Finally, Friday Reads: Continued Chaos in Congress and American Policy

“So, since Trump has defeated Venezuela and Iran. Is the Vatican after Cuba, or is that Greenland? So hard to keep track.” John Buss, @repeat1968

Good Day, Sky Dancers!

I’d like to thank JJ again for covering for me on Monday. I’m not sure what’s been going on with my stomach, but the daily news sure doesn’t help! Today’s biggest headline for me is a decision that will impact Louisiana and likely any part of the country where big oil continues to wreck the environment and sicken and murder people with their business practices. It’s a discouraging decision. I have always thought my own bout with an extremely rare form of cancer was due to oil leaking into the drinking water in Ponca City, Oklahoma, where I was born.

This story is from the Washington Post. “Supreme Court hands win to Chevron, Big Oil in environmental damage case. The decision puts into question a $745 million judgment against Chevron to help restore coastal wetlands in Louisiana that were damaged as long ago as World War II.” As you may know, the damage to the wetlands down here is immense, and it’s one of the reasons hurricane season is quite frightening. The industry is deadly for all forms of life. Julian Mark reports on the decision.

This decision seems to say that if they did what they did for a war the government ran, then it’s okay if they ruin our lives. That’s pretty frightening in my estimation. What other things could this apply to?  What would it have done to the Agent Orange victims in our military?

The Supreme Court on Friday sided with oil giant Chevron, ruling that it can fight an environmental damage lawsuit in federal court — a decision that could affect the outcomes of nearly a dozen other lawsuits that make similar allegations about the oil and gas industry.

The unanimous decision puts into question a $745 million state court judgment against Chevron to help restore coastal wetlands in Louisiana that were damaged as far back as World War II. Chevron had asked the Supreme Court to order the case moved to federal court.

At the heart of Chevron’s case was the argument that during World War II, the firm’s predecessors played a key role in the refinement of aviation gas, or avgas, to meet the demands of the war. Because the work was on behalf of U.S. government interests, the company and its backers have argued, claims regarding the actions at the time should be heard in a federal court rather than at the state level. The high court agreed.

“In this all-hands-on-deck, wartime context, Chevron needed to produce more crude oil as quickly as possible to facilitate more avgas refining, including its own,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority.

Chevron applauded the decision. “As the Court recognized, the plaintiffs’ claims are related to activities that Chevron and other energy companies performed under federal supervision during World War II,” company spokesman Bill Turenne said in a statement. “Those claims are flawed as a matter of both state law and federal law, and Chevron looks forward to litigating these cases in federal court, where they belong.”

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. did not participate in the case. Shortly before arguments in January, he recused himself, citing financial interests in ConocoPhillips, the parent of Burlington Resources Oil & Gas, a party in a related case.

Just a side note: ConocoPhillips was responsible for all the oil that leaked into my small Oklahoma hometown. This story is breaking, so be sure to follow up later as more analysis becomes available.

Lots of weirdness is happening in Congress this week as Democrats put a toe in the water to test the chances of yet another impeachment process. However, there is more afoot. Heather Cox Richardson discusses some of these issues on her Substack today.

Congress is back in session, and there is a frantic feel in the air. Republicans appear to be assessing the fall of Hungarian prime minister Victor Orbán, Trump’s increasingly erratic behavior along with his abysmal job approval numbers, rising prices, and an unpopular war in Iran that currently does not appear to have a solution that will not result in the U.S. losing face.

In Hungary, incoming prime minister Péter Magyar is setting a bar as he appears to want no part of playing business as usual with Orbán’s cronies. A center-right politician, Magyar appeared as a guest on state television after his party’s dramatic win—Orbán’s state media had not let him appear on it before the election—and said he intended to suspend the station’s news service because state media does not provide the journalism that the country deserves. He said that he would end the state subsidies for Orbán’s right-wing-allied university and that Hungarian president Tamas Sulyok, a close ally of Orbán, was “unfit to serve as the guardian of legality” and “must leave office immediately.”

Republicans appear to be trying to grab all the turf they can before the midterm elections.

