Finally Friday Reads: To the Depths of Depravity and Beyond!

Posted: July 10, 2026 | Author: | Filed under: #FARTUS, 2026 MidTerm elections, Faithful Execution | Tags: , , , , , , , | 9 Comments

Good Day, Sky Dancers!

“The Mitch McConnell saga continues to evolve. It is rumored FBI Director Kash Patel, while on a very early morning patrol of our Nation’s Capitol, made a grizzly discovery in the recently drained Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.” John Buss, @repeat1968

If Nixon was a crook, what on earth do we label Orange Caligula? He appears to be surpassing Bond and comic book villains.  He doesn’t even appear cognizant enough to spell his name, and we know he can’t walk straight. What’s the deal then? My first guess is that Stephen Miller is really in charge of everything but decorating forays. However, there seems to be a lot more going on than just one wicked man could possibly do.

This is the headline today in Lawfare. “Faithful Execution and the Removal Power. President Trump is exercising his removal power in ways that defeat his duty to faithfully execute the law.” Nick Bednar and Todd Phillips provide the analysis.

On July 9, President Trump removed or forced out all three remaining members of the Election Assistance Commission (EAC). Congress established the commission to aid state governments in administering elections and to certify voting equipment. It consists of four members appointed by the president, with the advice and consent of the Senate, who serve fixed four-year terms. Although its members lack statutory removal protections, Congress designed the commission with other devices commonly used to preserve independence from the president, including requirements that no more than two members be affiliated with the same political party and that three members agree to any action, a combination that necessarily requires all actions to be bipartisan.

In Trump v. Slaughter, the Supreme Court affirmed that Article II of the Constitution allows the president to remove principal officers—such as the members of the EAC—at will. The Supreme Court anchored its decision in the idea that the president must have adequate control over executive-branch officers to carry out his constitutional obligation to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” As the current moment illustrates, however, the removal power also allows the president to undermine faithful execution by removing principal officers tasked with implementing the laws enacted by Congress.

We argue that removals of this kind exceed the president’s removal power. The Take Care Clause obliges the president to ensure the laws enacted by Congress are executed. A removal that leaves an agency legally incapable of acting prevents that execution. The Supreme Court was aware of the potential contradiction between expanding the removal power and the president’s obligation under the Take Care Clause in Slaughter, because we, the authors, filed an amicus brief alerting the Court to the issue. Courts can enforce this limit, and the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. Cook—issued the same day as Slaughter—supplies the remedial tools. Enforcing the Take Care Clause would ensure that multimember commissions, such as the EAC, remain capable of enforcing the laws Congress has enacted.

Read the article for a full list of ramifications. It’s really worth it. Why is this suddenly an important issue? We know that Trump is doing everything inside and outside the power bestowed on the Presidency to throw the elections in his favor.  He’s highly unpopular, and the polls are running against him and Republicans in General. So, with Trump’s bull shitting in deep fail, he’s decided to do whatever he wants. This is from NBC News. “Trump ousts remaining members of the Election Assistance Commission ahead of midterms. The dismissals hamstring a key bipartisan agency just months before the midterms.” Jane C. Timm and Jonathan Allen share the lede. It might be time to hit the panic button.

The White House ousted all three sitting members of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission on Thursday, hamstringing the bipartisan agency ahead of the midterm elections.

The Democratic commissioners — Thomas Hicks and Benjamin W. Hovland — were fired by email, two people familiar with their terminations said. One of the sources also said Republican commissioner Christy McCormick received a call and was asked to resign.

“They will be replaced,” said a White House official who confirmed that all three commissioners are gone. Presidential appointments to the EAC are subject to Senate confirmation — by no means a quick process.

White House aide Morgan DeWitt Snow sent the Democratic commissioners a brief email of termination around 4 p.m. ET, one of the people familiar with the dismissals said.

“On behalf of President Donald J. Trump, I’m writing to inform you that your position as Commissioner of the Election Assistance Commission is terminated effective immediately. Thank you for your service,” the person said the email read.

The EAC is a bipartisan commission that helps state and local officials run elections, certifying election equipment and working with other agencies to ensure state and local elections run smoothly. From 2018 to 2025, it distributed more than $1 billion in grants for election security, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center.

Hovland, one of the Democratic commissioners, told NBC News he was returning from a work trip to a Missouri election office when he was fired.

The EAC, he said, has acted as a clearinghouse, sharing best practices between states and helping them use their limited resources to run elections. Taking away a key federal agency designed to help state and local election administrators will have a negative impact, Hovland said.

“When you’re asking more and more of people without giving them the necessary resources, you know, mistakes happen. And so there’s this real risk of like self-fulfilling prophecies in that way,” he said. “It feels much more like a death-of-1,000-cuts situation than there’s one particular thing that you’re concerned about.”

The commission normally has two Republicans and two Democrats; one Republican, Don Palmer, resigned this year, leaving it with just three members.

Is it time to hit the panic button yet? Are there any Senators and Representatives willing to combat this obvious overreach? Aaron Blacksberg of Just Security asks this question in his headline. “What is the Election Assistance Commission With No Commissioners?”

Last night, President Donald Trump effectively relieved all three serving commissioners of the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) of their positions. According to media reports, the Commission’s two Democratic members, Thomas Hicks and Benjamin Hovland, were fired by email, while the one Republican member, Christy McCormick, was allowed to resign. All three commissioners were unanimously confirmed by the Senate – Hicks and McCormick in 2015 and Hovland in 2019. The EAC’s fourth commissioner and other Republican member, Don Palmer, previously resigned on April 29. In a statement to media, the White House referenced last week’s Supreme Court decision in Trump v. Slaughter, stating: “The President, and head of the Executive Branch, reserves the right to remove individuals that may not be totally aligned with the important task of securing America’s elections and ensuring ​every legal vote is counted. The Slaughter decision gives the President precedence to do so.”

The EAC is a bipartisan, independent commission that was established by the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) in 2002. It requires an affirmative vote by at least three of its commissioners to conduct official business or establish policy. Historically, the EAC has operated for extended periods without a quorum and for several years had zero sitting commissioners.

Since the EAC was created, the commissioners have worked in partnership with state and local election officials to advance the professionalization and integrity of the election profession. A fully functioning EAC is critical for promulgating the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) to certify voting equipment, serving as a clearinghouse of best practices and training support, disbursing HAVA Election Security Grants, and compiling the biennial Election Administration and Voting Survey (EAVS) report.

So what does it mean for this Commission to have no commissioners? In the absence of the Senate confirming new commissioners – by law the EAC must have partisan balance and congressional leaders are tasked with making recommendations to the President – some business can and will continue.

Significantly, the EAC staff has authority to continue disbursing Election Security Grants to states – the primary source of federal election funding – and to continue certifying voting equipment under current standards. Below is an overview of who holds the remaining limited EAC authority and what that authority does and does not encompass.

Again, you can read the details at the link. Seeing it broken down into what can and can’t happen now is shocking for any of us well-schooled in the functioning of government.  Our collective pants should be on fire. This Talking Points article, written by John Light, has a headline that gets straight to the point. “Trump Seizes on SCOTUS Decision to Mess With the Midterms.”

A few weeks ago, the Supreme Court handed down a pair of decisions finding that 1. Trump could exert tremendous control over independent executive branch agencies, including firing their commissioners and 2. the Fed, also an independent agency, was different. Since then, the question of where Trump would strike first has lingered.

