows what's behind President-elect Donald Trump's bizarre new request: money.

Over the weekend, Trump suggested the United States should reclaim the Panama Canal, citing exorbitant fees for access and an increasing Chinese presence in the waterway.

"The fees being charged by Panama are ridiculous, especially knowing the extraordinary generosity that has been bestowed to Panama by the US,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform late Saturday. "This complete ‘rip-off’ of our Country will immediately stop …”

Trump said he would not allow the canal to fall into the “wrong hands."

ALSO READ:Why ABC settled a case they knew they would win — and why the Lincoln Project didn't

“The United States has a vested interest in the secure, efficient, and reliable operation of the Panama Canal, and that was always understood. We would and will NEVER let it fall into the wrong hands! It was not given for the benefit of others, but merely as a token of cooperation with us and Panama."

The president-elect also appeared to be alarmed by increasing usage from China.

“When President Jimmy Carter foolishly gave it away, for One Dollar, during his term in Office, it was solely for Panama to manage, not China, or anyone else,” he said. “It was likewise not given for Panama to charge the United States, its Navy, and corporations, doing business within our Country, exorbitant prices and rates of passage.”

Panamanian President Mulino rebuffed Trump's statement on his X account.

“Every square metre of the Panama Canal and the surrounding area belongs to Panama and will continue belonging [to Panama],” Mulino said in a statement, prompting a curt reply from Trump: "We’ll see about that."

The saga became the topic of conversation on CNN on Monday night, with former Rep. Max Rose joking that people should always take Trump at his word.

"Look, you should take what Donald Trump says seriously," he said. "And to my friend [Republican strategist David Urban], obviously congrats on your victory and what I particularly enjoyed about Donald Trump's campaign was all of the Panama Canal commercials. And you saw how much that spiked in the exit polls. It was such a pivotal issue in the campaign! So obviously he'd be acting on it now!"

As his fellow panelists chuckled at Rose's dig, he noted Trump did not mention the Panama Canal during the campaign.

"The guy never mentioned it once! So we all know how this business works, ok? Someone wrote him a check. Or Someone had a pivotal meeting with him and made him a promise for a future check if he acted on this issue. So it's going to be Panama Canal this week or next and then in the weeks thereafter it'll be another pet project of the billionaire class. This speaks to the actual truth of this second iteration of what the second iteration of the Trump presidency will be: not the populist hard core issues that he actually ran on, and that's what's so sad about all this."

Watch the clip below or at this link.

'Will never be for sale': Trump’s proposal to buy Greenland gets 'resounding no'

---

AN 12 24

'Pay-to-pray': Trump reportedly charging supporters $100,000 to attend church service with him

---

AN 12 24

Ever since his November 5 victory, President-elect Donald Trump has been rapidly consolidating power and cowing his opponents into submission even before he's officially sworn in on January 20. Now he's threatening to remove one House Republican for publicly going against him.

In a post to his Truth Social account on Thursday, Trump assailed Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) for refusing to go along with his call to abolish the debt ceiling. He referred to Roy as "just another ambitious guy, with no talent," and referenced former Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.) who was ousted after a Trump-endorsed challenger defeated him in a hard-fought primary race.

"The very unpopular 'Congressman' from Texas, Chip Roy, is getting in the way, as usual, of having yet another Great Republican Victory - All for the sake of some cheap publicity for himself," Trump wrote. "Republican obstructionists have to be done away with... Weak and ineffective people like Chip have to be dismissed as being utterly unknowledgeable as to the ways of politics, and as to Making America Great Again."

READ MORE:['I would lead the charge': Trump says he agrees with Democrats on this major policy issue

"I hope some talented challengers are getting ready in the Great State of Texas to go after Chip in the Primary," Trump added in a subsequent post. "He won’t have a chance!"

NBC News reported that the president-elect promised to "lead the charge" to get rid of the debt ceiling altogether, which Democrats have called for in previous spending bills. The debt ceiling has been in place since 1917, and Congress has had to raise it periodically in order to be able to continue keeping the federal government current on its debt service obligations. Failing to raise it could jeopardize the global economy, as multiple governments and institutional investors park their wealth in the form of U.S. Treasury securities.

Roy's position — which he stated in a post to his X account — was that he wouldn't vote to "raise or suspend the debt ceiling (racking up more debt) without significant & real spending cuts attached to it." Roy mentioned the official handles for Trump as well as House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), Senate Majority Leader-elect John Thune (R-S.D.) and the far-right House Freedom Caucus, of which Roy is a member.

House Republicans have reportedly come back to the table to assemble a spending bill that would keep the government funded for several more months, and would raise the debt ceiling through 2027. Trump endorsed the package on Truth Social, though Roy has promised to oppose it.

READ MORE:['Chilling effect': ABC News employees condemn network's 'surrender' to Trump

---

wapo phil bump 12 24

As his former attorney Michael Cohen once explained, Donald Trump often doesn’t need to tell his loyalists precisely what he expects them to do. He hints at it, nudges them and expects that they understand what is intended.

Sometimes, though, he’s more explicit.

In March, for example, he said that former congresswoman Liz Cheney (R-Wyoming) should “go to Jail along with the rest of the Unselect Committee” — a reference to the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. Cheney served as vice chair of the panel.

He was responding to a preliminary report compiled by the House Administration oversight subcommittee, which Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Georgia) leads. That report, a review of the Capitol riot investigation, suggested that the select committee had withheld evidence. This triggered Trump’s recommendation of criminal charges for its members.

Loudermilk is a Trump ally whose subsequent claims that the select committee had also failed to adequately preserve evidence evolved into a Trumpworld insistence that evidence had been destroyed. This has been debunked, but Trump nonetheless referred to that idea during an interview with NBC News this month in which he again suggested that Cheney should “go to jail.”

“They deleted and destroyed a whole year and a half worth of testimony,” he falsely claimed, referring to the select committee. “I think those people committed a major crime.”

Donald Trump awake just a few hours ago posting about...

Trump warns on social media 'Liz Cheney could be in a lot of trouble'

vid]](https://www.msn.com/en-us/video/news/trump-warns-on-social-media-liz-cheney-could-be-in-a-lot-of-trouble/vi-AA1w59zp)

On Tuesday, the final report from Loudermilk’s subcommittee was made public. In it, the subcommittee does recommend criminal charges against Cheney, as Trump had repeatedly demanded. But — probably in recognition that the “destroyed evidence” claim was a canard — the recommendation centers on Cheney’s alleged “tampering” with one of the committee’s key witnesses.

The report’s conclusion summarizes the claim:

“Based on the evidence obtained by this Subcommittee, numerous federal laws were likely broken by Liz Cheney, the former Vice Chair of the January 6 Select Committee, and these violations should be investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Evidence uncovered by the Subcommittee revealed that former Congresswoman Liz Cheney tampered with at least one witness, Cassidy Hutchinson, by secretly communicating with Hutchinson without Hutchinson’s attorney’s knowledge. This secret communication with a witness is improper and likely violates 18 U.S.C. 1512. Such action is outside the due functioning of the legislative process and therefore not protected by the Speech and Debate clause.”

“The Federal Bureau of Investigation must also investigate Representative Cheney for violating 18 U.S.C. 1622, which prohibits any person from procuring another person to commit perjury.”

Trump, predictably, celebrated this determination, paraphrasing the vaguest snippet of that allegation on social media: “Numerous federal laws were likely broken by Liz Cheney, and these violations should be investigated by the FBI.”

It’s an endorsement of a fishing expedition, a demand from Loudermilk and Trump that the FBI use this pretext to find something to pin to Cheney. But it sits alongside two actual allegations — both of them flimsy to the point of transparency.

At issue is the testimony of Hutchinson, a former aide to Trump’s last chief of staff when he previously served as president, Mark Meadows. Hutchinson, you will probably recall, offered shocking testimony at a June 28, 2022, hearing about Trump’s behavior on the day of the riot, including allegations about his dismissiveness about the threat posed by the crowd at his speech outside the White House that morning, Trump’s insistence on driving to the Capitol after the speech and how he responded to reports about the threat posed to Vice President Mike Pence.

That testimony, though, came about only after Hutchinson went through an internal struggle described in her 2023 book “Enough.” Hutchinson was a loyal Trump supporter and, as such, was provided by Trump’s team with an attorney, Stefan Passantino, when the select committee first subpoenaed her in January 2022.

She sat for two depositions with committee staffers in February and March of that year. Following Passantino’s advice, she didn’t volunteer information that would cast Trump in a negative light. But she began to have qualms about this approach, later reaching out to her former colleague Alyssa Farah for advice on how to proceed. Farah helped orchestrate a third deposition, in May 2022, during which Hutchinson was able to speak more freely. Her attorney was not pleased, and neither was Trumpworld.

In early June, Passantino recommended that Hutchinson stop complying with the committee’s efforts, including an anticipated fourth interview. In her book, she writes that she expected but “dreaded” Passantino forcing the issue, worried that she would be putting herself at risk of contempt charges. So, soon after, she contacted Cheney directly. Two months ago, Loudermilk’s subcommittee released some information about this communication, framing it in ethical, not legal, terms.

In a phone conversation with Cheney recounted in Hutchinson’s book, Hutchinson indicated that she intended to represent herself moving forward. Cheney recommended against doing so. When Hutchinson indicated that she’d previously had trouble identifying and affording counsel, Cheney said she would consult with her colleagues and get back to her. The next day she did, offering “contact information for multiple attorneys.” Hutchinson spoke with a number of them, ultimately deciding on attorneys Jody Hunt and Bill Jordan.

Later that month, she sat for another deposition. Freed from the constraints Passantino had encouraged, she offered much more detail on what she’d seen and, more explosively, what she’d been told about Jan. 6, 2021. The select committee quickly scheduled the aforementioned public hearing for June 28. Hutchinson would sit for recorded interviews twice more in September 2022.

The report from Loudermilk’s subcommittee twists Cheney’s role into criminal activity in two ways. The first is that her interactions with Hutchinson are described as “tampering,” citing federal witness-tampering statutes. But those are focused on inhibiting testimony (particularly through force), not on enabling it. What’s more, the report’s important claim that Hutchinson retained Hunt and Jordan “at the recommendation of Representative Cheney” ignores the nuances of the interactions both women describe in their respective books.

Much of Loudermilk’s report centers on discrepancies between Hutchinson’s testimony and the testimony of others, discrepancies that are often in part because (as Hutchinson always represented) her testimony included secondhand information. But because the subcommittee presents Hutchinson’s testimony as intentionally false, the second recommended charge against Cheney proposes that she intentionally orchestrated Hutchinson’s testimony so that the witness could provide that false information.

In a statement offered in response to the Loudermilk report, Cheney wrote that “[n]o reputable lawyer, legislator or judge would take [the allegations] seriously.” And that’s probably true. But the report’s recommendation for an FBI probe will most probably be taken seriously by the incoming head of the FBI — if not Trump first choice, fervent loyalist Kash Patel, then whoever ends up being confirmed by the Senate.

Trump sent his Capitol Hill allies an unsubtle signal: Cheney must pay, even beyond her Trump-orchestrated ouster from the House. Loudermilk and his subcommittee were no doubt cognizant of that signal when they upgraded their allegations against Cheney from ethical to legal ones. And now Trump’s incoming FBI director has a trivial predicate, in case he even sought one, to start the fishing expedition that Loudermilk and Trump endorse.

---

Chairman Loudermilk Responds to Former Member Liz Cheney's Baseless Claims, Debunks Claims with Receipts

December 19, 2024

WASHINGTON - Today, Committee on House Administration's Subcommittee on Oversight Chairman Barry Loudermilk (GA-11) released the following statement.

"Liz Cheney and Bennie Thompson are trying to say that my investigation has disregarded the truth of January 6, pointing to their Select Committee’s 'tremendous weight of evidence'," said Chairman Loudermilk. "We evaluated that exact weight based on their records and found it slimmer than claimed.

"Cheney claims the Select Committee's report was based on the testimony of hundreds of witnesses, whose testimony was made public. However, Cheney and Thompson did not make ALL transcripts public. They hid transcripts of first-hand witnesses who directly refuted their 'star witness' Cassidy Hutchinson's sensational story, which Cheney had personally procured.

"Americans can see the facts for themselves. That is why I have always released first-hand accounts and evidence, including today, where I am releasing the transcripts from the interview of USSS employees who directly refute Hutchinson's story. Cheney and Thompson's Select Committee conducted these interviews and had this information but chose not to release it publicly.

"Former Chairman Thompson might not be aware of these transcripts, which refute the narrative put forward by his committee, so I understand his confusion. I encourage him to read these transcripts taken by his select committee.

"I also invite Chairman Thompson to explain why the Vice Chair of his committee, Liz Cheney, was having secret conversations with the committee’s “star witness”, behind his back."

Click here to read the United States Secret Service transcripts taken, but never released, by the January 6 Select Committee under Chairman Thompson and Vice Chair Liz Cheney.

eg ornato

suv driver

USSS Transcripts - Google Drive

---

disney abc cave 15 mill george S rape

---

see abc disney //

an 12 24

President-elect Donald Trump has been spending a bulk of his presidential transition less focused on putting together a governing agenda and more focused on an aggressive campaign of legal intimidation. Now, one of his supporters has identified his next potential target.

Politico is reporting that former Illinois Democratic Governor Rod Blagojevich — who endorsed Trump in 2024 after receiving a pardon from him in 2020 — is calling on the president-elect to zero in on current Illinois Governor JB Pritzker. Blagojevich tweeted that Trump should pursue the Illinois governor using the same tactic he successfully used against ABC News in a separate defamation lawsuit.