Today the Senate passed House Joint Resolution 140, a bill that overturns a 20-year mining ban upstream from the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCA) in Minnesota. Representative Pete Stauber (R-MN) introduced the measure, which passed the House in January. It clears the way for a subsidiary of Chilean mining giant Antofagasta to engage in copper-sulfide mining, which produces sulfuric acid, above the pristine BWCA. Those waters include 1,175 lakes and over 1,200 miles of rivers and streams. According to outdoor writer Wes Siler, about 165,000 people visit the BWCA annually, generating $1.1 billion in economic activity and supporting 17,000 jobs.

The Republicans’ attack on the BWCA for the benefit of a foreign billionaire feeds President Donald J. Trump’s ongoing crusade against Minnesota. Trump’s secretary of transportation, Sean Duffy, is targeting New York today as well, saying that the federal government will withhold $73.5 million from the state because it has refused to review the commercial driver’s licenses of almost 33,000 immigrants. New York officials say they are complying with federal law.

Trump is also continuing to try to exert his personal power over the government, threatening again to fire Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell, whose term as chair ends in May but who has said he will continue on the board until the administration drops its trumped-up criminal investigation of him over alleged cost overruns on the renovations of Federal Reserve* buildings.

As Jacob Rosen and Olivia Gazis of CBS News noted, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is supporting Trump’s attacks on those he perceives to be his enemies by sending to the Department of Justice two criminal referrals yesterday. One is for the former government official who was the whistleblower over the July 2019 phone call in which Trump told Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky he would release money the U.S. Congress had appropriated for Ukraine’s defense against Russia’s 2014 incursion…but only after Zelensky did him the “favor” of smearing Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.

The whistleblower told the intelligence community inspector general: “I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals.”

Gabbard’s second referral is for the inspector general, Michael Atkinson, who found the complaint “credible” and “urgent” and set in motion the process of sharing it with the congressional intelligence committees, which led to Trump’s first impeachment.

As Representative Jim Himes (D-CT), the top-ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, noted, the effort to criminalize whistleblowing from 2019 for what was Trump’s well-established behavior is most likely an attempt to chill future whistleblower complaints.

There certainly appears to be concern on the part of MAGA loyalists that they are in danger of losing power, and that might mean legal repercussions. Testifying before the Senate Budget Committee today, Director of Office of Management and Budget Russell Vought denied that he had held back funds Congress had appropriated. Doing so is called “impoundment,” and it is illegal, but the administration has been engaged in it since it took office in January 2025.

There is a hell of a lot more in this piece, and it’s worth reading. I’m fairly jaded by now, so I don’t think it will actually amount to much. I’m still relying on voters. to come through. I’m into more election-related victories, including this one in New Jersey reported in Politico.  “Progressive Analilia Mejia coasts to victory in New Jersey special House election. The Democratic will fill the seat held by Gov. Mikie Sherrill.”  Madison Fernandez has the analysis.

Progressive organizer Analilia Mejia will succeed Democratic Gov. Mikie Sherrill in New Jersey’s 11th Congressional District, adding to a run of party victories that suggest voter dissatisfaction with President Donald Trump ahead of the midterms.

Mejia defeated Republican Randolph Township Councilmember Joe Hathaway in Thursday’s special election, according to the Associated Press.

In a victory speech, Mejia labeled her opponent and Republicans such as Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson, as well as billionaires Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, “radicals who are willing to upend our democracy, subvert our Constitution and act with impunity.”

“We must stop them,” she said. “These radicals will watch Rome burn with all of us within, and they are simply cowards — cowards unwilling to stand up to this madness. But we stand up, we resist, we will not allow it to continue.”

Hathaway conceded defeat but said he intends to challenge her again since there will be a regular primary in June and general election in November. He said he will keep a close eye on her voting record in the meantime and “will continue fighting for affordability, public safety, accountable government, and I will continue to stand up for the families of NJ-11.”

Mejia entered as the favorite for the affluent, blue-leaning North Jersey seat after an unexpected victory in February’s Democratic primary — a race that featured nearly a dozen candidates, including many who spent more and had higher name ID than Mejia.