Now we know. Last night, Trump forced out all remaining commissioners atop the Election Assistance Commission — two Democrats and a Republican — just months before the midterms. In a statement to ProPublica, an unnamed White House official gestured toward the same logic the Supreme Court used, saying that Trump “reserves the right to remove individuals that may not be totally aligned with the important task of securing America’s elections and ensuring every legal vote is counted.”

The agency largely does the fairly anodyne work of providing election security support for states and distributing funding. But it has figured prominently in Trump’s attempt at a federal takeover of voting.

In a sweeping 2025 executive order, Trump directed the EAC to add a documentary proof of citizenship requirement to voter registration forms. He also ordered the agency to use its power to distribute funds to pressures states to require that all ballots be received by Election Day, not simply mailed to officials by Election Day.

That executive order and another 2026 order on elections have largely been blocked by the courts.

The question, writes election law scholar Rick Hasen, “is what Trump might try to do with the EAC without commissioners. Most boldly (and I would argue illegally) Trump could try to direct the commissioner-less EAC to do his bidding, for example by stating that the EAC must amend the federal voter registration form that states must accept for federal elections to include documentary proof of citizenship.”

“If he tries anything like this, it will be high profile and very important litigation that will end up at the Supreme Court on the emergency docket over the summer,” Hasen added

And, as we know, the Surpreme Court can no longer be fully trusted to reflect the Constition and the laws passed in 250 years of Congress. Trump is also set on passing the so-called SAVE America Act. Fortunately, he’s not vetoing anything, but it should startle us all that he’s hell-bent on destroying voting as we know it in this democratic republic. This from The Hill. “Trump says he won’t sign housing bill in protest of SAVE America Act inaction.”  Julia Manchester has the story.

President Trump said Friday he will not sign the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, which is set to pass into law tonight, in protest of the Senate not passing the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE America) Act.

“THE SAVE AMERICA ACT’S non-passage is CRAZY, and a serious threat to any politician who votes against it!” Trump exclaimed in a lengthy Truth Social post.

rump proceeded to call on Senate Republicans to terminate the filibuster in an effort to pass the legislation, warning that Democrats will eliminate the parliamentary procedure if they win back the majority in the chamber.

“The Dumocrats will TERMINATE THE FILIBUSTER, if and when they ever get the chance to do so, in their very first hour – And I will no longer be able to call them Dumocrats again! The title of DUMB will revert to the Republicans who allowed this horrible calamity to happen to our Party, and our Nation, itself!” the president said.

Trump’s comments come just hours before the bipartisan housing legislation, which was passed late last month, is automatically set to go into law at midnight if the president does not veto the bill.

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has said Trump will not stop the legislation even if he doesn’t sign it.

“He won’t veto the bill. We already know that. He’ll either allow it to just go into law, or he’ll put his signature on it and take partial ownership, and I hope he does the latter,” Johnson said in an interview with USA Today.

The president sent shock waves through Washington when he abruptly canceled a signing ceremony for the bill at the Capitol last month, saying he would not sign the legislation until the SAVE America Act is passed.

This is what the pursuit of nothing but blind power, attention, and greed leads to when put in charge of a government. We no longer lead the world. We are not the “shining city on the hill” touted by Ronald Reagan. We are now anathema in the hearts of governments and people who once struggled to get the form of government that is being blown up by one narcissistic man with dementia, surrounded by idiots and living demons.

Ms Sparkles awaits her trip to the Vet so she’ll come back to her forever colony and meals healthy and spayed.

I’m late again today. I’ve been trapping the feral cats around my house and on my block. Today, very early, Ms. Sparkles, whom I captured yesterday afternoon, returned from her trip to be spayed and given shots.  This picture is when I caught her. She jumped out of the cage, ran to the food bowl, and her tribe. Sparkles joined Onyx, Bobo, and Silver in their little corner of the Bywater.

I’ve worked with Trap Dat Cat before. When I first got my Kristal, I was hard-pressed for cash, and Nita Hemeter took her to a vet and had her spayed. I raised enough money from my friends on Facebook to pay for the costs. It’s really important to have feral cat colonies here because we’re really close to the ports lined up and down the Mississippi River. Rats and all kinds of things thrive in that ecosystem. The cats control them. The city even recognizes their role in keeping the restaurants and homes free from vermin.

There are still lots of cats living in the old, abandoned Navy Base that is now being turned into a living community with commercial space. As they flee to us, they have a chance to be rehomed or welcomed into a feral cat colony like the one that lives under the very old homes and piers, as my feral cats do.

If you want to get your fill of pictures of some really cute kittens and cats, take a look at the link. Donations are also always welcome. I know Kristal, and I am happy to have them.

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

 

Mostly Monday Reads: Trump goes all Mafia on FIFA

Posted: July 6, 2026 | Author: | Filed under: #FARTUS, #We are so Fucked, 2026 FIFA, Trump Mafia Moves | Tags: , , , , , , | 12 Comments
"Seems like for the estimated $10M midnight apocalyptic firework extravaganza for our Dear Leader, they could have afforded a T." John Buss, @repeat1968

“Seems like for the estimated $10M midnight apocalyptic firework extravaganza for our Dear Leader, they could have afforded a T.” John Buss, @repeat1968

Good Day, Sky Dancers!

While getting ready for the Netherlands v Mexico last night, I just happened to flick through some headlines and  let out a loud ‘What the Hell?’ Loud enough to get a response from down the hall: “What now?” The hell was two headlines — one from the New York Times and the other from The Independent —  that convinced me it was real. I posted excerpts in response to JJ’s post last night downthread.

It basically gave the world another good reason to hate us or laugh at what we’ve become under Orange Caligula. My thought is we’ve become a Mafia state. This is the headline from the NYT:  “Trump Asked FIFA to Review U.S. Player’s Suspension. Now He’s Eligible to Play. The reversal of Folarin Balogun’s World Cup suspension is highly unusual. It was the first time since 1962 that FIFA has nullified a suspension for a red card received during the World Cup.”

It’s basically big news today, so I’ll lead with it. This time, he insulted our friend and ally, Belgium, so I’ll start with their response today as reported by the AP. It’s reported by Samuel Petraquin.  Also, there are pictures of the offense that got the red card.  “Belgian federation to challenge FIFA’s decision to let Folarin Balogun play in World Cup match.”

The Belgian soccer federation wants an explanation from FIFA about a decision to let U.S forward Folarin Balogun play at the World Cup despite getting a red card in his previous game.

Belgium takes on the United States later Monday for a spot in the quarterfinals.

The Belgian federation (RBFA) said it has still not received either “FIFA’s decision or any explanation regarding this matter. In these circumstances, it has no choice but to challenge the player’s eligibility for the upcoming match.”

It did not specify where it intends to appeal FIFA’s decision.

U.S. President Donald Trump intervened on behalf of star U.S. forward Balogun, whose red-card suspension was lifted in a decision that allowed him to play against Belgium.

The Belgian federation said it learned through media reports about the FIFA’s move and sent a letter to the governing body requesting a copy of the decision as well as an explanation of the process.

“As its only response, FIFA sent a letter to the RBFA stating that it considered this correspondence to constitute an appeal, that a judge had been appointed, and that the RBFA had only a few hours to complete that appeal,” it said. “No information whatsoever was provided by FIFA.