“Now that Trump successfully won his defamation case against ABC for calling him a ‘rapist,’ when will he sue Illinois Governor JB Pritzker for repeatedly lying & calling him the same thing?” Blagojevich wrote on X.

READ MORE:'Open season': Experts slam Trump's 'disgusting' lawsuit against Iowa newspaper and pollster

In a June tweet, Pritzer called Trump "a convicted felon, an adjudicated rapist, and a congenital liar." He added that then-candidate Trump was "a racist, sexist, misogynistic narcissist who wants to use the levers of power to enrich himself and punish anyone who dares speak a word against him." Blagojevich's tweet may be a reference to that statement, or his comments in the wake of the assassination attempt on Trump this summer, when he said the fact that Trump narrowly dodged a bullet didn't change the fact that he was "a convicted felon and an adjudicated rapist."

The incoming president is fresh off of a legal victory in which ABC News agreed to make a $15 million contribution to Trump's presidential library fund in addition to another $1 million in legal expenses in order to settle with Trump over his defamation claim. The lawsuit was filed in response to ABC host George Stephanopoulos saying Trump was found guilty of "rape" in a 2023 verdict in favor of writer E. Jean Carroll. The actual verdict wasn't for rape, but for "sexual abuse."

In a subsequent filing, Judge Lewis F. Kaplan clarified that "sexual abuse" was essentially the same thing as "rape" as the average person understands it, and that Trump was indeed guilty. He was ordered to pay Carroll $5 million for sexual abuse, and then another $83.3 million for defaming her when falsely asserting that she made the story up for financial benefit.

Trump has also filed a lawsuit against the Des Moines Register and retired pollster Ann Selzer for a poll that falsely predicted Vice President Kamala Harris would win Iowa by three points. Trump argued that the poll was a form of election interference, even though he ended up winning Iowa by a double-digit margin.

READ MORE:Trump calls for 'dishonest' ABC News to lose license following debate fact-check

*Click here to read Politico's report in full.

---

an 12 24

During his 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump repeatedly blamed President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris for inflation in the United States. His messaging worked: Trump pulled off a narrow victory, defeating Harris in both the electoral and popular votes.

Trump didn't win by a "landslide," as "War Room" host Steve Bannon, Rep. Rick Scott (R-Florida) and other far-right Trump supporters have been claiming. The president-elect, according to the Cook Political Report, won the popular vote by roughly 1.5 percent. But he successfully used voters' anxiety over inflation to his advantage.

Nonetheless, the U.S. has had low unemployment rates under Biden's presidency. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), unemployment was only 4.2 percent in November.

READ MORE:'Not going to cooperate': Border state sheriffs vow to defy Trump’s mass deportations plan

In an article published on December 18, the New York Times' Ben Casselman emphasizes that Trump is inheriting a "stable" economy from Biden/Harris — and addresses fears that the stability coud disappear.

"After five years of uncertainty and turmoil," Casselman explains, "the U.S. economy is ending 2024 in arguably its most stable condition since the start of the coronavirus pandemic. Inflation has cooled. Unemployment is low. The Federal Reserve is cutting interest rates. The recession that many forecasters once warned was inevitable hasn’t materialized."

The Times reporter continues, "Yet the economic outlook for 2025 is as murky as ever, for one major reason: President-elect Donald J. Trump. On the campaign trail and in the weeks since his election, Mr. Trump has proposed sweeping policy changes that could have profound — and complicated — implications for the economy."

:{:{READ MORE:'Chilling effect': ABC News employees condemn network‘s 'surrender' to Trump}:

Possible Causes for concern, according to Casselman, include new tariffs, mass deportations, and regulation changes that could "make the financial system more prone to crises over the long run."

Michael Gapen, chief U.S. economist for Morgan Stanley, told the Times, "It is a very uncertain outlook, and most of that uncertainty comes from potential changes in policy…. There's a wide range of potential outcomes, and a base-line outlook isn't quite as useful as it is in normal times."

Economist Michael Strain of the American Enterprise Institute warns that changes in "trade and immigration policy could be extremely disruptive to the economy" and lead to slow growth combined with high inflation.

Strain told the Times, "In this scenario, the price of imported goods, the price of groceries, the price of restaurant meals, the price of homes all shoot up dramatically."

READ MORE:'The source of much evil': Baptist minister warns against MAGA’s 'weaponization of Christianity'

*Read Ben Casselman's full New York Times article at this link (subscription required).

---

an 12 24

NOTE DID NOT RETRACT, SAID REGRET THE STATEMENT

ABC shouldn’t have agreed to settle the defamation case Trump brought against it — handing him $15 million for his presidential “library” (whatever monument that turns out to be) and another million for his legal fees, along with an apology.

It shouldn’t have, first, because the standard for defamation of a public figure requires that a plaintiff prove that the defendant acted with “actual malice” — that is, knew their statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.

But when on March 10, ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos asserted that Trump had been found civilly liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll, there’s zero evidence that Stephanopoulos knew it to be false or was acting with reckless disregard for the truth.

At Trump’s civil trial for defaming Carroll, she testified that he pushed her against a dressing room wall, forced his mouth onto hers, yanked down her tights, and shoved his hand and then his penis inside her while she struggled against him. She said she finally kneed him off her and fled.

In upholding the civil judgment for Carroll and against Trump, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan wrote that the unanimous jury verdict was almost entirely in favor of Carroll, except that the jury concluded she had failed to prove that Trump raped her “within the narrow, technical meaning of a particular section of the New York Penal Law,” which requires vaginal penetration by a penis.

The judge said that jury verdict did notmean that Carroll “failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape.’ Indeed ... the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

After a federal judge says that the jury under his purview found that Trump “exactly” raped her, as rape is commonly understood, isn’t it understandable that Stephanopoulos concluded that Trump had been found civilly liable for raping her?

By caving into Trump with this $15 million settlement, ABC didn’t just signal that Trump was correct and Stephanopoulos wrong about whether Trump had in fact raped Carroll.

ABC also signaled that Trump might be correct about a lot of other things he has accused ABC and the rest of the mainstream media of reporting falsely about him — that he lied when he said the 2020 election was stolen from him, for example, or that he lied when he claimed he did not provoke the rioters on January 6, 2021, or when he characterized it as a “peaceful” protest, or said President Biden was behind his prosecutions for trying to reverse the outcome of the 2020 election and making off with classified documents.

ABC’s cave to Trump has even larger implications.

Trump has already used legal threats to intimidate the media and anyone brazen enough to criticize or question him — saying he’ll prosecute journalists and their sources, eliminate funding for public radio and television, subpoena news organizations, revoke networks’ broadcast licenses, and use libel lawsuits.

In the wake of ABC’s surrender, Trump is alreadyexpandinghis threats of legal action against the news media, stating he wants to “straighten out the press.”

On Monday, Trump said that “today or tomorrow” he would sue the Des-Moines Registernewspaper over its final poll of Iowa voters that showed him losing the November election to Vice President Kamala Harris, because he believed the poll “was fraud and it was election interference.”

The Register’sfinal poll before Election Day, conducted by legendary pollster J. Ann Selzer, showed Harris leading Trump 47-44 percent among likely voters in the state. The poll was a bombshell that suggested Harris might pull an upset in a state Trump won in 2016 and 2020.

Trump went on to win the state by a 13-point margin.

“She’s a very good pollster,” Trump said of Selzer. “She knows what she was doing.”

Selzer said she was “mystified” by allegations she was politically motivated or had engaged in election interference. “To suggest without a single shred of evidence that I was in cahoots with somebody, that I was being paid by somebody, it’s hard to pay too much attention to it except that they are accusing me of a crime.”

Trump’s comments about the Registerwere in response to a reporter’s question about whether Trump planned to file more lawsuits following the settlement with ABC, including against social media influencers and other independent figures. Trump responded, “I think you have to do it because they’re very dishonest. We need a great media. We need a fair media.”

Some news organizations are already warning their reporters to prepare: Axios recently told its staff to expect an increased number of lawsuits from the Trump administration, Semafor reported.

At one point, Trump suggested that the U.S. government should be taking up these lawsuits against the news media. “I feel I have to do this. I shouldn’t really be the one to do it. It should have been the Justice Department or somebody else. But I have to do it. It costs a lot of money to do it, but we have to straighten out the press.”

So, why didn’t ABC stand by Stephanopoulos and stand up to Trump?

Media lawyers say it’s rare to see a settlement at this stage of a legal dispute.

After Trump filed the lawsuit accusing Stephanopoulos of “actual malice,” ABC filed a motion to dismiss the case, claiming Trump could not prove actual malice. In July, the judge assigned to the case rejected ABC’s motion and allowed the case to move forward. This subjected the network to the pretrial discovery process, meaning that Stephanopoulos would have his emails and other work materials scrutinized.

The curious thing here is that when media defendants are unsuccessful at the dismissal stage of a trial, they typically move on to preparing for summary judgment and challenge the legal sufficiency of a plaintiff’s claim. Four media lawyers I checked with told me they didn’t understand why ABC would settle before trying for summary judgment, especially when it had such a strong case.

Conservative radio host Erick Erickson, who used to practice law, says ABC and Stephanopoulos wanted to avoid discovery. The “$15 million settlement is not the cost of doing business. It is avoiding discovery.”

I don’t think it’s a cover-up. I know George Stephanopoulos well (we worked together in the Clinton administration), and I have utter confidence in his integrity.

But I don’t have nearly as much confidence in the Walt Disney Company — which, along with its ownership of ABC, owns the Disney Channel, ESPN Wide World of Sports, Freeform, FX, Hulu, Hotstar, and National Geographic. It also owns the properties Disneyland Resort, Walt Disney World Resort, and Disneyland Paris. It owns the studios Pixar Animation, Marvel Studios, Lucasfilm, and 20th Century Studios. It owns the brands Star Wars, The Muppets, Disney Princesses, Pirates of the Caribbean, and Winnie the Pooh. It owns a publishing company, a cruise line, a venture capital firm, and a host of international media networks.

In other words: A very big corporation with its hands in all sorts of places. A very big corporation that worries about all the ways the upcoming Trump administration might hurt its bottom line.

No large American corporation wants to be actively litigating against a sitting president, especially one as vindictive as Trump. A $15 million settlement is chickenfeed compared to the myriad ways Trump could penalize Disney, a $205.25 billion corporation.

We are beginning to see this all over the American political-economic system — giant corporations and hugely wealthy people going out of their way to appease King Trump even in advance of his coronation. They are paying him off to maintain or enlarge their profits.

Which is why Disney’s control over ABC — like Jeff Bezos’s control over The Washington Post, Elon Musk’s control over what we used to call Twitter, and Patrick Soon-Shiong’s control over the Los Angeles Times— and every other wealthy individual’s or big corporation’s control over the news we get, poses such a challenge to American democracy in the age of Trump.

---

an 12 24

'Certainly bring us lots of joy': Kremlin insider optimistic Trump will be Putin’s puppet

---

coronation fail orban?

'Wants a global stage': Trump’s 'power move' fizzles as China’s Xi blows off inauguration an 12 24

---

time man of year but tdb

Time Undercuts Trump Interview With Lengthy Fact Check

---

12/11/2024 RWW

Kyle Mantyla

Diana Falzone @ Mediaite: ‘Will Result in Termination’: Newsmax Bans Criticism of Pete Hegseth After Trump Fumed Over Host’s Attack

Newsmax instructed staff to lay off Pete Hegseth, the Fox News host Donald Trump nominated to serve as his secretary of defense, after a segment bashing the pick sparked the ire of Trump himself.

Alexander C. Kaufman @ HuffPost: Trump Names Price For Avoiding All Environment Regulations: $1 Billion Or More

President-elect Donald Trump said Tuesday he planned to expedite federal regulatory approvals, including all environmental permits, for any company or individual proposing to invest $1 billion or more in a construction project.

Sean Craig @ The Daily Beast: Mel Gibson Threatens ‘to Kill Someone’ While Fearmongering at Mar-a-Lago

A cavalcade of supporting characters in the MAGA universe, and President-elect Donald Trump, showed up at Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday to attend a soirée for the conspiratorial, QAnon-adjacent conservative nonprofit America’s Future.

Nikki McCann Ramírez @ Rolling Stone: Advocacy Group Calls B.S. on Nancy Mace’s Claim That She Was Assaulted in Capitol

A man has been arrested, and Nancy Mace is wearing a wrist brace and shoulder sling after the South Carolina congresswoman said she was “physically accosted” in a Capitol office building on Tuesday afternoon.

Peter Drier @ Talking Points Memo: Trump Does Not Have Mandate

Newspaper headlines have called Donald Trump’s victory “decisive,” “massive,” “resounding,” “historic,” and “sweeping.” Trump himself has described his win as a “landslide.” On election night, he claimed that “America has given us an unprecedented and powerful mandate.” None of those things are true.

---

an 12 24

Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) reminded lawmakers that President-elect Donald Trump's first administration had negotiated with the Taliban for a withdrawal from Afghanistan at a hearing where Republicans attacked President Joe Biden over the decision to pull U.S. forces out of the country.

During Tuesday's House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing, Connolly displayed a photo of former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo with a Taliban negotiator.

"I'd like to put a picture up, which seems to suggest, Mr. Secretary, that the Republican narrative is correct about you," the Virginia Democrat told Secretary of State Antony Blinken. "Isn't that you with the Taliban negotiator, Mr. Secretary?"

"I'm not aware of having spent any time with a Taliban negotiator," Blinken replied.

"Oh, I'm sorry, that's Secretary Pompeo," Connolly said. "Was he your predecessor in the Biden administration as Secretary of State?"

"No, he was my predecessor in the previous administration, the Trump administration," Blinken explained.

Connolly pointed out that Trump had appointed Zalmay Khalilzad to negotiate directly with the Taliban in 2018.