In the primary, hefty outside spending from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee against former Rep. Tom Malinowski in part helped propel Mejia to a win. But outside groups on both sides of the aisle largely stayed out of the special general election — money that could have otherwise made the race more competitive.

Republicans — who are looking to rebuild after brutal losses in the state last year — tried to make the argument that Mejia was too far to the left of the district. Sherrill, a moderate Democrat, first flipped the seat in 2018 and won reelection handily in the years after that; former Vice President Kamala Harris won by around 9 points in 2024. Like in other races across the country, the GOP was eager to refer to Mejia as a “socialist” — a label she did not identify with — and compare her to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

But that message didn’t land among the electorate, where Democrats outnumber Republicans by more than 60,000. Mejia also garnered support from Democrats across the ideological spectrum in her general election campaign.

Yesterday, in my social feeds, I started seeing references to a "Rape Academy" that's recently been exposed. This feels like something that should be a top headline at every news outlet. Completely inadequate news coverage of it. But at least some with a big audience are writing/speaking about it.

Dave (@flowstateneworleans.com) 2026-04-17T16:14:03.012Z

Turnout is always key. Also, I have a feeling women voters will be hitting the polls hard between the Epstein files and the rampant misogyny in the Republican line-up. It’s likely why our votes are threatened by the Save America Act. Here’s some analysis by Al Jazeera. “What is Trump-backed SAVE America Act and what could it mean for US vote? Senate resumes debate on controversial bill requiring more proof of citizenship, which Trump calls top priority.” Yes, it attacks all immigrants, but it also threatens women who can’t document the name changes from birth to marriage(s).

Here’s what to know.

What would the SAVE America Act do?

The version of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act passed by the House in February would require voters to provide proof of citizenship – a birth certificate or passport – when registering to vote. It would also implement stricter voter identification requirements for individuals casting ballots, whether by mail or in person.

Under the US Constitution, states administer elections, and currently have different processes for registering voters and confirming citizenship. Voting by noncitizens is already illegal, and all people registering to vote attest they are US citizens under threat of perjury.

The bill does not provide any funding for the new verification processes, which would be effective immediately upon the bill being signed into law.

The legislation would also require all states to run their voter rolls through a US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) “Alien Verification Eligibility” system to identify potential noncitizens already enrolled.

What has Trump said about the SAVE Act?

The US president has long maintained that elections in the country are marred by widespread fraud, including noncitizen voting, despite there being no evidence to support these claims.

Even the conservative Heritage Foundation, which has influenced many of Trump’s policies, has found only exceedingly rare instances of voter fraud over decades of US elections.

Trump’s focus on election administration dates back to his 2020 loss to former US President Joe Biden, which he continues to maintain was the result of the vote being “stolen”. Again, no evidence has emerged to back those claims.

The president has called the SAVE America Act “one of the most IMPORTANT & CONSEQUENTIAL pieces of legislation in the history of Congress, and America itself”.

Screenshot

Pete Hegseth is letting his freak fly over the incredible amount of negative media and public response to the Iran War. This is from NBC News.  “Pete Hegseth attacks ‘unpatriotic’ media and compares reporters to Jewish biblical group. The defense secretary has frequently attacked the media over Iran war coverage.” It’s really surprising to me how Orange Caligula and his weirdo cabinet members seem to think they know biblical texts better than anyone else, including the Pope. This analysis is written by Rich Schapiro. Also, aren’t the Pharisees supposed to be the bad guys in the Jesus story? At least, that’s what the Presbyterians taught me.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth escalated his attacks on the media Thursday, comparing reporters covering the Iran war to the Pharisees, the biblical Jewish group that opposed Jesus.

The comments came at a Pentagon press briefing in which Hegseth first described the American media as “incredibly unpatriotic.”

“I just can’t help but notice the endless stream of garbage, the relentlessly negative coverage you cannot resist peddling, despite the historic and important success of this effort and the success of our troops,” Hegseth said, referring to the Iran war.

“Sometimes it’s hard to figure out what side some of you are actually on,” he added.

Since the fighting began in late February, Hegseth, who is Christian, has frequently used religious rhetoric at news conferences and attacked the media over its coverage. But he went further Thursday by doing so with religious overtones.