Politico reports this on the Trump maneuver. “Inside the White House push to get Folarin Balogun back on the field. President Donald Trump got involved minutes after the U.S. striker received a red card that would have banned him from a crucial match.”  Sophia Cai has the lede.

The campaign to keep Folarin Balogun on the field for the United States’ World Cup run began just minutes after the team’s leading goal-scorer received a red card that would sideline him for the team’s next match.

Following Wednesday’s victory against Bosnia and Herzegovina, White House FIFA World Cup Task Force executive director Andrew Giuliani alerted President Donald Trump to Balogun’s punishment for a rash tackle — removal from the Bosnia match and a routine one-match suspension that would keep him out of a must-win encounter against Belgium.

Trump and Giuliani had been speaking regularly about the World Cup for months. During the planning stages for the tournament, the president received frequent briefings on logistics, security and the U.S. team’s prospects. Once the competition began in mid-June, those conversations accelerated to multiple times each week.

By Wednesday night, the White House had committed itself to taking action over Balogun’s red card, which some soccer analysts believed to be a harsh punishment for the infraction. Giuliani, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and senior U.S. Soccer Federation officials — all of whom had watched the Bosnia match in person at Levi’s Stadium near San Francisco — began activating plans to challenge the referee’s on-field decision to issue a red card. Successful appeals of World Cup red cards are exceedingly rare.

That kicked off four days of coordinated lobbying, legal maneuvering and diplomacy that stretched from the Oval Office to FIFA’s headquarters in Zurich — and underscored how invested Trump’s inner circle had become in the second World Cup hosted on U.S. soil and the fortune of the U.S. men’s national team competing in it. POLITICO spoke to a half-dozen U.S. government and soccer officials who were either directly involved in or briefed on the week’s events.

On Sunday, a day before the U.S. was due to face Belgium with Balogun on the bench, FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee announced that it was suspending Balogun’s one-match suspension for a year. Trump thanked FIFA for “doing what was right and reversing a great injustice.” The Royal Belgian Football Association and European confederation UEFA, of which Belgium is a member, are considering taking action against the FIFA ruling, according to a high-ranking UEFA official granted anonymity to discuss ongoing deliberations.

On Thursday, Trump placed a call to FIFA President Gianni Infantino. The two men had built a friendship over nearly eight years, with Infantino becoming a frequent visitor to the Oval Office during Trump’s second term. They remained in contact even when events put U.S. government policy in conflict with FIFA’s objectives, according to people familiar with their relationship. That included when the Trump administration launched military strikes against Iran in February, jeopardizing the country’s ability to compete in the World Cup — a personal history that mattered when Trump dialed Infantino about the Balogun matter.

Trump asked about FIFA’s rules around the red card decision and the grounds for a suspension. Infantino listened carefully but made no promises about the outcome. FIFA declined to confirm any specific discussions but reiterated to POLITICO that the decision to suspend the one-match ban was made by an independent disciplinary committee.

As U.S. Soccer’s legal team formally prepared and submitted its appeal to FIFA, Giuliani and Lutnick also offered to make White House attorneys available to assist with legal analysis if needed, according to people involved in the discussions.

At the same time, Giuliani and Scott Goodwin — a hedge-fund manager who had helped to personally pay the salary of U.S. coach Mauricio Pochettino — zeroed in on the officiating history of referee Raphael Claus, who made the red card call on Wednesday. Articles examining previous controversies involving the Brazilian referee circulated among senior government officials as they evaluated every possible argument that could bolster the appeal, according to sources familiar with the discussions.

Stephen Collinson of CNN has the story on what the rest of the world thinks about this shake-down.

For 24 days, the World Cup seemed to achieve a rare feat in America in 2026: It had almost nothing to do with Donald Trump.

But in an extraordinary twist following an appeal from the president, star US goal-scorer Folarin Balogun will play in the knockout clash with Belgium on Monday, despite being sent off in the previous match and earning a one-game ban.

“Thank you to FIFA for doing what was right, and reversing a great injustice! President DONALD J. TRUMP,” the president posted Sunday, taking a victory lap on Truth Social.

Trump added more rhetorical rocket fuel to the controversy on Monday, confirming that he’d called FIFA President Gianni Infantino to ask him to review the suspension.

“I didn’t say, ‘You have to do this,’” Trump said in the Oval Office, adding that he didn’t think Balogun’s offense was even a foul.

Balogun’s reprieve rocked global soccer, triggering fresh speculation about the cozy relationship between Trump and the FIFA supremo.

Trump’s call to Infantino and FIFA’s ultimate decision lifted a controversy about soccer refereeing into an international incident surrounding the world’s most popular sporting showcase.

The subsequent drama raises concerns about political interference and the integrity of the tournament. It doesn’t necessarily matter whether Trump’s muscling into the issue was decisive. Just the impression that it was risks souring global perceptions of an event that had generated remarkably positive headlines.

Controversy is guaranteed at World Cup finals. Who could forget Diego Maradona’s “hand of God” goal for Argentina in 1986 or French star Zinedine Zidane’s 2006 World Cup final headbutt?

Read more on this controversy at any of the three links. Believe me, there are a lot more out there. So, here’s another headline that’s making me think doing all that ish to get my passport was a good idea. This headline is from Wired as reported by Maddy Varner. “ICE’s Internal Watchdog Is Now Investigating Online Critics. The Office of Professional Responsibility has opened more than 100 cases over what ICE officials call “incidents of doxing and threats” against ICE employees.”  ICE’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) is set up to conduct internal investigations, but has recently begun investigating American Citizens.

OPR is supposed to act as an internal watchdog. It’s responsible for inspecting detention facilities, investigating allegations of employee and contractor misconduct, and processing security checks for new applicants. On its site, it says it also protects against “external threats” by managing badge access to buildings and maintaining the agency’s network security. But lately, court documents indicate, it appears to be pursuing more civilians like Gonyea for what they say online.

In a court declaration filed in April, an ICE official said that between January 2025 and March 2026, OPR investigated 131 cases involving “incidents of doxing and threats directed towards ICE employees nationwide.”

It’s unclear how many of those cases resulted in criminal charges. WIRED was able to identify only one instance when OPR was credited for its investigative work in a case where the Justice Department accused a California man of harassing an ICE attorney and her mother. The DOJ alleged that the man, who pleaded guilty, used to live in the same building as the mother and that he started his harassment campaign in January 2024, well before President Trump took office. ICE did not respond to questions about whether other cases have been brought based on OPR’s work or how many additional cases OPR has opened since March.

“It takes a lot to actually convict someone for their speech, and it’s only possible in very limited circumstances,” says Laura Moraff, a staff attorney at the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. “People do have a First Amendment right to criticize the government and to do that online and to do that anonymously.”

OPR was behind at least one of the flurry of administrative subpoenas sent to tech companies in recent months in an effort to unmask online critics. In court filings, lawyers for the poster argued that the subpoena, which asked for the poster’s name, address, telephone number, and other details, violated the poster’s right to free speech. The government withdrew the subpoena rather than trying to litigate its merits.

You may read some examples of U.S. citizens they’ve bothered by these claims in the article. You might recall this story via the article cited above.

… ICE agents arrived at a polling site in Syracuse, New York, during the state’s primaries in June. The agents were there to see Paigelynne Gonyea, a poll worker who says they were concerned about an Instagram post she had supposedly made in January, “doxing” an ICE agent.