"And he, of course, testified before this committee, and I can remember an exchange with him in which I expressed deep concern about the direction of the U.S. posture and the ramifications with allied Afghans who had worked for us or worked with us, and women," the lawmaker recalled. "And he kind of brushed them off at the time."

Khalilzad went on to forge an agreement with the Taliban in Doha that led to the U.S. withdrawal.

"All U.S. troops were to be out by May 31st," Blinken acknowledged. "In the meantime, 5,000 prisoners were released — Taliban prisoners."

"Among those 5,000 were terrorists, fighters, and people who returned to the battlefield against the Afghan government, which allegedly we were supporting at the time," Connolly remarked.

ALSO READ:Agenda 47: Alarm sounded about Trump’s dystopian plans for his second term

"It's kind of hard to follow and it seems to me that we, by agreeing to that in the Trump years with Secretary Pompeo, your predecessor, and Ambassador Khalilzad, we actually set in motion an untenable but probably irrevocable kind of folding of events," he added.

"We cut a deal to get out and cut our losses at the expense of the Afghan government, the Afghan military, and ultimately the Afghan people, and that was all set in motion before you took the oath of office or President Biden took the oath of office."

Watch the video below from C-SPAN or click the link.

---

strong man beta humiliate

an 12 24

'USA is a threat': Canadians slam 'bully' Trump’s 'arrogant' mockery of 'Governor Trudeau'

---

see funder get gigs plums // guilfoyle, fr in laws ambassadors

an 12 24

President-elect Donald Trump pledged to fast-track permits and tamp down regulations, including environmental, for any entity that wants to invest $1 billion or more in America, while offering no specifics or parameters, including how the federal government could arbitrarily overrule state and local laws.

“Any person or company investing ONE BILLION DOLLARS, OR MORE, in the United States of America, will receive fully expedited approvals and permits, including, but in no way limited to, all Environmental approvals. GET READY TO ROCK!!!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social website.

During the campaign, Trump told oil and gas executives and lobbyists at a closed-door Mar-a-Lago fundraiser that if they invested $1 billion in his campaign, he would scale back or remove environmental regulations.

READ MORE: ‘Swarm of MAGA Attacks’ Making Hegseth Confirmation Seem More Likely: Report

“Attendees included executives from ExxonMobil, EQT Corporation and the American Petroleum Institute, which lobbies for the oil industry,” The New York Times had reported in May. “The event was organized by the oil billionaire Harold Hamm, who has for years helped to shape Republican energy policies.”

Trump has announced his nominee for Secretary of the Interior will be North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum.

“Under the National Environmental Policy Act,” Forbes reports, “the federal government is required to conduct environmental reviews before approving energy production plans, infrastructure builds and other projects. How Trump will help investors get around regulations isn’t clear, but Trump has vowed to increase domestic production of oil and natural gas, projects that are often stymied or killed in the regulatory process.”

Critics blasted Trump’s statement.

314Action, which says it is “the only organization in the nation focused on recruiting, training, and electing Democrats with a background in science to public office,” wrote: “To tackle the climate crisis, Congress needs to pass and enforce bold, evidence-based legislation. However, Donald Trump doesn’t believe that billionaires should have to follow the law. In his world, they can pay-to-play and bypass crucial environmental protections. That’s why we’ll always fight to #ElectScientists who will fight back against his anti-science agenda and hold these bad actors accountable.”

“A government of oligarchs that will exist to solely serve the interests of oligarchs while distracting working people with culture wars. Foreign corporations & persons can loot & pollute the US and bypass regs that protect the health of Americans as long as they got lots of cash,” observed MeidasTouch editor-in-chief Ron Filipkowski.

Journalist David Leavitt asked, “How many animals will go extinct because of this? How much quicker will this hasten the destruction of our planet?”

---

an 12 24

'Everything is on the table': There's a new development in the Trump-Musk plot to kill Social Security

---

an 2 24

One of Donald Trump's promises for a potential second presidency, includes ending birthright citizenship — which would defy the US Constitution.

During a Senate hearing Thursday, Republican Senator Ron Johnson (Wisconsin) echoed the former president's sentiment.

"For those of you who've been at the border, you also probably saw what I saw," the Ohio lawmaker said. "There are so many pregnant women, I mean, in their 8th or 9th month. Of course, they come here, and that child is a US citizen. Which, personally, I believe we ought to do away with birthright citizenship."

READ MORE:'Done a lot of damage': McConnell unleashes on 'sleazeball' Trump and his supporters

In a July 2024 report, NBC News noted:

*Birthright citizenship has long been understood to be required under the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” The language was included in the constitutional amendment enacted after the Civil War to ensure that Black former slaves and their children were recognized as citizens.

*The phrase has been generally understood by legal scholars of all ideological stripes to be self-explanatory, but that has not stopped some anti-immigration advocates from pressing an alternative interpretation.

Trump floated the idea of ending birthright citizenship during his presidency, which then-Republican Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan (OH) said the MAGA hopeful "obviously" couldn't do, according to MPR News.

READ MORE:Here’s how a 'radicalized' Michael Flynn 'cashed in' on 'baseless conspiracy theories'

---

mult gop say no retal tho he constantly says yes and will not give up on kash and bondi

mma

December 9, 2024, edition of Fox News' Outnumbered

LARRY KUDLOW (CO-HOST): I just want to go back inside the church for a minute, Molly. Take a careful look at that. That wasn't a nice conversation. That was outright flirtation. It was almost —

HARRIS FAULKNER (CO-HOST): Oh my goodness!

KUDLOW: That was almost heavy — that was almost heavy-duty petting at the G7 level. I've been there. I've seen these things before. So I'm just saying the evidence is mounting.

...

KAYLEIGH MCENANY (CO-HOST): Trump said, Harris, his response was that she could not have been nicer. I would also note, to Kristen Welker, he said that he has not interest in putting a prosecutor on the Bidens. He wants to look forward, not the past. He is magananimous.

FAULKNER: Look, I mean, politics is a blood sport. And Larry what you were pointing out, you know, outside of some of the extracurricular activity you described, I do believe that in these moments you do want to gravitate — I mean clearly she gravitates to power. You're not in a White House with a husband who really could have sat down long before that debate on June 27. Yeah, I'm just going to say it, because it's the truth. So she's gravitating to power and the shiniest object in the room at that moment, the one with the really good lighting, Molly, is Donald Trump. So she goes over and kind of soaks that lightning up.

KUDLOW: This fondness for power is what I metaphorically called heavy-duty petting at the G7!

---

On Election Night 2024, Donald Trump became the first candidate in U.S. history to become president-elect despite having faced four separate criminal indictments — including Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg Jr.'s hush money/falsified business records case, which found him being convicted on 34 felony counts.

But none of other three cases went to trial. And special counsel Jack Smith, citing the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) longstanding policy against prosecuting a sitting president, asked Judge Tanya Chutkan to dismiss, without prejudice, his federal election interference case against Trump.

Smith also motioned to withdraw his appeal of Judge Aileen Cannon's dismissal of his classified documents case. Meanwhile, Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney Fani Willis' election interference/RICO case against Trump and a long list of allies is on life support.

READ MORE:Why Measles, Whooping Cough and worse could roar back under RFK's watch

But according to Politico reporters Josh Gerstein and Kyle Cheney, Trump "isn’t off the hook for January 6 just yet

"Though the criminal cases against him are all but dead," Gerstein and Cheney explain in an article published on December 8, "Trump is likely to be fighting eight civil lawsuits — from members of Congress and injured police officers — deep into his second term. They may be the last form of legal redress Trump faces for his role in spurring the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021."

The Politico reporters add, "Those lawsuits have been steadily advancing for years, largely overshadowed by the explosive January 6 Committee and grand jury investigations. But now that the criminal cases have imploded, they've become a last stand of sorts for those seeking to hold Trump accountable for the chaos his supporters wrought that day."

According to attorney Joseph Sellers — who has represented Democrats in January 6-related lawsuits — Trump's victory over Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election will not erase his legal problems in civil cases.

READ MORE:'America will not be made great again': McConnell received ovation after 'swipe' at Trump

Sellers told Politico, "These cases, unlike the criminal case, will not be affected by the election. Our clients suffered real injuries that entitle them to relief, but also, I think, are seeking some measure of accountability given President Trump's role in the January 6 events and the events leading up to it."

READ MORE:['Soap opera': Trump administration threatens to devolve into a battle of egos*

*Read Politico's full article at this link.

---

an 12 24

the Atlantic's George Packer believes there are important lessons that Democrats need to take away from President-elect Donald Trump's victory in the 2024 election.

However, he also believes that Democrats need to avoid overestimating the strength of Trump's electoral coalition, which he believes could split relatively quickly.

"The Trump Reaction is more fragile than it now seems," he writes. "Trump’s behavior in the last weeks of the campaign did not augur a coherent second presidency. He will surround himself with ideologues, opportunists, and crackpots, and because he has no interest in governing, they will try to fill the vacuum and turn on one another."

Packer then zeroes in on the contradictions within the Trump coalition that will make it very hard for the president-elect to keep everything held together.

"The Trump administration, with a favorable Congress, will overreach on issues such as abortion and immigration, soon alienating important parts of its new coalition," he argues. "It will enact economic policies that favor the party’s old allies among the rich at the expense of its new supporters among the less well-off. It’s quite possible that, approaching 80, Trump will find himself once more among the least popular presidents in the country’s history."

He nonetheless says that Democrats need to perform a mental balancing act of both correcting the errors of the Biden-Harris administration while at the same time getting on war footing against an administration that will be unprecedently hostile to them.

"The opposition will have to act," he urges. "Much of this action will involve civil society and the private sector along with surviving government institutions—to prevent by legal means the mass internment and deportation of migrants from communities in which they’ve been peacefully living for years; to save women whose lives are threatened by laws that would punish them for trying to save themselves; to protect the public health from Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the nation’s security from Tulsi Gabbard, and its coffers from Elon Musk."

---

AN 11 24

President-elect Donald Trump’s decision to nominate as the U.S. Secretary of the Navy a financier, art collector, and MAGA megadonor with no military experience is coming under fire.

“It is my great honor to announce John Phelan as our next United States Secretary of the Navy!” declared Trump in a statement, deviating from his usual habit of acknowledging their status as a nominee. “John will be a tremendous force for our Naval Servicemembers, and a steadfast leader in advancing my America First vision. He will put the business of the U.S. Navy above all else.”

Trump claimed, “John has excelled in every endeavor, from founding and leading Rugger Management LLC, to co-founding MSD Capital, LP, the Private Investment Firm for Michael Dell, CEO of Dell Technologies. His Record of Success speaks for itself – A true Champion of American Enterprise and Ingenuity!”

READ MORE: MTG Claims Biden Is ‘Starting a Nuclear War’ Over Debunked Claim of Giving Nukes Back to Ukraine

The Independent noted, “According to the U.S. Code,the secretary of the Navy shall be appointed ‘from among persons most highly qualified for the position by reason of background and experience.'”

Phelan “donated $834,600 to Trump’s joint fundraising committee, Trump 47,” back in April, according to The Hill. In August, at his $38 million Aspen estate, Phelan hosted a “$25,000 to $500,000 a couple” fundraiser that reportedly generated $12 million for Trump.

“The dinner, which Trump reportedly flew in for on a private jet once owned by disgraced financier and convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, was held at the $38 million home of art collectors and investors John and Amy Phelan, with Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO), gambling mogul Steve Wynn, and billionaire Thomas Peterffy also in attendance,” The Daily Beast reported. “There were about 100 attendees at the event, which required couples to pony up $500,000 to serve on the host committee or at least $25,000 to attend at all.”

“If confirmed,” The Military Times reports, “Phelan would be the first permanent Navy secretary without military experience since 2009, when Donald Winter finished up his three-year term in the role. Unlike Winter, who previously had worked within the Pentagon and on Navy contracts at major defense firms, Phelan has little public connection to the sea service.”

Winter was nominated by Republican President George W. Bush.

READ MORE: ‘Where Did All the Money Go?’: Trump DNI Pick Tulsi Gabbard Has Multiple PACs, Report Says

“Of the 26 men to be confirmed as Navy secretary over the last 70 years, all but six have been veterans,” The Military Times also noted.

Critics are pointing to Phelan’s lack of relevant experience.

Paul Rieckhoff, the veterans’ activist and founder of Independent Veterans of America, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA), and Righteous Media, blasted Trump’s pick.

He warned, “of course, Phelan has not served in the Navy. Or any other branch of military service. But he is a big Trump donor. The least qualified and most overtly political cabinet in American history continues to expand. And #OurEnemiesAreCelebrating.”

Veteran foreign policy journalist Laura Rozen, pointing to Phelan’s bio at the nonprofit Spirit of America and the London School of Economics and Political Science, writes, “Harvard MBA, art collector, manages fund of Michael Dell’s money. dont see anything in his bio that has any national security.”

Kevin Baron, the award-winning military journalist and former executive editor of Defense One, responding to a report on Phelan’s nomination, wrote, “Who?”

READ MORE: ‘Much Like the 11th Century’: Trump Defense Pick Called for American ‘Crusade’

---

mma

MAGA allies in the media make the case for Trump to ignore the Senate confirmation process

Written by Gideon Taaffe

Published 11/19/24

President-elect Donald Trump has called for Senate Republicans to let him make recess appointments for top positions in his upcoming administration, and his allies in right-wing media are making the case for his plan.

Trump named several picks for prominent cabinet positions that have drawn scrutiny for their inexperience and controversial statements, raising concerns that he is focused primarily on filling his administration with loyalists. He also signaled his intention to push through his picks without scrutiny by calling on Republican senators to let him make recess appointments.