Hegseth said he was at church on Sunday when his pastor read a Bible passage that described Jesus healing a man in front of the Pharisees, “the so-called and self-appointed elites of their time.”

“Our press are just like these Pharisees — not all of you, not all of you, but the legacy Trump-hating press. Your politically motivated animus for President Trump nearly completely blinds you from the brilliance of our American warriors,” he said.

Hegseth added: “The Pharisees scrutinized every good act in order to find a violation, only looking for the negative. The hardened hearts of our press are calibrated only to impugn. I would ask you to open your eyes to the goodness, the historic success of our troops, the courage of this president.”

Hegseth was a member of the media — a Fox News host — before President Donald Trump tapped him to lead the Defense Department. Like some other members of the Trump administration, his use of Christian rhetoric in public statements is a departure from the language used by his predecessors.

In celebration of my goal of better emotional and mental health, I have canceled my cable TV news subscription. I can no longer stand to watch any of these idiots speaking and moving around like they’re live human beings or something. I’m strictly sticking to the places where I can get a timeline without sacrificing my eyes and stomach. I’m hoping this helps the tummy and the budget, which is tighter than I’ve ever had it.

Wired is one media outlet that is on my keep list. David Gilbert writes this analysis today. “MAGA Is Increasingly Convinced the Trump Assassination Attempt Was Staged. Conspiracy theories about the Butler, Pennsylvania, shooting have ramped up in recent weeks as once steadfast Trump supporters turn on the president.”

Are they really waking up? Finally?

In recent weeks, as criticism of President Donald Trump from his own supporters has reached a fever pitch, a new conspiracy theory has taken hold: Some of the president’s biggest supporters are now claiming, without evidence, that Trump staged the assassination attempt on his life in Butler, Pennsylvania in 2024 and is covering it up.

During an open-air campaign rally on July 13, 2024, Trump survived an attempted assassination when a bullet fired by a 20-year-old on a roof nearby clipped the top of his ear. Corey Comperatore, a Trump supporter sitting near the president, was shot and killed. The shooter was later killed by Secret Service agents. Conspiracy theories around the Butler assassination quickly permeated the internet, but for many Trump supporters, his survival was seen as a sign from God that he was the chosen one.

As Trump’s hold over MAGA has waned, though, an increasing number of his supporters have begun to push the narrative that the entire incident was staged.

“I think that maybe it was staged,” Tim Dillon said on his show last weekend about the assassination attempt. Dillon, who was previously a staunch Trump supporter, went on to share that Trump should now come out and say, “Some people are going to be upset by this, but we staged the assassination attempt in Butler to show people how important it was to vote for me and how far I was willing to go for them.”

Some of these claims began months ago. In November, former Fox News pundit Tucker Carlson promoted the idea that the FBI was somehow involved in covering up the shooting, writing on X that the “FBI lied” about the shooter’s online footprint.

A day later, conservative pundit Emerald Robinson went further, posting on X that the FBI “did it.” (In the same post, Robinson claimed that the agency was responsible for everything from the January 6 attack on the Capitol to “Jeffrey Epstein’s blackmail tapes” and the “Gov. Whitmer fake kidnap plot.”)

But the claims that Trump had staged the entire thing really picked up steam when former US National Counterterrorism Center director Joe Kent appeared on Carlson’s podcast last month, one day after he resigned from his position over the Iran war.

During the interview, Carlson and Kent discussed the failure of the Trump administration to provide more details about the Pennsylvania shooter. Kent claimed, without providing any evidence, that investigations into the shooting had been shut down before they finished.

Kent also claimed that this vacuum of information about the incident would lead to more conspiracy theories. “If you don’t want to address that question, then you just go silent and say you can’t ask that question,” he said. “Which then creates people who come out of nowhere and they start drawing their own conclusions.” (This is in fact, experts say, one basic dynamic behind conspiracy theorizing.)

“If you cannot look at this story and use critical thinking skills and have at least some questions, you are the problem and we need you to snap out of it,” Trisha Hope, a GOP national delegate from Texas and former Trump supporter, posted on X about Butler this week.

As usual, more to read at all the links!

What’s on your Reading, Action, and Blogging list today?

 


Terrifying Tuesday Reads: Impeach the MFer!

Good Morning!!

The Dotard is not looking or sounding good this morning. He must be missing his executive time watching Fox News this morning. Trump was at the UN trying out a new excuse for his corrupt bullying of Ukraine. Supposedly he secretly held back the aid because other countries weren’t giving enough.

Then he gave a slow-motion speech full of slurred words. His face was bloated and expressionless, and he appeared to be struggling to read the teleprompter, squinting his eyes and craning his neck forward.

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross appeared to be dozing off in his chair.

 

The Dotard’s kids were in the audience, hoping he could somehow make it through the “speech” before he keeled over.

Here’s a longer excerpt, posted by an expert on authoritarian regimes.

This robotic, senile, yet dangerous “person” is supposedly the president of the United States.

I’ll get to Ukraine and impeachment talk in a minute, but first I want to highlight this op-ed by the publisher of The New York Times A.G. Sulzberger. I hope you’ll go read the whole thing, but here’s the breaking news part: the Trump administration refused to help a NYT reporter who was in danger of being arrested in Egypt.

Two years ago, we got a call from a United States government official warning us of the imminent arrest of a New York Times reporter based in Egypt named Declan Walsh. Though the news was alarming, the call was actually fairly standard. Over the years, we’ve received countless such warnings from American diplomats, military leaders and national security officials.

But this particular call took a surprising and distressing turn. We learned the official was passing along this warning without the knowledge or permission of the Trump administration. Rather than trying to stop the Egyptian government or assist the reporter, the official believed, the Trump administration intended to sit on the information and let the arrest be carried out. The official feared being punished for even alerting us to the danger.

Declan Walsh

Unable to count on our own government to prevent the arrest or help free Declan if he were imprisoned, we turned to his native country, Ireland, for help. Within an hour, Irish diplomats traveled to his house and safely escorted him to the airport before Egyptian forces could detain him.

We hate to imagine what would have happened had that brave official not risked their career to alert us to the threat.

Walsh wasn’t alone.

Eighteen months later, another of our reporters, David Kirkpatrick, arrived in Egypt and was detained and deported in apparent retaliation for exposing information that was embarrassing to the Egyptian government. When we protested the move, a senior official at the United States Embassy in Cairo openly voiced the cynical worldview behind the Trump administration’s tolerance for such crackdowns. “What did you expect would happen to him?” he said. “His reporting made the government look bad.”

You have to wonder why NYT reporters like Ken Vogel and Maggie Haberman are so protective of Trump. Check out this example at The Daily Beast: Author of New York Times’ Controversial Biden-Ukraine Story Becomes New Ukrainian President’s Spokeswoman.

The New York Times last month published a controversial 2,500-word report raising questions about whether Joe Biden used his position as vice president to meddle in Ukrainian politics for the benefit of a company that employed his son.

Iuliia Mendel

Now one of the piece’s authors has announced she has taken a job as the new Ukrainian president’s spokesperson—sparking a new round of criticism of the Times’ story.

“If you want changes—make them. I am glad to join Volodymyr Zelensky’s team. We will do everything possible to be as open to the media and society as we can,” Iuliia Mendel said Monday in a press release.

Her May 1 Times piece detailed how in 2016, then-Vice President Biden successfully pushed Ukraine to oust Viktor Shokin, the country’s top prosecutor who’d been criticized by the U.S. as an impediment to corruption reform. The story suggested the possibility that Biden was motivated to push for Shokin’s removal because the prosecutor investigated the head of Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company where the veep’s son Hunter Biden was a board member.

The article provided no evidence to support the accusations against Biden, but the NYT pushed Trump and Giuliani’s false claims anyway.

Two important stories broke at The Washington Post last night:

Trump ordered hold on military aid days before calling Ukrainian president, officials say.

President Trump told his acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, to hold back almost $400 million in military aid for Ukraine at least a week before a phone call in which Trump is said to have pressured the Ukrainian president to investigate the son of former vice president Joe Biden, according to three senior administration officials.

Officials at the Office of Management and Budget relayed Trump’s order to the State Department and the Pentagon during an interagency meeting in mid-July, according to officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. They explained that the president had “concerns” and wanted to analyze whether the money needed to be spent.

Volodymyr Zelensky

Administration officials were instructed to tell lawmakers that the delays were part of an “interagency process” but to give them no additional information — a pattern that continued for nearly two months, until the White House released the funds on the night of Sept. 11.

Trump’s order to withhold aid to Ukraine a week before his July 25 call with Volodymyr Zelensky is likely to raise questions about the motivation for his decision and fuel suspicions on Capitol Hill that Trump sought to leverage congressionally approved aid to damage a political rival.

Op-Ed by Seven freshman Democrats: Seven freshman Democrats: These allegations are a threat to all we have sworn to protect, by Gil Cisneros

Our lives have been defined by national service. We are not career politicians. We are veterans of the military and of the nation’s defense and intelligence agencies. Our service is rooted in the defense of our country on the front lines of national security.

We have devoted our lives to the service and security of our country, and throughout our careers, we have sworn oaths to defend the Constitution of the United States many times over. Now, we join as a unified group to uphold that oath as we enter uncharted waters and face unprecedented allegations against President Trump.

Abigail Spanberger

The president of the United States may have used his position to pressure a foreign country into investigating a political opponent, and he sought to use U.S. taxpayer dollars as leverage to do it. He allegedly sought to use the very security assistance dollars appropriated by Congress to create stability in the world, to help root out corruption and to protect our national security interests, for his own personal gain. These allegations are stunning, both in the national security threat they pose and the potential corruption they represent. We also know that on Sept. 9, the inspector general for the intelligence community notified Congress of a “credible” and “urgent” whistleblower complaint related to national security and potentially involving these allegations. Despite federal law requiring the disclosure of this complaint to Congress, the administration has blocked its release to Congress.

This flagrant disregard for the law cannot stand. To uphold and defend our Constitution, Congress must determine whether the president was indeed willing to use his power and withhold security assistance funds to persuade a foreign country to assist him in an upcoming election.

They go on to call for impeachment hearings and even using inherent contempt to force the administration to turn over documents and witnesses.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi has called a meeting of the Democratic caucus for this afternoon. CNN reports:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will meet with key committee chairmen who are leading investigations into President Donald Trump, ahead of a full caucus meeting Tuesday afternoon, according to Democratic sources, in what appears to be a crucial day for the party and their strategy on whether to impeach the President.

Amid a new slate of Democratic lawmakers opening the door to impeachment proceedings, Pelosi will consult with the six House Democratic leaders to discuss their presentation to the caucus later in the day, Democratic sources familiar with the issue say. The speaker has been on the phone with her colleagues over the last several days to take the temperature of the whistleblower complaint against Trump as she decides whether to embrace impeachment, Democrats say.

In an interview with CNN Monday night, Pelosi declined to say whether she would fully endorse initiating an impeachment inquiry when she meets with the caucus Tuesday.
But she left little doubt the developments around the whistleblower’s complaint had dramatically escalated the standoff with Trump and a move toward impeachment proceedings was all but certain.
“We will have no choice,” Pelosi said of ultimately getting behind an impeachment inquiry.

Some of Pelosi’s closest allies, including House Reps. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut and Debbie Dingell of Michigan, have signaled their support for impeachment proceedings — a significant indicator that the speaker could be moving closer to backing the divisive political procedure.

The news is full of impeachment talk this morning. Here are some stories to check out:

The Washington Post: Pelosi quietly sounding out House Democrats about whether to impeach Trump, officials say.

Politico: ‘Seismic change’: Democratic hold-outs rush toward impeachment.

Joyce White Vance at Time: Trump Is Leaving Congress No Choice But to Impeach.

Jonathan Chait at New York Magazine: Why Trump Has Finally Forced the House to Impeach Him.

Jonathan Bernstein at Bloomberg: We’re Likely Headed for Impeachment.

The Daily Beast: Trump Impeachment: House Dems Are Discussing a ‘Select Panel’ to Handle the Task.

What stories are you following on this Terrifying Tuesday?