So, who knows what they may be up to? Let’s hope the press stays on top of it. You may read a great update on the amount of nothing being done by the ICE Agent who killed Renee Good, who is at the root of the Paigelynne Gonyea OPR shenanigans. It’s at this link at The Atlantic. “The Death of Renee Good Has Yet to Be Properly Investigated. Six months after she and Alex Pretti were shot on the streets of Minneapolis, little has come of the probes into their killings.”  Quinta Jurecic is the reporter for the story.

Nearly six months have passed since federal officers shot and killed Renee Good and Alex Pretti on the streets of Minneapolis. No one has been arrested, the Trump administration has provided no reason to believe that any serious investigation is taking place, and federal officials continue to stonewall state and local investigators in Minnesota.

This inaction was predictable. The day after Good’s death, Vice President Vance insisted at a press conference that the agent who shot her would face no criminal charges. “That guy is protected by absolute immunity,” Vance told reporters. “He was doing his job.” Soon, Stephen Miller doubled down on the message, announcing “to all ICE officers” that “you have federal immunity in the conduct of your duties.” Federal agents apparently received the message: The next day, an ICE agent fired a gun into a Minneapolis home, wounding a Venezuelan immigrant, Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis. The week after that, Pretti was killed outside a doughnut shop. The Department of Homeland Security called him a “domestic terrorist” and said that the officers who shot him had acted in self-defense.

Typically, after a contentious killing by a law-enforcement officer, the Justice Department would launch a criminal civil-rights probe. Following George Floyd’s murder, for example, DOJ conducted an investigation alongside Minnesota law enforcement, and both federal and state prosecutors brought separate charges against the Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin. So far, though, the federal government has succeeded in protecting immigration officers from serious consequences for the violence of what DHS termed “Operation Metro Surge.” But in promising a total shield from accountability, Miller and Vance may have been premature. Law-enforcement officials in Minnesota are—albeit haltingly—beginning to move forward with investigations and prosecutions on their own. Their efforts may become the locus of yet another clash between state and federal authority in the age of President Trump.

For the first few hours after the ICE agent Jonathan Ross shot Good inside her car, the mechanisms of accountability appeared to operate normally: The FBI began mobilizing to investigate the crime scene alongside the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, the state’s investigative agency. By the evening of the day she was killed, however, officials in Washington, D.C., had frozen out both Minnesota police and law enforcement in Hennepin County, where Minneapolis is located. In a recent podcast interview, Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty recalled joining a conference call after Good’s death with the FBI, federal prosecutors, and Minnesota investigators: “Everybody agreed this would once again be a joint investigation. And then suddenly the BCA was kicked off the case.” Minnesota abruptly found itself without access to any of the evidence collected at the scene. Even Good’s maroon Honda Pilot, the windshield pierced by Ross’s bullet, was bundled away by the FBI into a storage facility before state law enforcement could get a look at it.

DOJ was now the only agency able to conduct a full investigation into the shooting. But it had little apparent interest in doing so. According to The New York Times, Harmeet Dhillon, who leads DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, refused to open a criminal investigation into Ross. Instead, DOJ looked into the possibility of investigating Good, along with her widow, Becca Good. Six federal prosecutors in Minnesota resigned in protest, as did an FBI agent in Minneapolis.

Bobo, who hangs out on the kitchen stairs waiting for friends and food.

The link is gifted and definitely worth the read.

So, that’s it for me today. I’m still working on trapping the feral cats living under my house, whom I feed and speak to daily. Work is progressing on the kathouse. The electrical work is mostly done. The A/C works again. The backyard no longer has a dilapidated pergula. It’s about to get a nice green space with a nice grill/smoker, a fire pit, many more plants, lighting, and Adirondack chairs. I look forward to the nice cooler fall days.

I’m off to set up traps for the infamous duo Bobo and Sparks.

Try to have a nice, quiet week.  I was hoping the games would be a nice break, but then Orange Caligula can never let good enough alone. He has to get involved and ruin it for everyone.  I still enjoy the openers where all the soccer kids come out with the players. Their looks make me realize we have to ensure the world is a better place before we leave it.

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

 

 

 

Finally Friday Reads: State of Exhaustion

Posted: July 3, 2026 | Author: | Filed under: #FARTUS, #We are so Fucked, Cheater in Chief, Democracy Backsliding, Trump Family Crime Syndicate, Trump Grift Rodeo | Tags: , , , , , | 5 Comments

“You know Hegseth is chomping at the bit to annihilate something for the Dear Leader.” John Buss, @repeat1968

Good Day, Sky Dancers!

I’m sorry I am so late, but I had to do some errands, including getting a new passport, which was way more complicated than the last time I did it. I wanted to get it done for several reasons, but top of the list was avoiding getting a passport with Orange Caligula’s nasty picture on its cover. I also do not want to be used as a tool of that ish that is Freedom 250.

The weird thing was that while I was cheerfully smiling in my last passport, they told me I could no longer smile. I have to look neutral, which comes off as grim. The Postal worker actually said they want it to look like a mug shot now. I hope that doesn’t portend anything for the future. But, frankly, the look on my face basically says I’m a very unhappy American.

I thought I had given my PDF copy of my application a look through last night, but it was nothing compared to what they expect to see now. I had to do a handwritten version after the consensus was that my middle name was no longer needed. They also took my last passport. My first passport was part of a family passport. They no longer have those, I guess. I brought the one prior to that, when I was married, but much like my interest in all that,  they weren’t the least bit interested. The Postal workers were sighing about the entire mess as much as I was. I have no idea what started all this, but I have DOGE and AI in mind as the primary hypothesis.

The majority of us are pretty broke right now. So, I’m not planning on a vacation at the Riviera. Part of me really wants the passport again in case things get any worse around here. Day after day, our democracy seems to be backsliding more quickly than ever.  Trump, however, has a bigger grift going than ever. This New York Times story is worth checking out. It’s reported by Jason Horowitz. “Trump’s Huge Windfall Has Few Known Global Precedents. President Trump’s earnings in office are at a level once unimaginable for any leader of a liberal democracy, particularly a sitting American president.”

Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian prime minister and billionaire mogul who died in 2023, is often considered to have set the mold for President Trump with his mastery of the news media, gilded taste and, above all, legislative maneuvers that drew accusations of conflicts of interest.

Mr. Berlusconi passed laws that appeared tailor-made to protect and benefit his family’s vast business empire. And his annual earning disclosures showed he had been paid tens of millions of dollars while serving as prime minister.

This week, new financial disclosures suggested that Mr. Trump has broken that mold by making at least $2.2 billion in his first year back in the White House, including about $1.4 billion from his family’s cryptocurrency businesses.

Mr. Trump’s profits are a haul once unimaginable for any leader of a liberal democracy, particularly a sitting American president. No modern Western leader has ever publicly disclosed such big windfalls while in office.

The Trump family’s earnings, experts said, have moved him into an echelon of enrichment more associated with strongmen in Russia and Turkey.

His gains were all the more striking because the United States has long positioned itself as a standard-bearer for financial regulation, anti-graft measures and the rule of law. Yet his cryptocurrency earnings highlight an unusually glaring conflict: As president, Mr. Trump oversees the regulation of an industry that, as a businessman, he also greatly profits from.