His allies in right-wing media are now arguing that recess appointments would be justified and calling on senators to bend to his will and forgo their standard confirmation process.

Trump has demanded support to use recess appointments for top members of his cabinet, and he plans to fill multiple posts with right-wing media loyalists

:{:{Trump posted on Truth Social on November 10 that “any Republican Senator seeking the coveted LEADERSHIP position in the United States Senate must agree to Recess Appointments.”As The Associated Press pointed out, Trump’s plan represents “a significant shift in power away from the Senate.” Though past presidents have confirmed appointments while Congress is in recess, it’s rare to use this process for high-level cabinet positions. The move would require Republican senators to pass a motion of adjournment with a simple majority vote. NBC News, [11/10/24; The Associated Press, 11/14/24]}:

Trump’s nominees include multiple right-wing media personalities who are loyal to him but have little to no relevant experience and have peddled conspiracy theories and extreme views.He has named multiple current and former Fox employees to top posts, including Pete Hegseth, Sean Duffy, Tom Homan, Tulsi Gabbard, Mike Huckabee, and Michael Waltz, along with frequent Fox guests including Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Media Matters, [11/13/24, 11/14/24, 11/15/24, 8/27/24; WNYC, On the Media, 11/15/24; Politico, 11/13/24; NPR, 11/16/24; CNN, 11/19/24]

Trump’s MAGA allies in right-wing media are championing Trump’s plan to force his nominees through without Senate confirmation

Center for Renewing America fellows Jeff Clark and Anthony Licata published a piece on the legality of Trump’s recess plan, saying he would be justified to pursue it.They wrote: “Given the extensive delays experienced during his first administration in getting the Senate to approve his nominees expeditiously, President-elect Donald Trump recently proposed the use of recess appointments, if necessary, to briskly stand up his new administration early next year. The question is whether the law and our history confirms the President’s belief that he should be allowed to assemble his Cabinet quickly via recess appointments? The answer is ‘yes.’” Center for Renewing America, [11/17/24]

During an appearance on former Trump adviser Steve Bannon’sWar Roompodcast, Clark advocated for Trump to use the recess power.Clark claimed that “there are many of us who think that he [Trump] should” use the recess power in order to “set right the boundaries between the branches of the government.” Real America’s Voice, War Room, [11/18/24]

Article III project founder Mike Davis responded to a question about recess appointments by saying, “Every option should be on the table.” Real America’s Voice, War Room, [11/18/24]

Bannon told his audience members to call their senators and demand a 15-day recess for Trump to appoint his cabinet.Bannon told his audience that “we need you, when you call,” to tell your senator “the president needs 15 days recess — recess days in the first hundred.” Real America’s Voice, War Room, [11/11/24]

Former Trump administration official Ric Grenell told Newsmax’s Greg Kelly that Senate Republicans should “at the very minimum, give him [Trump] a recess appointment and let the reform start.” Newsmax, Greg Kelly Reports, [11/15/24]

Right-wing commentator Mike Crispi wrote: “Recess appointments solves all. It’s time to WIN!” Twitter/X, [11/17/24]

Far-right podcaster and Trump ally Laura Loomer attacked Senate Majority Leader-elect John Thune (R-SD) for saying the Senate might struggle to get the votes to recess.She wrote: “The joke is on everyone who fell for the unity nonsense this election season. Senate Republicans are about to screw President Trump.” Twitter/X, [11/15/24]

Fox News host Laura Ingraham said: “I certainly hope that as they carry out their advise-and-consent role, Republican senators remember that Donald Trump is the reason they even have a majority.” Fox News, The Ingraham Angle, [11/14/24]

---

gaetz fail --> bondi not paxton

---

an 11 24

During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, then-President Donald Trump sent out two stimulus checks.

Now that President-elect Trump is on his way back to the White House, some social media posts are claiming that he plans to send out more stimulus checks after being sworn in for his second term. But according to CBS News reporter Aimee Picchi, some "experts" say the "likelihood" of that happening is "extremely thin."

Picchi reports, "When the COVID-19 health emergency shuttered the economy in 2020, millions of Americans lost their jobs, sending the jobless rate to almost 15 percent and causing financial hardship for many. As a result, Trump signed two bills that sent stimulus checks to eligible households, while President Biden authorized a third. Even though many Americans feel the economy is faring badly, with some pointing to the impact of the pandemic's high inflation, the U.S. isn't anywhere close to the situation of the early 2020s, economists say.

READ MORE:Ron DeSantis slams the door on Matt Gaetz’s hopes of being a senator

Jacob Channel, senior economist at Lending Tree, sees no need for stimulus payments at this point.

Channel told CBS News, "Stimulus checks typically only happen when the economy is in really bad shape and consumers need a push to start spending money again. That's not really the case in the present."

In fact, the United States has had low unemployment rates under President Joe Biden, although many voters were resentful over inflation when they went to the polls this year.

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), U.S. unemployment was only 4.1 percent in October.

READ MORE:House passes bill 'giving Donald Trump unlimited authority' to target political enemies

Channel told CBS News, "Despite some pain points and general 'bad vibes' expressed by some people, the economy is currently in remarkably good shape and consumer spending is relatively strong,"

:{:{READ MORE:'Wrong': Christian GOP senator fears 'slippery slope' of OK school chief’s Bible push}:

---

an 11 24

Despite his unpopularity among the American electorate, dozens of felony convictions and a failed coup attempt, Donald Trump still managed to not only win the Electoral College but also the national popular vote. One former Republican White House staffer is offering three main reasons why Trump defied the odds in 2024.

In a Friday essay for the Atlantic, David Frum — who was a speechwriter for former President George W. Bush — noted Trump "waged a relentless campaign against any and all rules that restrained him" in his third bid for the presidency. He also pointed out that Trump notched three "all-important successes" that paved the way for his eventual November 5 victory.

"First, he frightened [President Joe] Biden administration’s Justice Department away from holding him to account in courts of law in any timely way," Frum wrote. "Second, he persuaded the courts themselves — including, ultimately, the Supreme Court — to invent new doctrines of presidential immunity to shield him."

READ MORE:'Going to pay a lot more': Here's how Trump's deportations will lead to huge tax increases

"Third, he broke all internal resistance within the Republican Party to his lawless actions," he continued. "Republican officeholders, donors and influencers who had once decried the January 6 attempted coup as utterly and permanently debarring — one by one, Trump brought them to heel."

As if to illustrate Frum's point, Trump's sentencing in the New York hush money cover-up case has now been indefinitely postponed. Judge Juan Merchan issued a one-page ruling on Friday announcing that the late November sentencing date for Trump's 34 felony convictions had been scuttled, and did not announce a new date. His two federal cases will likely be officially dismissed once Trump takes office on January 20, and his Fulton County, Georgia election interference trial will likely be delayed until 2029, after Trump's final term ends.

Frum observed that because American institutions and the courts failed to hold Trump accountable, whether the ex-president (and now president-elect) would ever face any consequences for his actions ultimately came down to the election. He opined that regardless of how the American electorate may have felt about the importance of preserving democracy, a majority of voters viewed the economy as a higher priority — hence Trump winning with voters who ranked that issue as the most important.

"So the ancient struggle resumes again: progress against reaction, dignity against domination, commerce against predation, stewardship against spoliation, global responsibility against national chauvinism," Frum wrote. "No quitting."

READ MORE: Day one: Trump planning 'largest mass deportation operation'

:{:{Click here to read Frum's essay in its entirety (subscription required).}:

---

an 11 24

no lnx

alternet

People expecting Trump voters to turn on him are fooling themselves

John Stoehr November 20, 2024

There’s an argument I want to discuss. It goes something like this: Donald Trump’s policies are going to alienate some of the people who voted for him. To be sure, many of them wanted something done about the economy. Prices were too damn high. But they didn’t sign up for tariffs, deportations and cuts to social services, like food stamps.

As a liberal pundit put it, Trump seems poised to follow through with that policy agenda, though going through with it is “political suicide.”

My question is why.

Why are we expecting so much from Trump voters? I’m not making a distinction between his base and those who chose to go along for the ride. I mean all of his supporters, and I’m asking: Why should we place our democratic faith, and the future of the republic, in their hands?

It’s not like Trump had an agenda to bring down the cost of living. All he said was “Make America Great Again.” Deport “illegals.” Suppress transgender rights. Beat down weak and marginalized folks. Voila!

His one economic plan was tariffs. A tax on imported goods from China and elsewhere will raise prices on everything, not just imports, as retailers will price-gouge under cover of inflation. They’re the opposite of what you do to reduce costs. And that’s why he lied. He said nations would pay for them, not companies bringing goods in.

His voters chose to believe him.

So let me get this straight.

People who can’t or won’t understand tariffs are going to deduce all by themselves that tariffs are the reason they’re now paying three and four times more for their sneakers, T-shirts and video-game consoles?

People who voted against their own economic interests are going to figure out on their own what exactly those interests are, but only after they’ve been screwed over by the president they voted for?

To paraphrase Mark Twain, it would be easier to continue scamming these people than convince them that they’ve been scammed.

And the scamming will continue.

The rightwing media apparatus, which is global in scale, prevented these voters from knowing what Joe Biden and Kamala Harris had done for the economy, inflation, wages and the GDP, but especially for the material interests of the white working class. Biden and Harris literally ditched 40 years of supply-side consensus in favor of growing the economy, as Biden liked to say, from the bottom up and middle out. But no one who watches Fox or listens to Joe Rogan or reads The Daily Wire or sees YouTube ads for gold bullion knows any of that.

This same rightwing media apparatus, which has only grown larger since 2020, is going to prevent Trump voters from knowing who’s responsible for price hikes, job losses and soaring interest rates that will be directly attributable to deportations, tariffs and other insane policies. If there’s someone to blame, it won’t be Donald Trump. It will be RINOs or “Marxist, communist, fascist, socialists” or immigrants.

If Trump voters are not especially attuned to the rightwing media apparatus, they will nevertheless feel its ambiance, as the Washington press corps habitually launders Trump’s talking points and, as we have seen, appeases him by either self-censoring or acting as if already under threat of investigation or prosecution by his administration.

If Trump voters are able to see through the fog of the rightwing media apparatus and the Washington press corps, they still might not understand the damage done by Trump’s economic policies, as his administration will almost certainly try to corrupt government data. The jobs report, inflation index, consumer spending – there will huge incentive to fudge those after Trump commits “political suicide.”

If Trump voters are able to connect all the dots and blame him for everything he did or didn’t do, as they blamed Joe Biden and Kamala Harris for everything they did and didn’t do, so what? Is Trump going to respond to the backlash as if he were a normal president?

He doesn’t care about his party. He doesn’t care about the next election (presuming he doesn’t run again). It’s hard to see any incentive outside his self-interest that would move him to back off anything.

I haven’t mentioned the fact that these voters, even the ones who chose to go along for the ride, inhabit a world of fantastical fiction, absolute trash reality, that none of us should put our hopes in.

These people believe mothers “abort” babies after they’re born or if they don’t believe it, they don’t mind people who say so. They believe a student goes to school as a girl and comes back as a boy or if they don’t believe it, they don’t mind people who say so. Even if we give them the benefit of the doubt, and treat them more like children than adults, are we going to trust them to realize Trump is bad for them?

And even if Trump voters turn against Trump, thus creating an opportunity for the Democrats to win them over, are they going to recognize what the Democrats are offering in terms of economic policy given the hold the rightwing media apparatus has on them and given their past record of voting against their own economic interests?

I’ll pass.

I’ll pass on believing these people can learn the hard way what happens when you don’t take democracy seriously, when you can’t figure out whether it’s a good idea to put a crook in the White House. They don’t take their own lives that seriously, neither their physical nor spiritual selves, much less the fate of a constitutional republic.

I’ll put my faith in good people who seek out good trouble in the name of liberty, equality and justice for all. They’re a minority these days, but that’s OK. The world never changed for the better because a majority wanted it. It changed because a righteous minority demanded it.

---

an 11 24

A senior Trump official has issued a threat to Senate Republicans: support and confirm the Cabinet and administration nominees Donald Trump is choosing or face a primary challenge funded by the world’s richest person, Elon Musk, according to a new report from ABC News.

Jonathan Karl, ABC’s Chief Washington Correspondent reports, “the Trump team will play hardball with Republicans who waiver [sic] on any of the president-elect’s nominees.”

“There’s votes coming,” the Trump advisor said, according to Karl. “And if you are on the wrong side of the vote, you’re buying yourself a primary. That is all. And there’s a guy named Elon Musk who is going to finance it.”

READ MORE: Byron Donalds ‘Not Surprised’ at Snub from Trump’s Nearly-All White Administration

“The president gets to decide his cabinet. No one else. That’s just the way it is,” that advisor added, Karl reports.

The U.S. Constitution requires the Senate to provide its “advice and consent” on a large number of presidential nominees, which is not a rubber stamp. It reads in part: the President “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate…”

Democratic strategist Matt McDermott responded to Karl’s reporting, observing: “This has never, in the history of American democracy, been ‘just the way it is.'”

Media critic Susan Bordson urged the press “to provide audiences meaningful context.”

READ MORE: ‘I’m Not Here to Fight’: First Trans Member of Congress Responds to Johnson’s Bathroom Ban

“No journalists covering executive public governance should be skittish about contextualizing these actions, she writes, calling the threats “a TRAIT of authoritarian-style governance.”

Journalist James Surowiecki warned, “Having one super-rich guy exercise massive influence over American politics is a very bad thing. I know Americans don’t really care about the nuts and bolts of democracy, but this is a true corruption of democracy.”

Jesse Lee, a former Biden White House National Economic Council senior adviser declared, “Oligarchy is here.”