The White House has denied that Mr. Trump or his family had engaged in conflicts of interest and he has personally brushed aside such concerns, saying this week: “I never speak to any of the people that run the money.”

That reluctance to acknowledge any conflict now makes it harder, experts said, for anti-corruption investigators in countries big and small to combat behavior that the United States, until Mr. Trump’s presidency, once condemned.

“How the U.S. behaved was quite influential in shaping international norms,” said Professor Liz David-Barrett, director of the Center for the Study of Corruption at the University of Sussex.

Now, Mr. Trump’s windfall has undermined the idea “that there is a standard to which we should all be aspiring,” she said. It was now easier for other global leaders to ask “‘why should I regulate my behavior?’ when the greatest power in the world” is not regulating its president, she added.

Newsweek has more numbers and analysis under this headline. “Trump Says Family Faces Constant ‘Conflict’ Under White House Spotlight.” The Trump Family Crime Syndicate knows no boundaries.

Questions surrounding the Trump family’s business interests have followed the president throughout both of his administrations, but critics say those concerns have intensified during his second term as the family’s portfolio expands into areas including cryptocurrency, international real estate and private investments.

Trump’s latest financial disclosure report drew particular attention because it showed substantial income tied to crypto ventures associated with the family. The filing included hundreds of millions of dollars connected to World Liberty Financial and related businesses.

Supporters of the president say that Trump has complied with applicable ethics requirements and note that federal conflict-of-interest laws do not require presidents to divest personal assets. Trump underscored that point in the CNBC interview, saying there was “nothing illegal” or improper about the family’s business activities.

Ethics watchdogs, including Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), along with Democratic lawmakers and former government ethics officials, have argued that the Trump family’s expanding business ventures create actual or perceived conflicts of interest.

Warren, the top Democrat on the Senate banking committee, accused Trump of “brazen crypto corruption” this week after the financial disclosures revealed his family’s cryptocurrency ventures made more than $1 billion since his return to office.

“The crypto legislation heading to the Senate floor must prevent the president, vice-president, senior administration officials, members of Congress, and their families from profiting off the crypto industry,” said Warren in a statement. “If it does not, it will only turbocharge Donald Trump’s brazen crypto corruption.”

It’s not the first time Warren has issued a warning over Trump’s financial dealings with his family. In May 2025, Warren and Sen. Chris Van Hollen sent a letter to President Trump urging him and his family to divest from World Liberty Financial. They wrote that: “Your personal financial entanglements with foreign governments threaten to undermine U.S. national security.”

There’s a lot of information in it about Trump’s sperm discharges.

The brothers have significantly expanded their business portfolio in recent years. Their highest-profile ventures include co-founding World Liberty Financial, a decentralized finance platform that has generated hundreds of millions of dollars for the Trump family through token sales and a stablecoin business. They also launched American Bitcoin in March 2025, a cryptocurrency mining company, and have backed ventures through 1789 Capital, where Donald Jr. is a partner investing in defense, AI and technology companies.

They have pursued international Trump-branded licensing agreements in countries including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, India and Romania, while expanding into firearms retail, drone technology and politically aligned consumer brands.

According to Forbes, Donald Jr.’s net worth increased six fold since between the presidential election in November 2024 and the end of Donald Trump’s first year back in office, in December 2025, jumping from $50 million to $300 million.

Something sure smells rotten. This is from The New Republic. “Kleptocracy Is Trump’s Most Lucrative Business Venture. His investments make money even when his ventures fail! ”  Timothy Noah has the story.

Being president of the United States is by far the most lucrative business venture of Donald Trump’s checkered business career. The June 30 release of his financial disclosure report makes this official. Trump has turned the American presidency into an extractive industry. In 2025, Trump mined more than $2.2 billion in income from being president, most of it from crypto, from which he extracted $1.4 billion. That’s all the more remarkable when you remember that crypto entered a slump last year and that investors in Trump’s crypto ventures who were not members of the Trump family lost $2.3 billion, according to a June 9 investigation by Tom Bergin of Reuters. It’s almost as if Trump’s ability to draw income from business ventures did not depend on those ventures being successful!

A cynic might observe that Trump’s special treatment is no different from that of American chief executives in the private sector who are similarly insulated from failure. But Trump’s payday puts theirs in the shade. The only CEO whose compensation exceeded Trump’s last year was Elon Musk, who (for now) is a category of one. Musk’s $158 billion pay package from Tesla last year was more than 15 times larger than the combined pay packages of the other 391 chief executives surveyed in late June by The Wall Street Journal.

If we set Musk aside, the highest-paid chief executive in the Journal’s ranking was Shankh Mitra, chief executive of Welltower, “a real estate investment trust focused on senior housing and healthcare.” Let’s leave for another day the ethics of harvesting a vast personal fortune from the physical and mental decline of one’s fellow human beings. My point here is that Mitra’s obscene pay package last year of $821 million was less than half of Trump’s $2.2 billion. Plus, I bet Mitra had to put in at least some actual work.

I observed a year ago that Trump is America’s first rentier president. A rentier is someone who makes his money through the possession of assets rather than the exertion of labor. Rentiers are capitalism’s nepo babies. Prior to Trump, the main rentier occupations were real estate and finance. Trump himself was a classic rentier capitalist, a rich kid who joined the family real estate business, exaggerated his success to a credulous tabloid press, and inherited $413 million from his more successful father. Trump moved the family business from dowdy apartment buildings in Brooklyn and Queens to luxury apartments and hotels in Manhattan and beyond, but many of these went bankrupt. In 2018, The Economist concluded Trump would have made more money had he been a more conventional rentier and invested daddy’s money in index funds.

The rentier presidency is a much more lucrative proposition than rentier capitalism, and one with which index funds can’t possibly compete. Crucially, there is no index fund that lets you acquire a stake without investing money or labor. During the 2024 presidential campaign the Trump family acquired a 60 percent stake in World Liberty Financial and was granted 75 percent on net revenues from token sales. (The Trump family stake in the company, the less valuable part of this deal, has since fallen to 38 percent.) Trump did not pay for these privileges, yet last year he earned more than $594 million from them. Neither is there any evidence, according to Reuters’ Bergin, that Trump ever paid for his stakes in the crypto firms ALT5 Sigma, American Bitcoin, or Celebration Coins. This last alone netted Trump more than $636 million last year.

One more short article before I ruin your Independence Day weekend. This is from Democracy Defenders Action.

Following is a statement by Amb. Norm Eisen (ret.), co-founder and board member of Democracy Defenders Action and Richard W. Painter, former associate counsel to President George W. Bush, regarding President Trump’s newly released financial disclosures. Amb. Eisen was the White House ethics czar for President Obama.

“President Trump’s financial disclosure reveals he is capitalizing on the presidency for personal gain on a staggering scale never seen in American history.

“Worse, he’s doing this while his administration refuses to regulate the very industry making him a billionaire several times over, leaving Americans exposed while his own meme coin soars. His cronies and family are up to their eyeballs in the grift.

“Make no mistake. His billions in personal profit don’t come out of thin air. Every dollar extracted from these schemes comes at a cost imposed directly on the American people—whether through weaker consumer protections, trust sold to the highest bidder or otherwise.

“Congress has the power to enact legislation now to prevent these types of conflicts of interest for the president, vice president and members of Congress themselves. They should also investigate and hold him accountable. By refusing to act, they are complicit.

“The American people will not tolerate this shocking greed. And they will hold accountable those who enabled it.”

I’m not sure about the American people’s inability to tolerate his shocking greed. I’m more worried they won’t pay attention to all the warnings and will not vote.

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

 

Monday Reads: Supreme Justice

Posted: June 29, 2026 | Author: | Filed under: #We are so Fucked, 2026 SCOTUS Decisions, Corrupt and Political SCOTUS, MIA Mitch McConnell, Polycrisis, Refugees | Tags: , , , , , | 10 Comments
"Old man seen wandering around Washington DC babbling to an imaginary crowd." John Buss, @repeat1968

“Old man seen wandering around Washington DC babbling to an imaginary crowd.” John Buss, @repeat1968

Good Day, Sky Dancers!

The Supreme Court of the United States released some interesting decisions today. For a change, some of them are likely to frustrate Orange Caligula. My guess is he’ll be on social media all day ranting. At least, we don’t have to hear the ongoing lies about that failure of a fair he did over the weekend.

One case sent mixed messages. I’ll start with that.

This is from Politico. “Supreme Court widens Trump’s power to fire agency leaders — except the Fed. The exception for the Federal Reserve is a blow to Trump’s efforts to prod the central bank to lower interest rates.” At least he won’t be able to increase the inflation rate through that nonsense.

The Supreme Court on Monday granted President Donald Trump sweeping power to control executive branch agencies, while effectively exempting the Federal Reserve.

The justices voted 6-3, along ideological lines, to scuttle a 91-year-old precedent that said Congress can limit the president’s ability to fire Senate-confirmed leaders to instances of “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”

But in a separate ruling, the high court voted 5-4 to rebuff Trump’s bid to carry out his firing Lisa Cook, a Fed member appointed by President Joe Biden. The decision, which allows Cook to remain in her post while litigation continues over the effort to dismiss her, is a blow to Trump’s efforts to prod the Fed to lower interest rates.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinions in both cases.

The court’s conservative majority has been whittling away for years at the 1935 ruling known as Humphrey’s Executor, which allowed Congress to limit presidents’ power to fire the leaders of certain agencies.

The justices finished off Humphrey’s Monday in a case brought by Federal Trade Commission member Rebecca Slaughter, whom Trump attempted to fire in March 2025.

“If anything more is left of Humphrey’s, we overrule it,” Roberts wrote. “This is not a close case….The FTC unquestionably exercises executive power, and must therefore be controlled by the Chief Executive, in whom such power is vested. It follows, then, that Slaughter served as the President’s subordinate at the FTC—and that the President was entitled to cut her tenure short.”

When the White House dismissed Slaughter last year, it provided no detailed reason, simply telling her in an email that she was terminated effective immediately because her continued service was “inconsistent with Administration’s priorities.”

Did I mention that Roberts is probably the worst Chief Justice ever? He’s not the least transparent about his politics, which include racism and the destruction of checks on the executive branch that are centuries old. This analysis is by Melissa Quinn of CBS News. “Supreme Court expands presidential firing power, overturning 90-year-old ruling.”

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that removal protections for members of the Federal Trade Commission are unconstitutional and overturned a 90-year-old decision that allowed Congress to shield members of certain independent agencies from being fired by the president at will.

The decision from the high court expands the president’s power over many independent boards and commissions, which Congress had insulated from political pressure by saying their members could only be removed by the president for cause.

In a 1935 decision in a case known as Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which involved removal protections for the FTC, the Supreme Court said Congress could restrict the president’s ability to fire officials from multi-member agencies at will.

But the ruling from the high court’s conservative majority in the case Trump v. Slaughter overturns that 90-year-old decision and marks the culmination of a years-long weakening of the New Deal-era precedent.

The ruling was 6 to 3, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing for the majority, joined by the other conservative justices. The three liberals dissented, and Justice Sonia Sotomayor read a summary of her dissent from the bench, a rare occurrence that signals strong disagreement with a decision. Roberts wrote that limits on the president’s ability to fire those who wield executive power on his behalf infringe on his constitutional authority.

The FTC of today, the court’s majority found, “unquestionably” exercises executive powers and therefore must be under the president’s control.

“Although it is up to the Senate to decide whether to confirm those with whom the President would prefer to work, neither Congress nor the courts may saddle him with those with whom he cannot work,” Roberts wrote. “Subordinates who exercise the President’s power are subject to removal by him. Then, and only then, can they remain accountable to the President, and the President to the people.”

And, of course, all this diddling with election laws and voting access basically limits the accountability of said President to said people. That’s my major takeaway. And, of course, Orange Caligula is already ignoring the parts he doesn’t like. This is from the New York Times. “Trump Renews Threat to Fire Fed Governor in Wake of Court Loss. The president promised to “take appropriate action immediately” against Lisa D. Cook, a Fed governor.”

President Trump renewed his intention to try and fire Lisa D. Cook from the Federal Reserve on Monday, saying he would look for a way to oust her after the Supreme Court blocked his previous attempt to fire a sitting governor at the central bank.

In a social media post, Mr. Trump described the Supreme Court’s 5-to-4 decision as “procedural,” adding that he would “take appropriate action immediately to make sure that someone who has committed wrongdoing will not be making vital decisions concerning the Welfare of the United States of America!”

Mr. Trump took the extraordinary step of trying to fire Ms. Cook from the Fed last year, claiming that she had misrepresented her finances in order to obtain more favorable mortgage terms. Ms. Cook has not been charged with a crime, and has denied any wrongdoing.

She challenged her firing in court, as her lawyers sought to argue that the attempted dismissal fit a pattern by Mr. Trump, who has sought to pressure the Fed into lowering interest rates. In late September, a federal judge allowed Ms. Cook to continue serving in the role as she contested the legality of the firing, prompting the administration to appeal to the Supreme Court.

The opinion, written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., kept that decision in place. The majority found on Monday that the president had not properly afforded Ms. Cook the ability to respond to the allegations against her.

But the decision still left much unanswered. While the justices emphasized the uniquely important nature of the Fed as an independent body, they did not clearly define the conditions under which Mr. Trump could fire a Senate-confirmed governor.

“To be clear, the ultimate question of whether the president can remove Cook for cause will depend in part on the underlying facts,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the majority.

“In this opinion, we have not addressed the facts, as they have yet to be found or analyzed under the relevant legal standards,” he continued. “Rather, we have simply addressed the parties’ arguments about the appropriate legal standards under which the facts must be evaluated.”

It’s just a matter of time before Trump starts raging on this decision, as covered by the AP. “Supreme Court rules states can count late-arriving mailed ballots, rejecting Trump-led challenge.” Mark Sherman has the lede on this.

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that states can count ballots that arrive after Election Day, a persistent target of President Donald Trump.

The 5-4 decision rejected a Republican-led attack on laws in more than half the states and the District of Columbia that permit mailed ballots to arrive and be counted some number of days after the election, provided they are postmarked by Election Day. The outcome spares officials the headache of changing their ballot rules just a few months before the 2026 midterm congressional elections.

In just over half those states, the more forgiving deadlines apply only to ballots cast by military and overseas voters.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the court’s majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the three liberal justices.

Federal laws setting a single Election Day “leave open when those votes must be received,” Barrett wrote.

Congress could change the law, she said. “If varied deadlines for ballot receipt similarly call for a national solution, the American people must choose it through their elected representatives,” Barrett wrote.