ABC’s Selina Wang invoked Matt Gaetz’s name in her report, but Karl stated the threat applied to “any of the president-elect’s nominees.”

Minutes ago, Gaetz withdrew his name from consideration for Attorney General.

Watch ABC News’ report from Thursday below or at this link.

---

Alternet+ no lnx

:{:{:{Trump’s appointees are the Trojan horse that could lead to America’s strategic collapse}:

Thom Hartmann November 21, 2024

The mainstream media is baffled: Why would Trump promote candidates to oversee critical agencies with millions of employees and multi-billion-dollar budgets who have little to no management experience and have openly expressed hostility toward the institutions they’ll oversee?

I’ve seen legendary reporter Bob Woodward, who wrote several books about Trump, on three different TV shows this week asking to the effect of, “What could Trump possibly gain from these incompetent appointments?

If he just wanted loyalty, there’s no shortage of rational, competent members of the military and intelligence community who’re loyal to Trump.

So why is he selecting people like Hegseth, Gaetz, and Gabbard to run agencies that could directly involve confrontations with Russia?

Trump wants Gaetz for the job as our nation’s top law enforcement officer, Attorney General (who oversees the FBI), where he could block the FBI from investigating Trump’s embrace of Putin and Russia’s spying and disinformation efforts here in the US.

Why? Gaetz, after all, has called for Trump to “defund, get rid of, abolish the FBI…”; he apparently hates the agency that investigated and threatened to prosecute him.

Pete Hegseth, who Trump wants to put in charge of our Department of Defense, is openly critical of our NATO allies, saying they are, “self-righteous and impotent nations asking us to honor outdated and one-sided defense arrangements they no longer live up to.”

Who else hates NATO? Vladimir Putin. Hegseth has also echoed Putin’s assertion that he doesn’t have designs on the Baltic states, arguing that he doubted Putin would go “much further” than the Polish border.

And both Hegseth and Gaetz have a history of lurid, possibly illegal sexual activity that could subject them to blackmail by a foreign power…like Russia.

Tulsi Gabbard, who Trump wants to put in charge of all 18 of America’s intelligence agencies — giving her full access to America’s darkest secrets and our spies buried deep within Russia and China — has repeatedly and openly embraced Vladimir Putin’s positions on world affairs.

Regarding Ukraine, she argued that Russia was forced to invade that country because, echoing Putin, she falsely claimed Ukraine was developing (with US help) biological weapons and conspiring with NATO to put troops on Russia’s border.

Former Secretary of State Clinton said Russia was “grooming” Gabbard, and Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz was equally blunt:

“There’s no question I consider her someone who is likely a Russian asset.”

And JD Vance, also selected by Trump and now our vice-president elect, has famously said:

“I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine one way or another,” no doubt bringing cheers from the Kremlin.

So, what’s really going on here?

Is it possible that Trump isn’t trolling us or trying to do “dominance plays” with Congress, but actually wants these people to injure or destroy the agencies he’s putting them in charge of?

Is it even conceivable that Trump, in league with Putin (or at least sharing his goal of weakening and damaging America), actually wants our intelligence, defense, and investigative agencies to be gutted to the point of impotence?

That these appointees could be Trojan horses he’s planning to use to destroy America from within?

That he’s that angry with the country whose past leaders have ridiculed him, whose elites have rejected him all his life, and that has even tried to put him in prison?

That he’d like our country — which he disdains — to be brought to its knees?

That his loyalty, perhaps for years, has been to a country and system of government very different from America and what our founders envisioned?

In 2019 The Washington Post revealed that, throughout his presidency, Donald Trump was having secret phone conversations with Russia’s President Putin (over 20 have been identified so far, including one just days before the 2020 election).

Just months ago, we discovered that he and Elon Musk have both been having regular, secret conversations with Putin for at least the past two years.

This embrace of a foreign dictator first cranked into visibility in 2016.

The Moscow Project from the American Progress Action Fund documented more than 270 known contacts between Russia-linked operatives and members of the Trump 2016 campaign and transition team, as well as at least 38 known meetings just leading up to that year’s election.

Throughout the campaign, he let them know where Trump needed help, and when. Speculation is that they used that information for their successful 2016 Facebook campaigns.

Trump pardoned Manafort, which got him out of prison; he’s still fabulously rich from his work for Russia.

As The New York Times noted in 2020:

The Washington Post reported two years ago last August that Trump had a habit of carrying top-secret information that could severely damage our national security, leaving it in hotel rooms in hostile nations.

Was he bringing these documents with him to sell? Or just to show to leaders or oligarchs in those countries to impress them? Or for bragging rights to impress dignitaries, businessmen, or ladies he brings back to his room?

Trump doesn’t put all that effort into hauling things around unless it’s extraordinarily important to his ego or he thinks he can make money off them.

When Robert Mueller’s team tried to investigate Trump’s ties to Russia and his possibly sharing sensitive military information with them, they were stonewalled by the Trump administration.

The Mueller Report identified ten specific instances of Trump trying to criminally obstruct the investigation, including offering the bribe of a pardon to Paul Manafort, asking FBI Director Comey to “go easy” on General Flynn after his dinner with Putin, and directing Attorney General Jeff Sessions to limit former FBI Director Mueller’s ability to investigate Trump’s connections to Russia.

As the Mueller Report noted:

It adds, detailing Trump’s specific Obstruction of Justice crimes:

There are, after all, credible assertions from American intelligence agencies that when Trump was elected, members of Russian intelligence and Putin’s inner circle were literally partying in Moscow, celebrating a victory they believed they made happen.

And apparently Putin and his intelligence operatives had good reason to be popping the champagne in November, 2016. They were quickly paid off in a big way.

In his first months in office, Trump outed an Israeli/American asset/spy to the Russian Ambassador in what he thought was going to be a “secret Oval Office meeting” (the Russians released the photo to the press), resulting in MOSAD having to “burn” (relocate, change identity of) that spy.

The undercover agent was apparently working in Syria that year against the Russians, who were embroiled in the midst of Assad’s Civil War and indiscriminately bombing Aleppo into rubble.

That, in turn, prompted the CIA to worry that another longtime American spy, this one buried deep inside the Kremlin, was similarly vulnerable to Trump handing him over to Putin.

As CNN noted (when the story leaked two years later):

“According to CNN’s sources, the spy had access to Putin and could even provide images of documents on the Russian leader’s desk.”

Similarly, when they met in Helsinki on July 16, 2018, Trump and Putin talked in private for several hours and Trump ordered his translators’ notes destroyed; there is also concern that much of their conversation was done out of the hearing of the US’ translator (Putin is fluent in English) who may have been relegated to a distant part of the large empty ballroom in which they met.

The Washington Post reported, after a leak six months later, that when Trump met privately for those two hours with Putin the CIA went into “panic mode.” A US intelligence official told the Post:

“There was this gasp’ at the CIA’s Langley, Virginia headquarters. You literally had people in panic mode watching it at Langley. On all floors. Just shock.”

Ten days after Paul’s trip to Moscow, The New York Times reported that the CIA was worried because their sources inside Moscow had suddenly “gone silent”:

“The full reasons the sources have gone silent are not known,” the Times reported, but Trump having intentionally burned a man working for the FBI — whose job at that time was to find and reveal Russian agents involved in or close to the Trump campaign — may also have had something to do with it:

“[C]urrent and former officials said the exposure of sources inside the United States has also complicated matters,” noted the Times. “This year, the identity of an F.B.I. informant, Stefan Halper, became public after [Trump-loyal MAGA Republican] House lawmakers sought information on him and the White House allowed that information to be shared. Mr. Halper, an American academic based in Britain, had been sent to talk to Trump campaign advisers who were under F.B.I. scrutiny for their ties to Russia.”

Things were picking up the following year, in 2019, as Putin was planning his invasion of Ukraine while Trump was preparing for the 2020 election.

In July 2019, Trump had conversations with five foreign leaders during and just before a presidential visit that month to Mar-a-Lago; they included Putin and the Emir of Qatar.

As The Washington Post noted in an article titled “Trump’s communications with foreign leader are part of whistleblower complaint that spurred standoff between spy chief and Congress”:

On the last day of that month, July 31, Trump had another private conversation with Putin.

The White House spokespeople told Congress and the press that Trump said that he and Putin discussed “wildfires” and “trade between the nations.” No droids in this car…

But the following week, on August 2nd, The Daily Beast’s Betsy Swan reported that Trump had that week asked the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for a list of all its employees (including all of our spies) who had worked there more than 90 days, and the request had intelligence officials experiencing “disquiet.”

Did Trump ever return that document to the intelligence agencies? I can find no record of a news story suggesting that he did. It appears to have vanished.

If it turns out the Trump has been acting as an agent for Russia, a Trojan horse right here in America, how long might this have been going on?

Czechoslovakia’s Státní bezpečnost (StB) first started paying attention to Trump back in 1977, as documented by the German newspaper Bildwhen the StB’s files were declassified.

It began when Trump married Czech model Ivana Zelnickova, his first wife, recently buried on his golf course in New Jersey after she fell down a flight of stairs and died.

As 2016 and 2018 investigations by The Guardian found:

The KGB’s psychological profile of Trump had determined he was vulnerable to flattery and not a deep thinker, so they told him repeatedly how brilliant he was and that he should run for president in the US.

Much to the astonishment and jubilation of the KGB, Trump returned from Moscow to the US to give a Republican presidential campaign speech that fall in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.

Trump’s ad laid it on the line:

As The Guardian reported in 2021:

Meanwhile, Putin was making friends with powerful influence over American foreign policy.

In 2017, Erdoğan apparently gained access to America’s deepest secrets by secretly paying off General Michael Flynn even as Flynn became Trump’s National Security Advisor; he also had at least one secret phone conversation with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak after Flynn started working in the White House.

Flynn pleaded guilty in December of 2017 to “willfully and knowingly” making “false, fictitious and fraudulent statements” to the FBI about one of those conversations with Russian Ambassador Kislyak. Flynn was also charged as an unregistered agent of a foreign government (Turkey) while working in the White House: prosecutors said he had taken about a half-million dollars from Erdoğan.

Around the time he was leaving office, Trump pardoned Flynn, essentially burying the entire story.

The plot thickened when America learned, from a blockbuster 2022 report in Axios by Jonathan Swan, that just before leaving office, back on October 21, 2020, Trump had signed Executive Order 13957.

And it wouldn’t stop there. As Donald Moynihan wrote for Slate about this “Schedule F” Executive Order:

“Schedule F would burn down the civil service system. It would be a government of the lawless leading the incompetent. …

“Government data unfavorable to the administration would be suppressed or altered. Public statements about what government actors are actually doing would become rarer and less believable. And questionable actions by the security forces to target political enemies and protect friends could become routine.

“Career public employees would be forced to choose between their oath to the Constitution—in effect, their oath to serve the public—and keeping their job. They will have their loyalty questioned based on which political organizations they associated with in college, or voter registration, or social media activity. Some will not go along with the program. They will be fired. Or never join the government in the first place.”

Trump didn’t have the time to push that executive order through the federal bureaucracy, but it gives us a clear picture of his vision for a second Trump administration, particularly since this is still on the Project 2025 agenda.

Campaigning to destroy NATO; opposing aid to Ukraine; demolishing the free world’s confidence in America’s ability to keep top secret information confidential; utterly destroying our senior-most intelligence and military agencies; installing Trojan horses to lead them: Trump’s goal appears to be, to paraphrase Ron DeSantis, to “Make America Russia.”

What are Trump’s real goals with these appointments?

As the old saying goes, “Watch what he does, not what he says.”

NOW READ: Until there’s a liberal media apparatus, the Democrats will live in Trump’s America

---

mma

How Fox powered Trump’s first term — and what that means for his second

Written by Matt Gertz

Published 11/19/24

Fox News dominated wide swaths of federal decision-making during Donald Trump’s first presidency, as his administration effectively merged with the right-wing propaganda network that had propelled him to power.

It’s currently unclear how the battle for Trump’s attention will shake out in a second one — but here’s how his media diet influenced the U.S. government the last time he was in the White House.

Trump owed his 2016 political ascent to that right-wing media ecosystem. A longtime Fox regular, he was obsessed with the network’s programming and channeled its demagoguery on the campaign trail, winning over its audience, as well as upstart alt-right organs like Steve Bannon’s Breitbart.com. He dominated Fox’s airtime on the way to his primary campaign win, bending the network and the GOP to his will before garnering a narrow Electoral College majority.

Once Trump was in office, Fox became a state TV outlet that lavished him with praise and denounced his foes, and in doing so it gained unprecedented influence over the U.S. government. The hours Trump spent each day consuming the network’s content and speaking privately with its stars shaped his worldview and dictated his reaction to various events. Hundreds of his hyperaggressive, seemingly stream-of-consciousness tweets came in response to what he was seeing on his television, a phenomenon I dubbed the “Trump-Fox feedback loop.”

Fox’s employees affected wildly important policy decisions on matters of war and peace, and they turned right-wing tantrums into matters of national importance because the president of the United States happened to be tuning in.

It’s impossible to overstate how ridiculous — or dangerous — this Fox-Trump pipeline could be. At one point, after a Fox contributor turned to the camera and urged Trump to renounce his support for a bill, the president appeared to do so on Twitter, causing chaos on Capitol Hill. Later in his term, Trump put the full force of government behind a purported coronavirus “miracle cure” that he had seen touted on Fox but proved ineffective against the virus.

Below, I detail how Trump's communications, his administration’s personnel, and his administration’s actions on executive clemency, law enforcement investigations, domestic policy, and even military strikes all came to revolve around Fox during his first term.

Communications

Journalists struggled in the early days of Trump’s presidency to explain his Twitter activity. The sitting president’s often-hyperaggressive tweets would begin early in the morning and continue late into the night, skipping from topic to topic with little clear rhyme or reason.

While some attributed the pattern to strategic genius and others to mental instability, the truth was more prosaic: Trump was spending much of his days watching cable news, particularly Fox, and responding in real time to segments that captured his fancy.

I ultimately traced nearly 1,300 Trump tweets back to Fox News and its sister channel, Fox Business. He live-tweeted dozens of different Fox shows, with hundreds of his missives attributed to his favorite program, Fox & Friends, alone, on a bevy of topics. These live tweets — and thus, Fox’s coverage — often set the agenda for the broader news media, as reporters dropped whatever they were working on to cover the newsworthy comments from the TV-addled president.

Some of the Fox live tweets were a humorous sideshow — a June 2019 tweet about Mars and the moon that baffled journalists turned out to be Trump giving feedback to a NASA official he had just seen on Fox Business.

But Trump’s reactions to the network were often deadly serious: Based on what he saw on Fox, he raised tensions with foreign adversaries; demanded investigations of his political foes; lashed out at public officials with racist invective; denounced an array of journalists and media outlets; undermined the public health response to the coronavirus pandemic; and fueled the election fraud conspiracy theories that ultimately triggered the January 6 insurrection.

While Trump has in recent months at times feuded with Fox, that hasn’t stopped him from continuing to promote segments from its programming.

Personnel

Trump’s unprecedented relationship with Fox created a revolving door between the network and his administration during his first term.

Trump relied on Fox as a staffing agency, filling the ranks of the federal government with familiar faces from his TV screen. At least 20 former Fox employees ended up working for the Trump administration in some capacity, a tally that included multiple Cabinet secretaries (Ben Carson and Elaine Chao), top White House aides (Kayleigh McEnany and John Bolton, among others), and U.S. ambassadors (Scott Brown and Georgette Mosbacher). Fox, in turn, hired at least 16 members of his administration for roles at the network or its parent company during his presidency or after it concluded.

Trump also relied on advice from Fox personalities who remained at the network. He reportedly spoke with Sean Hannity so frequently that White House aides described the Fox host as “the unofficial chief of staff.” He also brought Laura Ingraham into the White House to brief administration officials, patched Lou Dobbs into Oval Office meetings via speakerphone, and privately consulted with Jeanine Pirro, Pete Hegseth, and Tucker Carlson.

These relationships proved so strong that some of the unofficial Fox advisers dislodged official Trump appointees: Attorney General Jeff Sessions resigned after losing a power struggle with Pirro, as did Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen with Dobbs, U.S. Navy Secretary Richard V. Spencer with Hegseth, and Bolton with Carlson.

Trump appears to be returning to the same source as he begins filling out his second administration. His initial spate of picks included five former Fox employees: Fox & Friends Weekend host Hegseth for defense secretary, former host Mike Huckabee for U.S. ambassador to Israel, and former contributors Tulsi Gabbard, Tom Homan, and Michael Waltz as director of national intelligence, “Border Czar,” and national security adviser.

Policy

Fox’s coverage and the influence of its personalities permeated every aspect of federal policy during Trump's first term, including but not limited to:

Domestic actions. Trump blew up a potential immigration deal after consulting with Hannity. He abruptly changed his trade policy with China due to criticism from Dobbs and Brian Kilmeade. He triggered a partial government shutdown after goading from Fox hosts; awarded a contract to build border wall due to a Fox PR campaign. He backed an ineffective treatment as a coronavirus “miracle cure” because it was championed by Fox stars. And in response to critical Carlson segments, he terminated a federal antisegregation plan, abandoned police reform legislation, and launched an administration-wide turn against diversity training.

Foreign actions.Trump launched the Ukraine abuse of power scheme that resulted in his first impeachment in response to coverage from Hannity. He publicly criticized South Africa’s government after seeing Carlson promote false white nationalist talking points, leading South African to condemn his statement. He responded to a Fox segment about North Korea by threatening nuclear war. And he both cut off funding to the World Health Organization and repeatedly called off military strikes on Iran due to Carlson monologues.

Executive clemency. Fox influenced at least 25 of Trump’s acts of executive clemency. He gave pardons and commutations to individuals whose cases had the support of Trump-loving network personalities and to clients of prominent pro-Trump lawyers who regularly appeared on its shows. Individuals seeking clemency and their family members and lawyers used the president’s favorite programs to request clemency from him directly. Hegseth in particular played a key role in lobbying for clemency for alleged and convicted war criminals.

Law enforcement investigations. Trump repeatedly demanded — and received — law enforcement action against his perceived foes in response to coverage he saw about them on Fox, including John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Google, and the Russia probe.

Who knows what the second term will bring.

*This post is adapted in part from myop-ed at MSNBC.com.

---

an 11 24

Donald Trump reportedly got a potentially devastating message from Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell, and political observers are speaking up.

Trump already announced he would be relying on recess appointments to get some of his cabinet nominees pushed through, but McConnellsaid on Sunday that such a thing wouldn't happen, according to a news report.

Trump's controversial nominees include former GOP lawmaker Matt Gaetz, who has been investigated for drug use and allegedly having sex with a minor.

ALSO READ:Why Trump voters should be held accountable for their choice

After McConnell reportedly said, "There will be no recess appointments," social media was overtaken by talk of the upcoming standoff.

Former federal prosecutor Harry Litman said, "Lines are drawn."

"It would be sad as well as disgraceful if the Senate caved on this," he added. "And the stakes go beyond the political, and even the constitutional. It’s an inordinate and unnecessary national security risk."

HuffPost reporter Yashar Ali said, "McConnell will not be Senate Republican Leader soon, but he may be saying this based on conversations with his colleagues."

"The idea that the U.S. Senate will give up its authority on this matter with the flip of a switch is foolish," Ali said. "They’re not going to stop using pro-forma."

Economic advisor Patrick Chovanec said, "McConnell understands this would be the end of the Senate as we know it. Whether he's in any position to stand up against the MAGAs is the real question."

Correspondent Molly Jong-Fast simply said, "Let us pray."

Legal analyst Allison Gill, better known as Mueller, She Wrote, said, "But McConnell won't be the leader. Here's hoping, though."

---

an 11 24

Revenge—it’s a big part of Trump’s life,” Mother Jones‘ David Corn (10/19/16) wrote just before Trump was elected to the presidency the first time:

In speeches and public talks, Trump has repeatedly expressed his fondness for retribution. In 2011, he addressed the National Achievers Congress in Sydney, Australia, to explain how he had achieved his success. He noted there were a couple of lessons not taught in business school that successful people must know. At the top of the list was this piece of advice: “Get even with people. If they screw you, screw them back 10 times as hard. I really believe it.”

Knowing this about Trump, Democrats and liberals worry that he will use the Department of Justice, especially if Matt Gaetz is confirmed as attorney general, as an unrestrained vehicle to pursue the prosecution of political enemies.

But given Trump’s constant attacks on media—“the opposition party,” as his ally Steve Bannon called the fourth estate (New York Times,1/26/17)—journalists fear that he will use the power of the state to intimidate if not destroy the press.

Defunding public broadcasting

Trump called for defunding NPR (Newsweek, 4/10/24) after a long-time editor accused the radio outlet of liberal bias in the conservative journal Free Press (4/9/24). Rep. Claudia Tenney (R–NY) introduced legislation to defund NPR because “taxpayers should not be forced to fund NPR, which has become a partisan propaganda machine” (Office of Claudia Tenney, 4/19/24). With Republicans also holding both houses of congress, bills like Tenney’s become more viable. Trump has previously supported budget proposals that eliminate funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (Politico, 3/27/19).

The infamous Project 2025, a conservative policy agenda many see as a blueprint for the second Trump term, calls for the end to public broadcasting, because it is viewed as liberal propaganda:

Every Republican president since Richard Nixon has tried to strip the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) of taxpayer funding. That is significant not just because it means that for half a century, Republican presidents have failed to accomplish what they set out to do, but also because Nixon was the first president in office when National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), which the CPB funds, went on air.

In other words, all Republican presidents have recognized that public funding of domestic broadcasts is a mistake. As a 35-year-old lawyer in the Nixon White House, one Antonin Scalia warned that conservatives were being “confronted with a long-range problem of significant social consequences—that is, the development of a government-funded broadcast system similar to the BBC.”

All of which means that the next conservative president must finally get this done, and do it despite opposition from congressional members of his own party if necessary. To stop public funding is good policy and good politics. The reason is simple: President Lyndon Johnson may have pledged in 1967 that public broadcasting would become “a vital public resource to enrich our homes, educate our families and to provide assistance to our classrooms,” but public broadcasting immediately became a liberal forum for public affairs and journalism.

PBS and NPR, as FAIR (10/24/24) has noted, has for decades caved in to right-wing pressures—PBS by adding conservative programming, NPR by trying to rid itself of political commentary altogether. But the right will never let go of its ideological opposition to media outlets not directly owned by the corporate class.

‘Whether criminally or civilly’

Trump also has a well known track record of revoking the credentials of journalists who produce reporting he doesn’t like (Washington Post, 2/24/17, 5/8/19; New Republic, 11/5/24). It is realistic to assume that a lot more reporters will be barred from White House events in the years ahead.

While a bill that would grant the secretary of the treasury broad authority to revoke nonprofit status to any organization the office deems as a “terrorist” organization has so far failed (Al Jazeera, 11/12/24), it is quite possible that it could come up for a vote again. If this bill were to become law, the Treasury Department could use this ax against a great many progressive nonprofit outlets, like Democracy Now! and the American Prospect, as well as investigative outlets like ProPublica and the Center for Investigative Reporting.

The department could even target the Committee to Protect Journalists, which has already said in response to Trump’s victory, “The fundamental right to a free press, guaranteed by the First Amendment of the US Constitution, must not be impaired” (11/6/24).

Margaret Sullivan (Guardian, 10/27/24), an avid media observer, said there is no reason to think Trump will soften his campaign against the free press. She said:

In 2022, he sued the Pulitzer Prize board after they defended their awards to the New York Times and the Washington Post. Both newspapers had won Pulitzer Prizes for investigating Trump’s ties to Russia.

More recently, Trump sued ABC News and George Stephanopoulos for defamation over the way the anchor characterized the verdict in E. Jean Carroll’s sexual misconduct case against him. Each of those cases is wending its way through the courts.

She added:

There is nothing to suggest that Trump would soften his approach in a second term. If anything, we can expect even more aggression.

Consider what one of Trump’s most loyal lieutenants, Kash Patel, has said.

“We’re going to come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections,” Patel threatened during a podcast with Steve Bannon. “Whether it’s criminally or civilly, we’ll figure that out.”

Trump has already gone after the New York Times and Penguin Random House since Sullivan wrote this. CJR (11/14/24) said:

The letter, addressed to lawyers at the New York Times and Penguin Random House, arrived a week before the election. Attached was a discursive ten-page legal threat from an attorney for Donald Trump that demanded $10 billion in damages over “false and defamatory statements” contained in articles by Peter Baker, Michael S. Schmidt, Susanne Craig and Russ Buettner.

It singles out two stories coauthored by Buettner and Craig that related to their book on Trump and his financial dealings, Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created the Illusion of Success, released on September 17. It also highlighted an October 20 story headlined “For Trump, a Lifetime of Scandals Heads Toward a Moment of Judgment” by Baker and an October 22 piece by Schmidt, “As Election Nears, Kelly Warns Trump Would Rule Like a Dictator.”

And just before his victory, Trump sued CBS News, alleging the network’s “deceitful” editing of a recent 60 Minutes interview with Vice President Kamala Harris “misled the public and unfairly disadvantaged him” (CBS News, 10/31/24).

Expect more of this, except this time, Trump will have all the levers of the state on his side. And whatever moves the next Trump administration makes to attack the press will surely have a chilling effect, which will only empower his anti-democratic political agenda.

---

AN 11 24

“The press freedom fire is at our door step now," saidone Washington Post journalist on Thursday night after news broke that two months before President-elect Donald Trump is set to take office, he has already begun to wage legal warfare against on the news media.

The Columbia Journalism Review (CJR)reported that days before the election, a lawyer for Trump, Edward Andrew Paltzik, sent a letter toThe New York Times and Penguin Random House demanding $10 billion in damages for publishing articles and a book that were critical of the president-elect, who was convicted of 34 felony counts earlier this year.

Trump's legal team took issue with a book by Times journalists Susanne Craig and Russ Buettner titled Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created the Illusion of Success. They also said they were demanding damages over "false and defamatory statements" in the October 20 article "For Trump, a Lifetime of Scandals Heads Toward a Moment of Judgment" by Peter Baker and the October 22 piece "As Election Nears, Kelly Warns Trump Would Rule Like a Dictator"by Michael Schmidt.

The former article covered numerous wrongdoings by the president-elect and accusations against him, pointing out that he "is the only president in American history impeached twice for high crimes and misdemeanors, the only president ever indicted on criminal charges, and the only president to be convicted of a felony (34, in fact)," and that he has also boasted about sexually assaulting women and spearheaded numerous businesses that went bankrupt.

The latter article detailed comments by Trump's former chief of staff, John Kelly, who told the Times that the definition of fascism accurately describes Trump.

The president-elect himself said while campaigning that he planned to govern as a dictatoronly on "Day One"of his term in office.

"Governments and powerful figures threatening journalists and media outlets with costly legal battles and bankruptcy is a common tactic against press freedom in repressive countries."

Paltzik told the newspaper that the articles demonstrate the Times' "intention of defaming and disparaging the world-renowned Trump brand that consumers have long associated with excellence, luxury, and success in entertainment, hospitality, and real estate, among many other industries, as well as falsely and maliciously defaming and disparaging him as a candidate for the highest office in the United States."

TheCJR reported that theTimes responded to Paltzik's letter, telling him the newspaper stood by its reporting on Trump.

As Barry Malone, deputy editor-in-chief of the Thomson Reuters Foundation,saidon social media on Friday, Trump's legal threats may be designed not to actually win billions of dollars in damages but "to tie the media up with time-consuming and often prohibitively expensive cases."

The Timesand Penguin Random House threats were reported two weeks after Trump suedCBS News for another $10 billion, claiming an interview with Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris, who lost the November 5 election, was unfairly edited to present her in a positive light and qualified as "election interference."

CBS said it would "vigorously defend" its journalistic practices and called the lawsuit "completely without merit"—a similar response to the one by The Washington Post, which was accused by Trump on the same day of making an illegal in-kind donation to Harris.

Anne Champion, an attorney who has represented several journalists and CNN in legal cases initiated by Trump, told the CJR that the legal threats will likely have "a mental chilling effect" on reporters and news outlets in the United States as Trump prepares to take office.

"It is both conscious and unconscious," said Champion. "Journalists at smaller outlets know very well that the costs for their organization to defend themselves could mean bankruptcy. Even journalists at larger outlets don't want to burden themselves or their employees with lawsuits. It puts another layer of influence into the journalistic process."

Trump has a longstanding disdain for the media, saying numerous times during his first term that journalists were the "enemy of the people." During one campaign rally just before the election he said he wouldn't "mind" if reporters at the event were shot, and he called the media the "enemy camp" during his victory speech last week.

During his first term he also threatened to "take a strong look at our country's libel laws"—which are actually controlled by states, not the federal government—and ensure that "when somebody says something that is false and defamatory about someone, that person will have meaningful recourse in our courts."

The American Civil Liberties Unionpointed outat the time that the First Amendment and the lack of federal libel laws would stand in Trump's way, but on Thursday Lachlan Cartwright wrote atCJR that "the drumbeat of legal threats signals a potentially ominous trend for journalists during Trump's second term in office."

AsWashington Post columnist Karen Attiah noted on the social media platform Bluesky, "governments and powerful figures threatening journalists and media outlets with costly legal battles and bankruptcy is a common tactic against press freedom in repressive countries."

---

reich an 11 24

trump is giving his middle finger to America.

Nominating the alleged sexual trafficker Matt Gaetz to be Attorney General, Fox News host Pete Hegseth to be Secretary of Defense, and bizarro Tulsi Gabbard to be Director of National Intelligence are acts of nihilistic disruption.

Now, nominating conspiracist and fabulist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to the nation’s leading health job — overseeing the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control, and the National Institutes of Health, among other sensitive positions — is an act of utter hubris.

At a time when the truth is a precious common good, and the public’s health is already precarious, RFK Junior has made a name for himself spreading dangerous health lies.

He claimed that COVID-19 was “targeted to attack Caucasians and Black people” and that “the people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese.” And that “the Chinese are spending hundreds of millions of dollars developing ethnic bioweapons and we are developing ethnic bioweapons. They’re collecting Russian DNA. They’re collecting Chinese DNA so we can target people by race.”

He has promoted the baseless claim linking vaccines to autism. He’s been a leading proponent of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation, erroneously suggesting the vaccine has killed more people than it has saved.

In his 2021 book, The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health, he alleged, without plausible evidence, that Dr. Fauci performed “genocidal experiments, sabotaged treatments for AIDS, and conspired with Bill Gates to suppress information about COVID-19.”

All nonsense.

Friends, I knew Robert F. Kennedy, and Robert F. Kennedy Junior is no Robert F. Kennedy. If not for his lustrous name, RFK Junior would be just another crackpot in the ever-growing pool of bottom-feeding fringe characters encircling Trump like ravenous slugs.

So why nominate this collection of bozos?

If Trump wants to smoke out the Senate Republicans who aren’t fully behind him, he has easier ways of doing so than putting an entire Star Wars cantina of idiots up for Senate confirmation.

I can see why Trump might want total loyalists in key positions that would enable him to turn America into a police state — more on this tomorrow — but why nominate a nut job to run America’s health system?

What possible point is there to subjecting Americans to poisonous food or drugs? Why undermine the Centers for Disease Control when Americans and their children need the protections vaccines provide?

Or is all this just another manifestation of Trump becoming deranged?

If Americans suffer buyer’s remorse for electing him, the next time we’ll have a chance to do anything about it will be the midterm elections of November 2026. But how much damage can Trump and his cantina do between next January and then?

NOW READ:Trump finds a new lawman is who even more lawless than he is

*Robert Reich is a professor of public policy at Berkeley and former secretary of labor. His writings can be found at https://robertreich.substack.com/.

---

alternet-logo

no lnx

Why Trump voters should be held accountable for their choice

John Stoehr November 13, 2024

For now, I’m not getting involved in the debate over what Kamala Harris did wrong. For one thing, whatever conclusions are drawn now will almost certainly be forgotten by the time of the next election. For another, the debate takes vital attention away from the choice of the majority of American voters, which is to say, their terrible choice.

Why did they break for Donald Trump? Lots of worthy people are going to spend lots of time exploring that question. I won’t, though. What I know is that Trump campaigned on easily proven lies. What I also know is his supporters chose to believe them. What I care about now are the consequences of that choice, and those consequences are going to be bad for all of us, including everyone who voted for him.

Yesterday, the president-elect said among the first things he’s going to do is eliminate the US Department of Education. That agency not only sends federal money to local school districts, it makes sure children are treated equally. This is usually understood in terms of race, but special-education is protected too, and it needs it. There was a time in American history when special-needs kids were told to sink or swim.

My kid is one of those kids, and if the funding and protection she now has disappears, I’m going to take that personally. I’m going to blame everyone who supported Trump. I won’t care if they didn’t believe he’d follow through on his pledge. I won’t care if they didn’t know about it. I won’t care if they were lied to by the rightwing media apparatus. I won’t care if the kids of Trump voters are themselves victims of their parents’ bad choices. I’m going to blame them and I will be right to.

Ignorance is no defense in law.

It should be no defense in politics either.

Trump has also promised to impose punishing tariffs on imported goods from countries like China and Mexico. Tariffs are a tax and every adult knows how a tax works. Yes, some of his supporters pretended not to know that importers pass that cost on to consumers. But whether they did or didn’t is going to be irrelevant to me when I’m paying two or three times more for necessities like food and clothing.

As I’m standing in the checkout at Stop & Shop, sticker-shocked for the umpteenth time, I’m not going to be wondering what Kamala Harris could have done to persuade white working-class Americans to vote for her. I’m not going to feel sympathy for them, knowing that they decided to impoverish themselves out of spite and resentment. No, I’ll be too busy cursing them for the titanic assholes they are.

Trump has also promised to deport millions of so-called illegal immigrants. He said he’ll only go after “the bad ones” and his supporters, even some Latinos, decided to believe a liar. But I’m not going to care how they came to that decision if the government starts snatching taxpayers out of their homes, arresting and detaining whole families, including US citizens, in the insane belief that doing so is going to make America great again. Why should I care about why they voted the way they did when the consequence of that choice brings chaos to communities, decimates the labor supply and raises prices?

Trump has denied it, but his Republicans are looking forward to taking another crack at repealing the Affordable Care Act. Tens of millions of Americans depend on Obamacare, including independent businesspeople, like me, who could not do what we do without the law. Voters who supported Trump are included in that number, but again, it does not matter to me whether they knew a vote for him was a vote for abolishing affordable insurance. I tend to lose interest in the reasons behind another person’s choices if those choices ruin me.

The conventional wisdom is that Trump inflamed resentments in order to win. What’s missing from that story is that the resentments are over race, or rather racism. Fact is, lots of white people feel like nonwhite people are taking something from them when they do better for themselves. Trump has made an art form out of getting white people to believe nonwhite people are robbing them, making them poorer, even when the economy is rapidly benefiting those same white people.

Well, when it comes to resentment, you haven’t seen anything yet.

If Trump does what he says, by the time he’s done, America is going to be poorer, sicker, weaker and more chaotic. In some cases, he will have done irreparable harm, as he did last time he was president, including to the people who supported him. And he will have done it because … well, it doesn’t matter. They made their choice and it was terrible.

And the rest of us will be right to resent it.

---

an 11 24

Russia made an audacious public attempt to blackmail the incoming U.S. president, according to a military expert.

Vladimir Putin and his ministers are already trying to mess with Donald Trump's head when Kremlin intelligence chief Nikolai Patrushev claimed in an interview that Trump had "relied on certain forces" to win a second term in the White House and warned that he had "corresponding obligations" that he was "obliged to fulfill," wrote Slate columnist Fred Kaplan.

:{:{"This is a mind-blowing bit of psychological warfare!" Kaplan wrote. "The Russians are basically telling Trump: We put you in office. Now it’s time for you to pay us back.Did this make Trump wonder: WTF?"}:

The FBI, the director of national intelligence and the top cybersecurity agency all confirmed that Russia was sowing disinformation against Kamala Harris during the election campaign, and law enforcement blamed the foreign adversary for bomb threats called into polling stations in Black neighborhoods.

"However, there is no evidence — nor has anyone claimed — that Trump or his campaign staffers colluded in, or knew anything about, these videos or the bomb threats," Kaplan wrote. "If Trump did have some involvement, or if Russia possesses some other form of kompromat (compromising material) on Trump, Patrushev’s message constitutes an extraordinarily bodacious threat of blackmail, delivered in public, against an American president-elect.

"If Trump did not have any involvement in this escapade, Patrushev’s gambit shows — some would say, confirms— that Russia’s main goal, in all these misinformation ventures, is to sow chaos, breed mistrust, and weaken the sinews of democracy in Western countries, especially in the U.S., regardless of who is the president," Kaplan added.

Trump and the MAGA movement have long sought to improve relations with Russia, but Kaplan said the Kremlin's reaction to his re-election should serve as a warning.

"One can only wonder what Trump will do — whether he’ll change his position, whether he’s capable of changing his stance — when he realizes, if he realizes, that Putin is not his friend," Kaplan wrote. "Trump certainly should not act as if he is."

---

AN 11 24

ov. Kristi Noem's assent from admitted dog killer to national watchdog is spurring howls of rage and disbelief on social media.

President-elect Donald Trump's selection of Noem, the South Dakota Republican who boasted of shooting a pet dog to death, as secretary of Homeland Security on Tuesday stunned political spectators.

"Trump wants the dog-shooter to be his Secretary of Homeland Security," author Stephen King told his followers. "We're sure not in Kansas anymore, Toto."

News broke in April that Noem's memoir "No Going Back: The Truth on What’s Wrong with Politics and How We Move America Forward" included an anecdote about shooting a 14-month-old dog named Cricket in a gravel pit because she "hated that dog."

ALSO READ:What Trump's win really means for America

"The puppy-killer will be in charge of homeland security," SiriusXM radio host Michelangelo Signorile wrote on X, "making critical decisions over people's lives."

Noem will head a sprawling agency that oversees U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the U.S. Secret Service, two sources told CNN Tuesday.

"She was willing to shoot her own dog," responded USA Today columnist Michael J. Stern on X. "Imagine what she'll do to immigrants crossing the border."

The non-partisan advocacy group Veterans for Responsible Leadership argued Noem's decision to share the anecdote suggested she catered her message toward Trump loyalists alone.

"Noem never cared that we were disgusted with her dog murder," the group wrote. "We weren’t the audience."

Political analyst Russell Drew was one of many commentators to suggest Trump granted Noem the powerful position in gratitude for her support.

"With Kristi Noem head of Homeland Security, not only will people not be safe, but neither will their dogs!" wrote Drew. "Talk about being completely unqualified for a job."

"Noem, it will be recalled, scuttled her bid to become Trump’s vice presidential nominee when she published an account of how she gunned down the family pet," added John Nichols, national affairs correspondent for The Nation. "But she remained absolutely loyal to Trump and has now been tapped to keep America 'safe.'”

CNN analyst Jeff Storobinsky resorted to dark humor, writing, "All dogs, please, this is not a drill, please seek shelter immediately."

Cartoonist Adam Zyglis joined in by sharing a cartoon that depicts Noem and Trump, both toting smoking guns, next to the corpses of a dog and Lady Justice.

It is entitled "MAGA Meet-Cute."'

---

musk burned 1/2 value xitter to make it alt rt gop trump platform --> oligarch

on call trump zelynsky b/c he wandered by?!

hayes aha: trump will get rid of tesla competition; [ we lose mkt/capitalism AND democ!?

---

Jesse Watters says mass deportation is “going to be hysterical”

11/08/24 MMA

---

AN 11 24

NO LNX

'Path forward' to Democrats winning may come sooner than you think: analysis

'Brad ReedandRaw StoryNovember 07, 2024

Former President Donald Trump is inheriting an economy with low unemployment, falling inflation, and a record-high stock market.

Regardless, the Washington Monthly's Bill Scher thinks it's a good bet that he will royally screw it up in the coming years.

While the economy performed reasonably well for the first three years of Trump's presidency, Scher argues that is because many of his economic advisers stopped him from implementing some of his truly destructive ambitions such as starting global trade wars.

Trump will face even fewer constraints in his second term, which makes the likelihood of a significant policy error even higher, according to the analysis.

"Despite the bravado, Trump is no economic mastermind," Scher contends. "If he follows through on his across-the-board tariff plan, he may jack up prices high enough to cause a major political backlash, which happened to his beloved William McKinley. An immigration crackdown or mass deportation can also disrupt the labor market, causing negative economic consequences."

He also thinks that Trump's personal characteristics make a massive misstep exceedingly likely.

"Considering that Trump can never run for president again, doesn’t care about anyone but himself, doesn’t have to worry about the future of the Republican Party, and rarely listens to sane advice, I see the chances of Trump implementing self-indulgent, economically foolish policies to be high, especially with a cowed GOP-controlled Senate and, possible, a GOP House, to boot," he writes.

However, Scher also thinks that Democrats cannot simply wait for Trump to foul things up. Rather, they have to go all-out to correct public perceptions about President Joe Biden's economy, which voters never warmed to even as inflation cooled and unemployment remained low.

"Democrats can and should tell the true story of the Biden-Harris economic record, how they cleaned up Trump’s mess and handed him back a humming economy—just as Barack Obama cleaned up George W. Bush’s mess and handed it to Trump in the first place," he writes. "They should start now and repeat it often to help regain lost credibility."

---

AN 11 24 JOE C SEE ANNO

With Donald Trump’s impending return to the White House, the nightmare threat posed by him and his fascistic movement will all too soon become America’s waking reality. How the nation descended into this political abyss will no doubt inspire angry debate, but here is one response to this electoral disaster: We aren’t going anywhere and will continue to stand for the Constitution, the rule of law, and the principles of democracy and decency that endure even under aspiring tyrants.

Trump certainly aspires to tyranny, as he has repeatedly warned us, during the 2024 campaign and many times before. We can hope that his vow to use military force against opponents and dissenters and his openly expressed urge to arrest and harm his political adversaries is merely bluster, as his supporters insist. Many voters said they didn’t believe he would carry out those menacing promises, although his most fervent supporters evidently anticipate a campaign of vengeance with glee. Should he attempt such measures, he can expect fierce resistance in the courts and on the streets – and perhaps from military officers who have been trained to uphold constitutional values.

It remains astonishing that tens of millions of our fellow citizens have chosen to be led by a convicted felon -- described bluntly as a fascist by former members of his own cabinet and the military leaders who served under him – who calls his own country a hellhole and incessantly conjures racism, misogyny, division, and hatred to advance himself. What do those voters really want and expect from Trump?

Whatever they may want, what they are likely to get from him is probably not going to make them happy. Should he implement his reckless tariff scheme, much of which he can direct without Congressional approval, the nation’s economy will crater -- and the inflation that so irked consumers is certain to soar. If he tears down the Affordable Care Act, without the alternative plan he has failed to propose for almost ten years, the nation’s health care system will lurch into chaos -- and many of his followers and their families will be left to suffer. And if he orders the mass detention and deportation of migrants, then many actual citizens of Latino origin – a plurality of whom helped him win this election – are likely to be endangered. Appointing conspiracy kook Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as health czar or awarding control of the federal budget to Elon Musk are scenarios designed to conclude in disaster. Kennedy's idea of making America "healthy again" would risk the return of lethal childhood diseases we had conquered, including polio and measles; Musk' notion of cutting a third of federal spending would sink the economy and impoverish the middle class. But maybe their fans must find all this out the hard way.

It is going to be a steep learning curve for anyone who expects Trump to make their lives better.

And those grim possibilities are merely the most obviously ruinous potential consequences of this election. We must expect the worst, from federal surveillance of women’s pregnancies to government attacks on the First Amendment. A profound sense of buyer’s remorse may be in store for Trump voters.

In the meantime, however, we must take whatever encouragement is to be found in these mostly dismal results – abortion protections won at the ballot box in several states, for instance – and must demand, both of ourselves and our elected officials, the courage to stand up against this would-be dictator’s excesses. This election has left us with no other choice.

Joe Conason is founder and editor-in-chief ofThe National Memo. He is also editor-at-large of Type Investigations, a nonprofit investigative reporting organization formerly known as The Investigative Fund. His latest book is*The Longest Con: How Grifters, Swindlers and Frauds Hijacked American Conservatism

---

an 11 24

Trump reverted back to form on Friday morning, just days after he won re-election, by running to his Truth Social platform and raging about rumors about that very same platform.

Now that he will assume the bully pulpit the White House will afford him in January, there is a growing belief he won't need his Truth Social platform going forward and might sell off a major portion of his stock, thereby reaping billions while the stock is high after his win, and then stop using it and thereby cause it to spiral further into irrelevance.

On Friday morning he began making threats.

"There are fake, untrue, and probably illegal rumors and/or statements made by, perhaps, market manipulators or short sellers, that I am interested in selling shares of Truth. THOSE RUMORS OR STATEMENTS ARE FALSE. I HAVE NO INTENTION OF SELLING!" he wrote in his familiar style.

"I hereby request that the people who have set off these fake rumors or statements, and who may have done so in the past, be immediately investigated by the appropriate authorities. Truth is an important part of our historic win, and I deeply believe in it. Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!" he concluded Friday.

---

Trump team 'quietly distancing itself' from RFK Jr. following latest anti-vax remarks

---

an 11 24

During the 2024 presidential race, radio host Charlamagne tha God predicted that if Vice President Kamala Harris defeated GOP nominee Donald Trump, the "corrupt" U.S. Supreme Court would go along with one of Trump's legal challenges and hand the election to Trump even though he had lost it.

But President-elect Trump enjoyed a decisive victory over Harris on Election Night 2024, and Harris subsequently gave her concession speech. Trump not only picked up at least 295 electoral votes — according to the vote count, he appears to have won the popular vote as well.

During his second term, Trump is likely to push the U.S. Supreme Court — which has a 6-3 GOP-appointed supermajority — even more to the right.

:{:{READ MORE:'Listen here, sweetheart': Possible Trump AG pick threatens NY’s Letitia James with 'prison'}:

In a scathing article published on November 8, Mother Jones' Pema Levy argues that the Roberts Court has repeatedly run interference for Trump — and helped his campaign more than once.

"Why Americans chose a demagogue to helm their democracy may be partially explained by the fact that, in many ways, the United States isn't a democracy any longer — and in many ways, that's thanks to the Roberts Court," Levy argues. "Our system was never perfect; on a basic level, the U.S. only became a democracy in 1965 when it finally gave all Black people the right to vote. But for nearly two decades, Roberts and his colleagues have done immense damage to the underpinnings of the democracy Americans painstakingly built."

Levy adds, "They have reallocated political power from ordinary citizens to billionaires, worsened congressional paralysis, and transformed many elections into meaningless exercises."

The cases that Levy discusses include, among others, Biden v. Nebraska and Trump v. the United States.

READ MORE:Path forward' to Democrats winning may come sooner than you think: analysis

Levy notes that in Biden v. Nebraska, the High Court "blocked (President Joe) Biden's loan forgiveness plan." But she is even more critical of the Trump v. the United States ruling.

"After Trump lost the 2020 election," Levy explains, "he attempted to stay in office by plotting to overturn the will of the voters, culminating in a violent insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. In the summer of 2023, special counsel Jack Smith brought charges against him for his role in the scheme. A trial was scheduled for March 2024, during the Republican primaries. But the Supreme Court was there to help Trump…. Then, on July 1, John Roberts released a stunning opinion."

Levy continues, "He bought Trump's argument — hook, line, and sinker. Former Presidents are now immune from criminal prosecution for anything deemed an official act. Even evidence of a crime is inadmissible if it involved official acts. The Court, with Roberts in the lead, had not only removed a serious impediment to Trump's reelection efforts — but ensured that should Trump return to the White House, he would do so with more power than any president ever before."

READ MORE:How Garland’s 'truly historic legal missteps' let Trump dodge accountability

*Pema Levy's full article for Mother Jones is available at this link.

---

Evangelicals view Trump victory as a 'new mandate from God' for Christian nationalist rule](https://www.alternet.org/trump-election-victory-evangelicals/)

---

AN 11 24 2X?

One expert is warning that the United States is about to enter a period of "American fascism," in which both Americans and American institutions will be under constant attack.

That's according to City University of New York journalism professor Jeff Jarvis, who recently authored a Medium essay entitled: "How F—ed Are We?" Jarvis wrote that Americans can expect "vast tragedy and destruction" over the next four years assuming President-elect Donald Trump intends to enact his campaign promises. He began his essay by emphasizing that blame for Trump's victory shouldn't lie at the feet of Vice President Kamala Harris, whom he argued "did everything she possibly could to win."

"The fault is in our nation. We must come to the realization that America is deeply racist and sexist, incapable of electing a Black, Asian woman to its highest office because of our culture’s innate, widespread, and unreconciled bias and hatred," Jarvis wrote. "That is the root of it. That is the weed that will now grow unkempt no matter how much media wish to groom the nation to make us look as if it were not so. Its aims of oppression will grow daily."

READ MORE:'Made violence his brand': Fascism scholar says threat of 2nd Trump term 'uniquely dangerous'

Jarvis laid out a comprehensive list of things that are likely to happen once Trump takes power on January 20. Chief among them were women losing "control of their bodies, their health [and] their lives." He wrote that Black Americans "know better than anyone, of course, how racist America is" and that now "there will be no limits to it" as the election result gives racists "permission." And he opined that LGBTQ+ people may be deprived every precious right they fought so bravely to attain as bigots try to "force them back into closets."

"Some portion of Latino voters may think — like Italians long before them, who once were considered people of color and then were not — that they might buy their way into favor with white America with their votes," he wrote. "[But] discrimination never ends. No matter their contribution to Trump’s victory, some citizens will again be called garbage by those in power."

Axios reported Wednesday that Karoline Leavitt, who is Trump's 2024 campaign spokesperson, promised that the president-elect would follow through on his promise to deport millions of immigrants upon taking office. And in Jarvis' essay, he explained that all immigrants will be at risk of the incoming Trump administration's wrath, whether they're documented or not.

"[Immigrants] will find their families and lives torn apart as Trump follows through on his promise of mass deportation, tearing husbands, wives, parents, and children from each other on the suspicion brought by an accent, a name, the color of skin," Jarvis wrote.

READ MORE:'One of the oldest dictator tricks': Here's why Trump is lying about Project 2025

And as economists have already warned, Trump's promise of high tariffs on imported goods will have a direct impact on all Americans' finances. The president-elect has proposed tariffs as high as 20% on goods from China, which retailers typically pass on to consumers in the form of higher prices. Jarvis reminded readers: "Every consumer will suffer higher prices — no matter what their yard signs promised — as Trump undertakes his deportations and tariffs."

But Jarvis' essay didn't stop there: He wrote that in a second Trump term, it's a near-certainty that "institutions of voting rights, fair elections, and equal rights under the law will diminish further," that "RFK Jr. will drive Trump to outlaw vaccinations, essentially outlawing the institutions of medicine and science" and that "free speech will be very much at risk, even as Trump, [Elon] Musk and their supposedly contrarian lock-step thinkers argue they are its protectors."

"They will forbid and harass speech of which they do not approve," he wrote.

"This election was my hope that we could find a different way, to rebuild not from the ashes but from where we stood. Now I am not sure," he added. "What is ultimately broken is not the set of institutions the extremists are trying to destroy but instead our nation itself. Until we face its faults of racism, sexism, and inequity we will never be finished fighting our war, our endless Civil War."

READ MORE:How Trump's tariffs would 'aggressively' transfer wealth from the poor to the rich: journalist

Click here to read Jarvis' full essay on Medium.

---

AN 11 24

COMM DR

Government watchdogs on Wednesday said they are "not going anywhere" and will continue pushing for U.S. President-elect Donald Trump to face accountability for his 34 felony counts and other alleged crimes, even as the Republican and his allies threatened the special counsel who has been prosecuting him.

"Trump will still be sentenced for the 34 felony counts on which he has been convicted, and other pending legal proceedings must

also move forward," saidRobert Weissman and Lisa Gilbert, co-presidents of consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, which spent Trump's first term exposing corruption and unethical profiteering in his administration.

The group pledged to "mobilize Americans to resist Trump's agenda of cruelty and corruption" as it was reported that Special Counsel Jack Smith, who was appointed by the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate Trump's alleged mishandling of classified documents and his role in the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol, was in talks with the DOJ to wind down the federal prosecutions.

Under DOJ policy, a sitting president cannot face prosecution while in office.

Smith filed charges against Trump over the allegations, but the cases were thrown into uncertainty by the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in July that held presidents have legal immunity for "official acts" while in office.

In legal filings that were unsealed last month, Smith argued Trump should not be entitled to immunity from prosecution because he "resorted to crimes" when he attempted to overturn the 2020 election results.

Trump said in recent weeks that he would fire Smith "within two seconds" if he won the presidency.

His allies, including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), have also demanded an end to what they call "lawfare" against Trump, with Scalise sayingWednesday that the election results proved American voters want federal and state officials in to "immediately terminate the politically motivated prosecutions of President Donald Trump."

Graham wrote on the social media platform X on Wednesday, addressing Smith and his team, that "it is time to look forward to a new chapter in your legal careers as these politically motivated charges against President Trump hit a wall."

Trump was convicted of 34 state felony counts in New York for falsifying business records related to a hush-money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels. He is currently scheduled to be sentenced on November 26, but his lawyers are likely to ask for an indefinite delay. There's also state case in Georgia stemming from Trump's attempts to reverse his 2020 loss.

The work of ensuring Trump is "not about the law," said Weissman and Gilbert, "will continue in earnest [and] will be more important in 2025 than ever before."

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) said Trump's victory "is making the urgency of accountability and checks on the presidency clearer than ever before."

"We're going to keep standing up against corruption and authoritarianism," said CREW, "as we have been for years."

Public Citizen was among more than 200 groups that announced a virtual eventcalled "Making Meaning of the Moment," planned for November 7 at 8:00 pm. More than 20,000 people had registered as of Wednesday evening.

---

'USA is a threat': Canadians slam 'bully' Trump’s 'arrogant' mockery of 'Governor Trudeau'