So, Orange Caligula’s latest hissy fit this morning about the court’s decisions is this one, as reported by Politico‘s Emilio Perez Ibarguen. Maybe with all this ranting, he’ll blow a gasket and join Mitch McConnell in whatever ether he’s disappeared into. “Trump doubles down on SAVE America Act after Supreme Court loss on mail voting. The president’s desire for a signature elections bill has all but frozen Hill Republicans’ agenda.”

President Donald Trump intensified his efforts to pass his signature elections bill on Monday after the Supreme Court handed the president a loss in his push to add restrictions to mail voting.

The decision — where the Supreme Court ruled that states may choose to count ballots that arrive after Election Day, so long as they are either postmarked before then or otherwise deemed cast on time — sparked a flurry of activity Monday among the president and his allies.

“In light of the tremendous loss in the Supreme Court today concerning Voter’s Rights, and the fact that ‘people’s’ votes are allowed to be counted LONG AFTER an Election is over, it is more important than ever to pass THE SAVE AMERICA ACT,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

Trump has advocated for severely restricting mail voting, which he has claimed without evidence is responsible for widespread fraud.

The Trump administration has also sought to empower the Postal Service to withhold ballots if states don’t hand over their voter rolls, though an executive order instructing the agency to do so was batted down by a federal judge.

A core tenet of the SAVE America Act, according to the president, would be to drastically limit when voting by mail is available to citizens with few exceptions, alongside requiring voters to present photo identification and proof of citizenship

The president has fixated on the SAVE America Act, even as some Senate Republicans insist the legislation simply does not have enough votes. Trump called out five senators as “Hold Outs” on the bill, naming Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

Monday’s ruling upheld a Mississippi law allowing election officials to count mail-in ballots received up to five days after Election Day. A bipartisan mix of over a dozen states allow at least some ballots that arrive after Election Day to still be counted so long as they are postmarked before then. More states extend that grace period to certain military and overseas voters.

Okay, so my big question today is where the fuck is Mitch McConnell? Why aren’t we getting any status reports on his health? Is the Republican Party hiding something? We have to go to the local news just to get a hint of why he’s not voting this week, and whether he’s even alive at this point. This is from the Lexington Herald Leader. “Few details known on Mitch McConnell’s health 2 weeks after hospitalization.” This is reported by Hannah Pinski.

The public has received few details surrounding Sen. Mitch McConnell’s health condition after he was admitted into the hospital two weeks ago. A spokesperson for McConnell’s office did not have any updated information regarding the Kentucky senator’s health to share as of Monday.

McConnell, 84, was hospitalized June 14, but his staff did not give details about his condition at the time, other than to say he was receiving “excellent care.” During the Republican Party of Kentucky’s Lincoln Day Dinner in Lexington June 20, Rep. Andy Barr told reporters after the event that he’d exchanged text messages with McConnell, saying “he’s good.” McConnell’s office has not confirmed whether he is still hospitalized. On June 22, spokesperson Stephanie Penn said he would not vote in the Senate that week but is working “closely” with staff as his health continues to recover. As of Wednesday, the Senate is not in session and will reconvene July 13. McConnell has held his Senate seat since 1985 and is in his seventh term. From 2007 to 2025, he served as the leader of the Senate GOP. He is not seeking reelection this year.

The reason that this is important and is leading to conspiracy theories about proof of life is that his death or resignation would mean a special election would need to be held. This would drain Republican Resources away from the Midterm elections and possibly further endanger their chances of holding on to majorities in both houses. I’m not into conspiracy theories, but all this is extremely suspicious IMHO.

There are more decisions coming tomorrow. The Hill‘s Jack Schonfeld has the list and the associated ramifications. Let me just add that these are big and also controversial topics. “Supreme Court to hand down final decisions Tuesday: Here’s what’s left.”

Here’s what the court will hand down beginning 10 a.m. EDT Tuesday:

Birthright citizenship

President Trump’s banner immigration policy hangs in the balance.

The Supreme Court is set to decide whether Trump’s restrictions on birthright citizenship can stand, or if they are unconstitutional.

It’s a major test for the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to all persons born on U.S. soil and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

The president’s executive order, which has not gone into effect amid legal challenges, limits birthright citizenship to children with at least one parent with citizenship or permanent legal status.

It upends the conventional understanding that the 14th Amendment leaves room for only narrow exceptions, like babies born on enemy warships and the children of foreign ambassadors.

The president, who attended the Supreme Court’s oral arguments in the case, hasn’t sounded optimistic about the case.

“This decision by the Supreme Court is a very big one,” Trump said in the Oval Office last month. “They’ll probably rule against me, because they seem to like doing that.”

Transgender athlete bans

The Supreme Court is preparing to say its piece on the national debate surrounding school sports and transgender athletes.

…

Campaign finance

The Supreme Court will rule on a GOP-backed challenge to a campaign finance provision.

At issue is how much money candidates can spend in coordination with their political party.

It’s going to be a busy conscientious week.

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

Finally Friday Reads: When Will It Ever End?

Posted: June 26, 2026 | Author: | Filed under: #We are so Fucked, Broligarchy, Constitutional Crises, Corrupt and Political SCOTUS, corruption, Watergate | Tags: , , , , , | 9 Comments

“Should have just went with this in the first place. Honest Don reflects on his achievements.” John Buss, @repeat1968

Good Day, Sky Dancers!

Every time we think about Orange Caligula, we have to think about what comes after him if he doesn’t make it through his second term. It’s not likely that someone reasonable will take his place in a party that no longer goes by reason. For all intents and purposes, we still have to put the Shillbilly at the top of that list. I’m not really feeling good about that at all.

This is a headline from the New York Times this morning. “Vance Downplays Watergate and Compares Himself to Nixon. The vice president said that the scandal that ended Richard Nixon’s presidency would be “like a 12-hour news story” if it happened today and that the “deep state” had taken down Nixon.” Be afraid. Be very afraid.  Emily Davies has the story.

Vice President JD Vance downplayed the significance of the Watergate scandal during a speech on Thursday, saying that the controversy that toppled President Richard M. Nixon would be “like a 12-hour news story” if it happened today.

“The idea that it would have taken down a presidency is crazy,” Mr. Vance added, saying he had been joking backstage about the scandal before his appearance at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in Yorba Linda, Calif.

Mr. Vance, who is widely seen as a potential 2028 presidential contender, compared himself to Nixon, who resigned in disgrace after his administration tried to cover up its involvement in a break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters.

“Young senator, vice president, writes some best-selling books, is hated by the media,” Mr. Vance said. “It kind of sounds like JD Vance. I’ve always liked Richard Nixon.”

Mr. Vance also conspiratorially compared the political forces that pushed Nixon out of office to President Trump’s opponents.

“If you look at the story of how the deep state took down Richard Nixon,” Mr. Vance said, “it’s not all that different from what the same groups of people, the same institutions, tried to do to Donald Trump in the first Trump administration.”

Mr. Vance’s remarks were notable in part because of how Mr. Trump and his administration have pushed to expand presidential power and test the boundaries of the law. Mr. Vance, a critic of Mr. Trump’s during his first presidential bid in 2016, has become a fierce loyalist and stood by the president through many controversies, casting him as the victim of an unjust political system.

The vice president’s defense of Nixon followed a similar playbook, seeking to rewrite the historical narrative of a scandal-scarred president so that he becomes the target of a witch hunt instead of the perpetrator of wrongdoing.

A spokesman for Mr. Vance did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Mr. Vance was in California in part to promote his new memoir, “Communion: Finding My Way Back to Faith” and in part to raise money for the Republican Party.

I never thought I’d see the day when a candidate desperately seeking the presidency would give an all hail to Nixon.  Those of us that remember all findingof those Senate hearings know that finding any one that supported him, especially once the cover-up became clear, were clearly few and far between.

This headline from the AP headline has me shaking my head that I may need a neck brace. “Vance says Watergate would be a ’12-hour news story’ today. Vice President JD Vance said the Watergate scandal that brought down President Richard Nixon would have been a 12-hour blip in today’s news cycle, and he drew parallels between Nixon and President Donald Trump — arguing both were targeted by “deep state” forces.”

Yup, Arlen Specter was about as deep state as you could get.  Excuse me while I choke on laughter.

It’s obvious that these people have no respect for our Republic or it’s rule of Constitutional Law. This is democracy backsliding at its jaded worst.  This is the analysis by the Washington Post. “Vance dismisses Watergate scandal, says ‘deep state’ went after Nixon. The vice president said he admired Nixon and drew parallels between the past president, who resigned amid pressure in 1974, and Trump today.”  This is fascist level over-reach.

Vice President JD Vance on Thursday expressed sympathy for former president Richard M. Nixon, suggesting that Nixon was wrongly forced out as president in 1974 and comparing his political travails decades ago to those facing President Donald Trump now.

“As I joked … backstage, if Watergate happened tomorrow, it would be like a 12-hour news story,” Vance said in remarks at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in California. “The idea that it would have taken down a presidency is crazy.”

A spokesperson for Vance did not immediately respond to questions about whether the vice president was being facetious and how he was defining Watergate.

… Naftali, a Columbia University presidential historian, referenced tapes that contained thousands of hours of Nixon’s Oval Office conversations.

“You can hear him suborn perjury on the tapes. He’s telling an intermediary, what to tell someone who’s about to be interviewed by the FBI, what to say and what not to say,” said Naftali, who oversaw the Nixon library’s Watergate exhibit. “You can hear Nixon being told that money had been found to hire teamsters to go and break the bones of demonstrators. That’s all illegal.”

“It’s not as if it’s a matter of partisan interpretation. The evidence is overwhelming,” Naftali said, offering additional examples of Nixon’s efforts to subvert legal protections. “If he does know all of this, he’s telegraphing the kind of president he hopes to be.”

Again, I’m just gobsmacked. How do you even get through university or high school, let alone law school and come up with this shit of an interpretation of Nixon?  Speaking of  Orange Caligula and his tendency to pick lying bags of scum who are only interested in power and grifting, here’s an NBC headline to bring back some memories of his last ugly term. “Ex-Trump adviser John Bolton pleads guilty to mishandling classified information.  Bolton served as White House national security adviser during Trump’s first term.”

Former national security adviser John Bolton pleaded guilty in federal court Friday to mishandling classified information related to his work during the first Trump administration.

Bolton, who served as White House national security adviser during President Donald Trump’s first term and has since been a frequent critic of the president, appeared Friday morning for a re-arraignment in Greenbelt, Maryland, before Judge Theodore D. Chuang, an appointee of then-President Barack Obama.

Bolton pleaded guilty to one count of unauthorized retention of national defense information out of the 18 with which he was initially charged. He faces a prison sentence of up to 60 months and has agreed to pay $2.25 million, prosecutors said. He is set to be sentenced Oct. 28.

Abbe Lowell, Bolton’s attorney, said in a statement Friday that the former national security adviser and U.N. ambassador “did what real leaders do. He took responsibility for a mistake he made, thereby saving the government resources to pursue a case that could expose additional sensitive information.”

Hayden O’Byrne, acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ’s national security division, said in a statement that the plea agreement “ought to send a message to other public officials whom the public has entrusted with classified, national defense information. If you willfully mishandle these state secrets, the Department of Justice, led by the National Security Division, will investigate and prosecute you to the fullest extent of the law.”

Bolton was originally indicted in October 2025, charged with eight counts of transmission of national defense information and 10 counts of retention of national defense information.

He pleaded not guilty to the charges and faced up to 10 years in prison, a $250,000 fine per count, and three years of special release.

Sigh, “special release.” Why to punish this truly evil people courts!  Then there’s this guy. This is from PBS News. “WATCH: Stephen Miller says ‘America’s doors are closed fully to asylum seekers’ after Supreme Court rulings.”

The Supreme Court voted 6-3 on Thursday to allow the Trump administration to end legal protections for migrants fleeing violence and natural disaster in Haiti and Syria, exposing hundreds of thousands more people to potential deportation.

The Department of Homeland Security can now end temporary protected status, a program that protects a total of 1.3 million people from 17 countries.

The Supreme Court also voted 6-3 to clear the way for the Trump administration to potentially revive an immigration policy once used to turn back migrants seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border. The court overturned a lower court order blocking the practice that limited the number of people who could apply for asylum each day.

EThis crap doesn’t reflect the American Values I grew up with.  This makes the Guilded Age look like a Socialist Picnic. “Elon Musk’s zero accountability life. Elon Musk goes berserk if you talk about USAID.” This is from the magazine The Argument. Kobe Yank-Jacobs provides the news and analysis.

Elon Musk really doesn’t want you to say he’s responsible for the deaths of millions.

Earlier this week, Musk threatened to sue Rep. Ro Khanna for charging him with destroying the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and putting millions of lives at risk around the world:

“There needs to be accountability for Elon Musk,” Khanna said. “You know, they’re celebrating that he created 4,400 millionaires [with his SpaceX IPO], but they don’t talk about the 4.5 million children around the world who he possibly sentenced to death by dismantling USAID.”

In response, Musk called Khanna a liar, threatened to sue, and said he should be in prison.

But Khanna is making a perfectly reasonable claim here. In that quote, he is (carefully) citing a peer-reviewed study that estimated the effects of dismantling USAID. It found that Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) will result in 14 million deaths overall by 2030, of which 4.5 million will be children under the age of 5.

This is probably a high-end estimate, but even lower end projections with different methodologies sit between 670,000 and 1.6 million annual deaths compared to a fiscal year 2023 baseline.

In other words, the toll from USAID cuts by seems to be at best around two-thirds of a million people annually1; that’s about as many people as were killed during the Civil War. At worst, Musk is tied to the deaths of 14 million.

If DOGE had managed to cut tens of billions of dollars from the federal budget, Musk and his defenders would certainly have taken credit. It’s bizarre then to disclaim responsibility for the tragic consequences of the cuts they did make.

Yet Musk and his defenders insist that Khanna is somehow slandering him.

There are a couple of interlocking issues worth separating here: one is the factual question of what actually happened to USAID, where Musk is now downplaying his actions. A second question is what is likely to happen out in the real world to real people without USAID. And the final issue is whether Musk should be subject to basic Congressional oversight for wrecking whole government agencies as an outside adviser to the president.

So, I’m cutting it short today because frankly, I can’t read any more of this myself, and I’m still working on the house. I just hope the election is as clean as possible and that people come out in droves.  I’ve really had enough of this.

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

 

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →