I suppose the top story is the government shutdown that began last night at midnight, but I think Trump’s unhinged speech to 800 top military officers is even more urgent. The unprecedented gathering of military leaders, who were forced to travel to Virginia from all over the world, began with an insulting presentation by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and ended with an utterly insane speech by Trump. I watched quite a bit of it with the sound off. I’d much rather read closed captions than listen to Hegseth’s or Trump’s voices.
Let’s get the shutdown out of the way first. The government shut down at midnight last night. Here’s what’s happening now:
This is the third time Trump has presided over a federal funding lapse, the first since his return to the White House this year, in a remarkable record that underscores the polarizing divide over budget priorities and a political climate that rewards hard-line positions rather than more traditional compromises.
As the federal government teeters on the brink of a shutdown, workers across many agencies received identical emails late Tuesday afternoon blaming Democrats for the possibility. The Handbasket was the first to learn that the message was mandated by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) via an intra-agency email to leadership and reinforced on a subsequent call. And there was one clear stipulation: Absolutely no modifications to the language.
At the time of publication, I was able to confirm at least 16 federal agencies had received the OMB email ahead of the midnight funding deadline, including the Departments of State, Health and Human Services, and Interior. Here is the text of the message shared with me by numerous federal workers alarmed by its contents (emphasis mine):
“President Trump opposes a government shutdown, and strongly supports the enactment of H.R. 5371, which is a clean Continuing Resolution to fund the government through November 21, and already passed the U.S. House of Representatives. Unfortunately, Democrats are blocking this Continuing Resolution in the U.S. Senate due to unrelated policy demands. If Congressional Democrats maintain their current posture and refuse to pass a clean Continuing Resolution to keep the government funded before midnight on September 30, 2025, federal appropriated funding will lapse.
A funding lapse will result in certain government activities ceasing due to a lack of appropriated funding. In addition, designated pre-notified employees of this agency would be temporarily furloughed. P.L. 116-1 would apply.
The agency has contingency plans in place for executing an orderly shutdown of activities that would be affected by any lapse in appropriations forced by Congressional Democrats. Further Information about those plans will be distributed should a lapse occur.”
The marching orders went out to agencies’ leadership via email at 1:30pm ET, a government source confirms. Then on a 3pm intra-agency call with around 300 participants, a member of OMB leadership reinforced the mandatory nature of the note and stressed that no modifications could be made to the message.
During any other period of recent American history, this email would have been deemed a flagrant violation of the Hatch Act. The law was passed, according to the US Office of Special Counsel website, “to ensure that federal programs are administered in a nonpartisan fashion, to protect federal employees from political coercion in the workplace, and to ensure that federal employees are advanced based on merit and not based on political affiliation.”
In the past, federal workers could be reprimanded for something as simple as a political social media post. But if the past eight months have shown us anything, it’s that this administration feels unencumbered by the law.
Last Thursday, September 25, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth suddenly announced he was calling about 800 of the nation’s top military generals and admirals, along with their top enlisted advisors, to meet at Marine Corps Base Quantico, in Virginia, today. Such a meeting was unprecedented, and its suddenness meant military leaders across the world had to drop everything to run to Washington, D.C., at enormous financial cost for the country. Under those extraordinary circumstances, speculation about what Hegseth intended to say or do at the meeting has been widespread.
Now we know. This morning, in front of a giant flag backdrop that echoed the opening scene from the movie Patton, Hegseth harangued the career military leaders, pacing as if he were giving a TED talk. The event was streamed live to the public, making it clear that the hurry to get everyone to Washington, D.C., in person was not about secrecy.
Pete Hegseth lectures top military leaders.
In his speech, Hegseth reiterated his vision of a military based in what he calls the “warrior ethos.” Ignoring the military’s mission of preventing wars through deterrence, its professional and highly educated officer corps, and its modern structure as a triumph of logistics, he told the military leaders that today was “the liberation of America’s warriors, in name, in deed and in authorities. You kill people and break things for a living. You are not politically correct and don’t necessarily belong always in polite society.”
He claimed that “we have the strongest, most powerful, most lethal, and most prepared military on the planet. That is true, full stop. Nobody can touch us. It’s not even close.” But then Hegseth, who became defense secretary from his position as a weekend host on the Fox News Channel, complained that “our warriors” are not “led by the most capable and qualified combat leaders.”
He claimed that “foolish and reckless politicians” had forced the military “to focus on the wrong things” and that it had promoted too many leaders “based on their race, based on gender quotas.” “We became the woke department,” he said. “We are done with that sh*t.” He is loosening rules about hazing and bullying, changing physical fitness reforms with the idea that they will get women out of combat roles, and prohibiting beards, which will force Black men out of the service, for Black men suffer at a much higher rate than white men do from a chronic skin condition that makes shaving painful and can cause scarring.
He also said he was tired of seeing “fat troops” and “fat generals and admirals,” and that he would institute a second physical fitness test every year.
“[I]f the words I’m speaking today are making your heart sink,” Hegseth said, “then you should do the honorable thing and resign.”
Trump’s speech was largely incoherent and included many of his familiar gripes, but its basic purpose came through loud and clear. He doesn’t believe the U.S. military should be dealing with foreign threats. Instead, he plans to use active duty military troops to police the U.S. Southern border and also to attack “the enemy within”–protesters in Democratic U.S. cities.
The military audience sat through these speeches in stone-faced silence.
Reactions to Hegseth’s presentation and Trump’s speech:
Longtime Pentagon reporter Helene Cooper said that she can’t find any military officials who attended the meeting in Virginia with President Donald Trump and Secretary Pete Hegseth and liked what they heard.
“I have yet to find a single military official who was in the audience today who thought that this was a good presentation,” she told MSNBC on Tuesday afternoon.
“All I’ve had from them so far, from the people I’ve talked to, is a combination of disbelief that some of them were made to fly from, some of them, Asia, from all over the world … all the way to Quanico to listen to the same familiar type of culture war complaints that we’ve been having since Trump was reelected,” she added, calling Trump’s remarks a “campaign-style stump speech.”
“Nothing that was said today could not have been put in an email or in a directive. So there’s that, to begin with. There’s also the fact that so much of this was partisan, and this is a military that is supposed to present itself as nonpartisan. So you didn’t hear the kind of cheering that we usually get, because President Trump is used to playing for the type of crowds that favor him,” Cooper explained. “And so he’s not very used to performing in front of an audience that’s just giving, looking back stone-faced. But that’s what you were getting from these generals.”
The other thing she noted is that she’s gotten “so many emails from women in the military” who are seeing this as a message “that they are not welcome.”
The president talked at length, and his comments should have confirmed to even the most sympathetic observer that he is, as the kids say, not okay. Several of Hegseth’s people said in advance of the senior-officer conclave that its goal was to energize America’s top military leaders and get them to focus on Hegseth’s vision for a new Department of War. But the generals and admirals should be forgiven if they walked out of the auditorium and wondered: What on earth is wrong with the commander in chief?
Trump seemed quieter and more confused than usual; he is not accustomed to audiences who do not clap and react to obvious applause lines. “I’ve never walked into a room so silent before,” he said at the outset. (Hegseth had the same awkward problem earlier, waiting for laughs and applause that never came.) The president announced his participation only days ago, and he certainly seemed unprepared.
Trump started rambling right out of the gate. But first, the president channeled his inner Jeb Bush, asking the officers to clap—but, you know, only if they felt like it.
Just have a good time. And if you want to applaud, you applaud. And if you want to do anything you want, you can do anything you want. And if you don’t like what I’m saying, you can leave the room. Of course, there goes your rank; there goes your future.
Laughs rippled through the room.
Trump addresses top military leaders.
Trump then wandered around, lost in the halls of history. He talked about how the Department of War was renamed in the 1950s. (It was in the late 1940s.) At one point, he mentioned that the Atomic Energy Commission had confirmed that his strike on Iran had destroyed Tehran’s nuclear program. (Iran still has a nuclear program, and the AEC hasn’t existed since the mid-’70s.) He whined about the “Gulf of America” and how he beat the Associated Press in court on the issue. (The case is still ongoing.) The Israeli-Palestinian conflict? “I said”—he did not identify to whom—“‘How long have you been fighting?’ ‘Three thousand years, sir.’ That’s a long time. But we got it, I think, settled.” [….]
And so it went, as Trump recycled old rally speeches, full of his usual grievances, lies, and misrepresentations; his obsessions with former Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama; and his sour disappointment in the Nobel Prize committee. (“They’ll give it to some guy that didn’t do a damn thing,” he said.) He congratulated himself on tariffs, noting that the money could buy a lot of battleships, “to use an old term.” And come to think of it, he said, maybe America should build battleships again, from steel, not that papier-mâché and aluminum stuff the Navy is apparently using now: “Aluminum that melts if it looks at a missile coming at it. It starts melting as the missile is about two miles away.”
Ohhhkayyyy….
As comical as many of Trump’s comments were, the president’s nakedly partisan appeal to U.S. military officers was a violation of every standard of American civil-military relations, and exactly what George Washington feared could happen with an unscrupulous commander in chief. The most ominous part of his speech came when he told the military officers that they would be part of the solution to domestic threats, fighting the “enemy from within.” He added, almost as a kind of trollish afterthought, that he’d told Hegseth, “We should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military—National Guard, but military—because we’re going into Chicago very soon. That’s a big city with an incompetent governor. Stupid governor.”
This farrago of fantasy, menace, and autocratic peacocking is the kind of thing that the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan evocatively called “boob bait for the Bubbas” and that George Orwell might have called “prolefeed.” It’s one thing to serve it up to an adoring MAGA crowd: They know that most of it is nonsense and only some of it is real. They find it entertaining, and they can take or leave as much of Trump’s rhetorical junk-food buffet as they would like. It is another thing entirely to aim this kind of sludge at military officers, who are trained and acculturated to treat every word from the president with respect, and to regard his thoughts as policy.
In targeting the military’s professionalism and nonpartisanship, Trump laid the groundwork for further lawless domestic use of the military, including illegally in law enforcement. It was a harbinger of a more muscular and oppressive authoritarianism than Trump has mustered so far.
As I watched the flag officers flown in from around the world sit uncomfortably for absurd speeches by the president and his callow defense secretary, I came to see it as the closest Trump could get to a mass firing of the officer corps.
Imagine the other groups of federal workers that Trump has targeted sitting in those seats: government scientists, foreign aid experts, prosecutors and investigators, inspectors and regulators, human resource professionals. They were summarily fired, often in violation of the law, but the generals and admirals are more untouchable than that. Not entirely off limits, as we already seen with some Pentagon terminations, especially of officers who are women or people of color. But for a variety of practical and political reasons, a sweeping purge of generals isn’t feasible.
Audience of 800 top military officers sat stone faced through Hegseth’s and Trump’s speeches.
What is feasible is is to begin to erode the military culture. To emphasize loyalty over merit. To prize fealty over competence. To punish truth-telling and reward convenient fictions. Trump touched on all of those things in a long, rambling speech that could be confused with incoherence.
Trump, as commander in chief, already had constitutional power over his captive audience of flag officers. What he proceeded to do yesterday, with Hegseth’s assistance, was to assert the power of his cult of personality over them. If that made your stomach turn, Hegseth told them, then you should resign.
As a group, this is not what the officers corps signed up for. They are steeped not just in military tradition but in civilian control of the armed services, the chain of command, laws of war, rules of engagement, and the proper role of the military in a free society. These each consist of sets of guardrails, expectations, and values that, if not anathema to Trump, are entirely foreign to him. He is indifferent to them at best, but more likely he is threatened by them because they stand outside of his own power base.
Trump has checked off the list of independent sources of political power that authoritarians typically target: the courts, law enforcement, the press, universities, and civil society organizations, amon others. The military remains a key holdout. But none of these institutions can resist alone, and even together they can’t resist forever without broad-based cultural support for them. That is going to be the real test of our time.
Naveed Shah, a veteran and activist who served as an enlisted public affairs specialist – an army journalist – uncharacteristically found himself searching for words to describe the address of the newly styled secretary of war to flag officers on Tuesday.
“A lot of the words that are coming to me aren’t fit to print,” said Shah, policy director for Common Defense, a veterans advocacy organization. “The people in that room who have served for 20, 30-plus years in uniform do not need Pete Hegseth to tell them about warrior ethos.”
Hegseth’s hour-long Ted talk-style address touching on physical fitness, the doctrine of lethality and the perils of DEI certainly drew more attention than a policy memo might have, and perhaps more than Donald Trump’s rambling, politically charged hour-long speech that followed.
But the attention came at the cost of respect, said Dana Pittard, a retired army general who commanded soldiers in Iraq and co-author of Hunting the Caliphate.
“I thought it was insulting,” Pittard said of the address, rejecting Hegseth’s assertion that senior officers of color – like himself – had benefitted from a non-existent quota system for promotions.
Online chatter in military groups ahead of the unprecedented, secrecy-shrouded meeting of 800 generals and admirals called to Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia had revolved around a demand for some loyalty oath to the administration, or public firings or a declaration of war. Some described it as karmic revenge for decades of mandatory hour-long safety briefings held by unit commanders before dismissing troops for the weekend. Many also wondered if the expensive challenge to security could have been an email.
“Certainly, addressing the troops could be useful or beneficial, but to call 800-plus generals and senior enlisted advisers from around the world into this room just before a government shutdown? It’s not just bad optics or strategy,” Shah said. “A bad cold could have threatened our entire chain of command.”
Pittard said it was well within the authority of a defense secretary to call a meeting of generals, but that the display was “egotistical” and a waste of resources. And Trump’s subsequent comments created “a dangerous, slippery slope … to make it so partisan”, he said.
“He talked about the previous commander in chief, president Biden, and then talked about the ‘enemy within’. That is a dangerous slippery slope to be referring to that to the leaders of the US military. Very dangerous.”
Six months ago, I wrote a piece urging soldiers to leave the United States military. At the time, the possibility that the president might use the military as a tool to unjustly abuse US citizens was still somewhat theoretical. At the risk of being repetitive, events in the world make me feel compelled to write, once again: Leave the military now. The time when you can say that you did not understand what might happen is coming to an end.
Ann Telnaaes The actual enemy within.
Yesterday, the Secretary of Defense and the Commander in Chief gave speeches to all of our nation’s generals, who they had ordered to assemble in Washington. It is bad enough, I imagine, for all of these accomplished career officers to be subjected to the performative tirade of Pete Hegseth, a childish television host, installed as their superior, ranting about the need to be more macho, fairly dripping with overcompensation for his various inadequacies. Yet if Hegseth’s speech was unnecessary, bigoted, and cartoonish, the performance of the Commander in Chief was much more substantively dangerous.
First, because it must have been clear to all of those assembled generals that Donald Trump, who possesses complete and total control of the military and its awesome powers, is, at best, mentally unwell. His speech, characteristically, was an incoherent stream-of-consciousness rant consisting mostly of narcissism and fiction and personal grievances. The mind of the man who has the ability to tell all of these officers what to do is broken and impervious to facts and reason. This is the man who can tell you when and how and who to kill.
“They’re brave in our inner cities, which we’re going to be talking about because it’s a big part of war now, it’s a big part of war,” Trump said, speaking about firemen. “But the firemen go up on ladders and you have people shooting at them while they’re up on ladders. I don’t even know if anybody heard that. And actually don’t talk about it much, but I think you have to. Our firemen are incredible. They’re up on one of these ladders that goes way up to the sky rescuing people, and you have animals shooting at them — shooting bullets at firemen that are way up in death territory.” This is your boss.
Worse, the president made his intentions for the military clear. “You know, the Democrats run most of the cities that are in bad shape. We have many cities in great shape too, by the way. I want you to know that. But it seems that the ones that are run by the radical left Democrats, what they’ve done to San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, they’re very unsafe places and we’re going to straighten them out one by one,” he said. “And this is going to be a major part for some of the people in this room. That’s a war too. It’s a war from within.”
Nolan’s warning:
I am not going to try to convince generals in the United States armed forces to embrace my own personal moral beliefs. Rather, I would urge them all to consider their own moral beliefs. Honor and courage are often touted as the highest military values. What do those values demand of these generals at this moment in history? To salute their deranged superiors, and then, in private, to mutter under their breath about how incompetent and awful those commanders are? Is it honorable for these hundreds of generals to go forward doing their very best to carry out the will of a president who vows openly to use the military to suppress his domestic political enemies, and who has in fact already done that in major cities? Is it courageous of these officer to—for the sake of their own careers—continue to robotically serve a man who is obviously making decisions based upon things that are not true, and who is obsessed with revenge above all, and who is quite straightforward about his intentions to use the military to forcefully oppress Americans? Is that what honor and courage demand of the highest ranking officers in our military? Nothing at all?
It is common for people in the military to point out that they took an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States,” and to imply that their allegiance to that oath would prevent them from carrying out truly unjust orders. I can’t help but notice that the point at which this moral duty to stop obeying orders kicks in appears to recede forever into the future. We, the citizens, are assured that there exists some ill-defined moment at which the personal moral code of military soldiers and officers will kick in and stop an out-of-control Commander in Chief from using the military for purposes of tyranny.
Well? The tyrant is here. Talk is cheap. This theoretical guardrail of our democracy would be much more comforting if it were ever possible to see it produce some tangible action.
That’s all I have for you today. It’s just one more scary day in the Trump regime. What do you think? What else is on your mind?
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
“Eagle eye Kash solves another one!” John Buss, @repeat1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
My kids were Quarter Rats. We lived in the lower quarter for five years before settling about a mile downriver in a small, single, pre-Civil War house near the Mississippi. Prior to COVID-19, I still gigged there consistently. My last gig was on Bourbon Street, accompanying and DJing for two talented Drag Queens doing Drag Queen Cabaret. It ended in a very Bourbon Street way.
The club finally got to return to its strip club days when its permit got approved, and like me, all good things move downriver where the local talent can shine, and up until Airbnb forced tourists on us, we could just be New Orleans. I keep meaning to go back to the one activity that truly relaxes me, but like most of my neighbors, I fear the people who come from other cities that scream and yell biblical obscenities at my GLBTQ friends whenever they dare to have a public celebration. We’ve had all the local versions of piety performing bible bangers and right-wing white boy droogies. We’ve been safe from them to date, but we know it’s just a matter of time before they show up anywhere they’re not wanted.
Since then, I admit, I rarely head to the Quarter, let alone Bourbon Street. I’m generally only in the vicinity when the small, early Holiday parades fire up. This year, there have been two violent events on Bourbon Street, which were–as usual–a combination of plenty of alcohol and rage. Our law enforcement officials have begged the state, to no end, to set up a gun-free zone there. The Louisiana outback, with its constant gun violence, never puts the state on the map quite like an attack on Bourbon Street. The state determined the best defense was just a bunch of ugly,out-of-place barricades that did no good at all on Saturday night. No city has a fighting chance unless their states have sensible gun laws.
Over the weekend, Bourbon Street was one of three American locations that suffered a mass shooting. The first to hit the headlines created a war zone at a Latter-day Saints Church. I grew up with a Latter-day Saints Temple–the winter stakes one–on the same block as my home. My mother was over there doing so much work on the family genealogy that they even called her Sister Whittaker. I’m quite familiar with the religion and people. I could hardly stop my imagination from jumping from the Temple that is now burnt to the ground in Michigan, to the one sitting next to my cul-de-sac in Omaha.
For some reason, attacking a religious building appears to get more media hand-wringing than attacking a school of children or a mall full of tourists and service workers. This attack was huge, but had all the footprints of the uniquely American tragedy of a white guy, mad at the world, finding a way to commit suicide while bringing a lot of innocents with him. I’m waiting for the lies about this guy to start like a volcanic eruption from President Evil and his incompetent loyalists. You really have to be dumb to try to see this for what it was and what it was not.
This first read is from The New Republic. “Mormon Church Gunman Had Trump Sign Outside His Home. Thomas Jacob Sanford drove his car into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Grand Blanc, Michigan, and opened fire.” Again, let’s see them spin this one.
Thomas Jacob Sanford, the 40-year-old Iraq War veteran identified as the suspect in a fatal Sunday attack on a Mormon church in Grand Blanc, Michigan, seemed to own Donald Trump memorabilia, with a campaign sign on display outside his house.
His reported home on East Atherton Road in Burton, Michigan, according to public records, is located less than 20 minutes by car from the church into which he ran his truck, before opening fire—killing at least four people—and setting the building ablaze.
As of June 2025, the house had a Trump campaign sign posted on its fence, per a Google Maps image. A picture posted to Facebook in September 2019, of Sanford with his wife and son, shows him wearing a camo shirt that reads “Re-elect Trump 2020,” and “Make liberals cry again.”
Mark Grebner, a Michigan Democratic consultant and data expert, told local outlet Bridge Michigan that Sanford signed two petitions a few years ago, both of which seemingly aligned with right-wing causes: one for Unlock Michigan, against Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s pandemic restrictions, and an anti-abortion petition by Right to Life Michigan.
Local authorities and the FBI have not yet identified a motive for the attack.
Undoubtedly, everyone is waiting for the Director to pull something stupid out of his ass that will please Yam Tits and no one else.
Oh, right, I’m not being politically correct here. Now’s the time for useless thoughts and prayers, and not looking to solve this uniquely American and preventable tragedy. Sensible Gun Laws are cancel culture. Sending Troops to terrorize immigrants and protestors exercising their First Amendment rights is some kind of take back of America. I’ve purposefully kept the TV news off because frankly, I’m tired of the ritual dance they perform that includes the ‘Both Sides Do it’ Shuffle’ and the ‘What can be done about this?’ Mambo. Definitely don’t mention that the Secretary of War and FARTUS want cities to look like war zones. It’s part of the Macho, Macho, Man disco punch shuffle we get to view daily when FARTUS is trying to look all Village People.
This is from the Chicago Sun-Times. “Feds march into downtown Chicago; top border agent says people are arrested based on ‘how they look’. U.S. Border Patrol agents wearing tactical gear and carrying long guns made arrests in downtown Chicago and the River North neighborhood Sunday. “This is not making anybody safer — it’s a show of intimidation,” Gov. JB Pritzker said.”
Dozens of federal agents took individuals into custody during a winding patrol Sunday through downtown Chicago, and a top U.S. Border Patrol official told WBEZ the agents were arresting people based on “how they look.”
The agents, clad in military-style fatigues, roamed past some of Chicago’s most well-known landmarks on a beautiful Sunday afternoon. The highly visible show of force came just three days after Border Patrol boats carrying armed officers appeared on the Chicago River.
Gregory Bovino, commander at large of the border force, contrasted the people being arrested with a white WBEZ reporter, saying agents consider a person’s appearance before taking them into custody.
“You know, there’s many different factors that go into something like that,” Bovino said. “It would be agent experience, intelligence that indicates there’s illegal aliens in a particular place or location.
“Then, obviously, the particular characteristics of an individual, how they look. How do they look compared to, say, you?” he said to the reporter, a tall, middle-aged man of Anglo descent.
Bovino, who brought his “Operation At Large” deportation campaign from California to Illinois this month, made the comments about three weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court said federal agents could continue stopping people based on factors including race and language during the campaign in California. The court’s majority did not explain itself.
Chicago has been on edge ever since President Donald Trump floated the idea of sending National Guard troops into the city in August. Though he never followed through, Sunday’s immigration patrols may have given him the photo opportunity he’s been looking for.
Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker responded on social media by noting the officers appeared “to be carrying large weapons around downtown Chicago in camouflage and masks.
“This is not making anybody safer — it’s a show of intimidation, instilling fear in our communities and hurting our businesses,” Pritzker said.
Immigration agents were patrolling several other neighborhoods, Bovino added.
“Chicago’s got a lot of murders,” Bovino said. “We’re going to make the city a safer place.”
The city’s murder numbers have been falling fast in recent years, and studies show the vast majority are committed by U.S. citizens. Violent crime overall is down too.
Bovino said the deportation blitz also extends beyond Chicago’s borders: “It could be Cicero. It could be South Chicago. It could be anywhere in Illinois.”
As the immigration patrol continued through River North, people on a double-decker tour bus craned their necks to get a look at the commotion.
At one point, agents ran after a bicyclist who’d yelled at them. He got away.
I can tell you that it is the most intimidating, awful experience from all my friends in the service industry who had to deal with that situation in the French Quarter during the Super Bowl. It is fucking scary and intimidating. That was only a week or so compared to what L.A. went through.
I heard this directly from my grocery shopper this week. He’s a young black man with this for a side gig. He told me the same thing I would’ve told him as I left him with the old TV, saying, “Be Safe Out there.” He told me his idea of fun these days is staying at home.
Other than trips to the doctor, I pretty much stay within the confines of a few blocks in my neighborhood. I’m lucky I have all the friends and music venues, and a library within those confines. I’m just peachy. Meanwhile, I’m exercising like a marine. The saying on the avenue is that they will be coming for us. As a professor, that’s what I hear from colleagues, too. It’s also why I’ve been happily teaching online and off-campus for two years. We had a shooter at the Lake Front campus in the Library not that long ago, and I’m glad to share office space with two cats and a dog.
I will be testing the waters on October 18th, but luckily, the 9th ward is hosting the second “No Presidents’ protest and I’ll be blocks from home.
So, with cash incentives and the ‘do whatever’ set of orders, this headline from the New York Timesis not surprising. (Shared link.) “‘I’m From Here!’: U.S. Citizens Are Ending Up in Trump’s Dragnet. As immigration agents take a more aggressive approach, they have stopped and in some cases detained American citizens.” How long before the arrest orders include other identifiers, like looking too much like a professor, a potential protester, or someone who is part of or supports the GLBTQ community?
U.S. citizens, many of them Latino men, have been stopped and in some cases taken into custody by law enforcement officers who are carrying out President Trump’s immigration crackdown and who suspect the men are living in the country illegally.
While many of those detained have immediately declared their U.S. citizenship to officers, they have routinely been ignored, according to interviews with the men, their lawyers and court documents. In some cases they have been handcuffed, kept in holding cells and immigration facilities overnight, and in at least two cases held without access to a lawyer or even a phone call.
How many U.S. citizens have been swept up in the Trump administration’s immigration sweeps is difficult to say. No comprehensive log of such encounters is available from the federal government, and immigration agents are not required to document stops of citizens.
A review by The New York Times of publicly reported cases and court records found that since January, at least 15 U.S. citizens have been arrested or detained and questioned about their citizenship by immigration agents or local law enforcement officers enlisted to work with the federal authorities.
In late January, Julio Noriega, 54, of Chicago, had been handing out copies of his résumé to local businesses in Berwyn, Ill., when ICE officers approached him as he walked out of a Jiffy Lube auto service shop.
They handcuffed him and loaded him into a van, without allowing him to explain he was a citizen, according to a motion filed in the Federal District Court for Northern Illinois. He was released about 10 hours later, the court filing states.
School budgets and government programs are already being targeted by right-wing machinations in Yam Tit’s administration. We may have a government shutdown just because a few specific religious folks can’t take anyone not being exactly like them
Trump threatens to shut down US government unless Democrats agree to ban all trans health carehttps://www.thepinknews.com/2025/09/29/trans-care-ban-government-shutdown/?utm_content=1759153201&utm_medium=social&utm_source=bluesky
From the link embedded above from Pink News. “Trump threatens to shut down US government unless Democrats agree to ban all trans health care. Proposed legislation behind the impending US government shutdown contains provisions that would ban federal funding for transgender adults, as well as youngsters.” This is reported by Amelian Hansford.
The bill has kept congress at a stand-still over the past few days after Democrats refused to provide the necessary votes for it to go through. Unless agreement is reached by 12.01am (Eastern) on Wednesday (1 October), sections of the government will be unable to function.
Donald Trump initially refused to meet with Democrats to avoid the shutdown, accusing minority leaders Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer of making “unserious and ridiculous demands”. The Republicans control both the senate and house of representatives.
If passed, the law would prohibit trans surgeries, strip [health insurance] Medicaid coverage from transgender people and ban Pride flags from public buildings, such as schools and universities.
While Trump has since agreed to meet with Democrats, trans men and women have urged them not to bow to any pressure from the president.
One person on Reddit, whose post has gone viral, called on members of the public to “contact your senators and house reps asap”, urging them to protect “the rights and dignity of LGBTQ+ Americans”.
They went on to say: “These are not budgetary measures, they are ideological attacks [that] would erase protections, endanger lives and weaponise federal funding to coerce institutions into abandoning care. For many, access to HRT and affirming care is not optional, it’s life-saving.
“Democrats have the power to stop all this happening if they hold the line in the senate.”
This news via The Guardianis probably the most prescient window into the dark hearts of the Republicans sitting on the SCOTUS bench. Read it and weep. “Clarence Thomas says precedent might not determine cases on upcoming supreme court docket. The court is expected to weigh in next session on same-sex marriage, which it legalized in 2015.” Women’s rights were the first to be destroyed. Now, we’re moving on to the Old Testament version of GLBTQ rights.
Settled legal precedent in the US is not “gospel” and in some instances may have been “something somebody dreamt up and others went along with”, the US Supreme Court JusticeClarence Thomas has said.
Thomas – part of the conservative supermajority that has taken hold of the Supreme Court over Donald Trump’s two presidencies – delivered those comments Thursday at the Catholic University of America’s Columbus School of Law in Washington, DC, ABC News and other outlets reported. His remarks preceded the nine-month term that the Supreme Court is scheduled to begin on 6 October.
“I don’t think that … any of these cases that have been decided are the gospel,” Thomas said during the rare public appearance, invoking a term which in a religious context is often used to refer to the word of God. “And I do give perspective to the precedent. But … the precedent should be respectful of our legal tradition, and our country and our laws, and be based on something – not just something somebody dreamt up and others went along with.”
Among the various cases Thomas and his colleagues are expected to weigh in on is a request to overturn the 2015 Obergefell supreme court decision that legalized marriage for same-sex couples nationwide. Other cases being mulled by the Supreme Court for its 2025-2026 term involve tariffs, trans rights, campaign finance law, religious rights, and capital punishment.
Thomas was in the 5-4 minority that voted against the Obergefell decision.
Trump’s first presidency yielded him three supreme court picks that gave the panel a conservative supermajority which has frequently ruled in his favor after he returned to the White House in January.
In June 2022, as Joe Biden’s presidency interrupted Trump’s terms, that conservative supermajority also struck down the federal abortion rights which had been established decades earlier by the Roe v Wade supreme court precedent. Thomas wrote a concurring opinion in which he urged the court to “reconsider all … substantive due process precedents”, including in Obergefell as well as cases involving rights to contraception and same-sex intimacy.
Thomas reportedly told those listening to him at the Catholic University that he feels no obligation to hew to precedent “if I find it doesn’t make any sense”.
“I think we should demand that, no matter what the case is, that it has more than just a simple theoretical basis,” Thomas said. If it’s “totally stupid, and that’s what they’ve decided, you don’t go along with it just because it’s decided”.
Down here, we have Social Aid and Pleasure clubs, which originally sprang up to ensure folks could get a good send-off with a second line when they exited the earthly door. It’s morphed into a lot more than that now. It’s basically a tribe of neighbors looking out for each other. You may want to consider setting up some networks like this, as food and services for the elderly and children disappear. You may need it for more than that later.
I don’t think I need to remind you of German history and what happened when NAZIs went door to door. Oregon is now suing the Trump administration to keep troops out of Portland. This is from Politico. “Oregon sues to block Trump from deploying state’s National Guard in Portland. ”Local law enforcement has this under control,” the governor said.” Josh Gerstein and Kyle Cheney share the headline.
Oregon and its largest city, Portland, are suing to block President Donald Trump from deploying the state’s National Guard, calling it an unconstitutional abuse of power.
“Far from promoting public safety, Defendants’ provocative and arbitrary actions threaten to undermine public safety by inciting a public outcry,” the state and city contend in the lawsuit filed Sunday in federal court in Portland.
“I think this is a sad day for our country, a sad day for Oregon that the president of the United States does not listen to local leaders about what they need,” Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek, a Democrat, told reporters during a videoconference shortly after the suit was filed.
“When the president and I spoke yesterday, I told him in very plain language there is no insurrection or threat to public safety that necessitates military intervention in Portland or any other city in our state,” Kotek said. “Putting our own military on our streets is an abuse of power … Local law enforcement has this under control.”
“It’s actually un-American, if you think about it, to use the military against our own citizens but that’s exactly what’s happening right now, across our country,” Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, a Democrat, told the press conference. He said his office plans to file within the next day for a temporary restraining order against the deployment.
The lawsuit follows Trump’s announcement on social media Saturday that he was ordering the Defense Department to send troops to Portland to use “full force, if necessary,” to combat protests that he said were interfering with immigration enforcement. Trump described the decision as the result of a request from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
Oregon officials say the Pentagon followed through on Trump’s order on Sunday morning, calling up 200 members of the state’s 6,500-member National Guard contingent. State officials say even the relatively small call-up could damage the state’s ability to respond to emergencies.
Lawyers for the state say protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement have been small and relatively subdued, routinely featuring fewer than 30 people, and that there have been no arrests related to those protests from June until earlier this week.
One last read via PBUMP.Net. “How Trumpworld inflates the perceived danger of the left.”
It is stipulated at the outset that there have been gruesome acts of political violence in recent months that appear to have been motivated by hostility to right-wing politics or the administration. This is not really contestable and rarely seriously contested. There is, in fact, violence on the political left.
It is also the case, though, that right-wing political violence has been much more common in recent years. This is not a useful bit of information to the Trump administration, which actively seeks to ignore or bury it. It, like Trump himself, is committed to presenting political violence as centrally if not entirely a function of the left — obviously in part because doing so provides a rationalization for the administration to crack down on the president’s political opponents. Trump’s been champing at the bit to deploy the military against protesters, a desire so obvious that questions about his doing so were part of Pete Hegseth’s confirmation hearings to serve as Defense Secretary.
Over the weekend, Trump announced on social media that he would be directing the (since-confirmed) Hegseth to “provide all necessary Troops to protect War ravaged Portland, and any of our ICE Facilities under siege from attack by Antifa, and other domestic terrorists.” He further “authoriz[ed] Full Force, if necessary” — apparently giving the military a green light to shoot at the purported “terrorists”.
Why Portland? Well, that’s an interesting story that reflects one of the central ways that Trump and his allies convince the right that there’s an imminent threat — a tactic so convincing that it apparently convinced Trump, too.
The next section is my favorite.
In mid-June 2020, I noticed something weird about Fox News’s coverage of the racial-justice protests that had emerged in response to the killing of George Floyd: they were often accompanied by footage of violence or vandalism that had actually occurred more than a week prior. Tucker Carlson (then still a Fox host), Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham were incorporating footage into their shows that had been recorded in late May. The reason for doing so wasn’t subtle; they (and Trump, who was president) hoped to suggest that a firm hand was needed to keep the lunatic left under control.
It didn’t work. But what I couldn’t have anticipated then was that Fox would still be using that footage five years later.
Trump eventually backtracked on his threat to send troops to Portland. In an interview with NBC’s Yamiche Alcindor, he described a conversation he’d had with Oregon’s governor.
“I said, ‘Well wait a minute, am I watching things on television that are different from what’s happening? My people tell me different,’ ” Trump said of the conversation. “They are literally attacking and there are fires all over the place…it looks like terrible.”
Well, yes, Man Who Has Access to the Breadth of Federal Intelligence Gathering. What you saw on TV was in fact not what was happening at the moment in Portland.
Trump made his pledge to send troops to Portland on Saturday morning. On Friday, Fox News had several segments in which purported violence in the city was shown.
One featured Tricia McLaughlin, a Homeland Security official who often appears on cable shows. As she was discussing an executive order Trump signed, the channel showed b-roll of events in Portland.
You will notice, though, that the footage was not timestamped for any date in September. Instead, they showed an encounter apparently involving tear gas that occurred back in June … and footage from protests in July 2020.
In the next hour, they ran the same playbook. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was on, talking about how dangerous the left was next to footage of Portland violence from July 2020.
You’re POTUS, you have thousands of intelligence reports and agencies at your beck and call, so who are you gonna call? Forget calling, just watch whatever crap Fox News or some other right-wing propaganda channel, and there you go! So this is obviously Philip Bump’s personal site, and it’s also quite the long-form read. Take some time and read the rest. Buckle up! Find your safe word! Collaborate with like-minded neighbors! You may need each other soon! More specifically, be safe out there!
What’s on your Reading, Action, and Blogging list today?
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
If you can’t see this Instagram embed, here is what it says:
Repost: @photogs_memes This is a genuine photo by Samuel Corum, a photographer for The New York Times.
Samuel Corum is a Pulitzer Prize-winning photojournalist based in Washington, D.C. He is a regular contributor to The New York Times, Getty Images, Bloomberg, AFP, and other major outlets.
@thecorum
Thoughts?
Take it easy…
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
The Sky Dancing banner headline uses a snippet from a work by artist Tashi Mannox called 'Rainbow Study'. The work is described as a" study of typical Tibetan rainbow clouds, that feature in Thanka painting, temple decoration and silk brocades". dakinikat was immediately drawn to the image when trying to find stylized Tibetan Clouds to represent Sky Dancing. It is probably because Tashi's practice is similar to her own. His updated take on the clouds that fill the collection of traditional thankas is quite special.
You can find his work at his website by clicking on his logo below. He is also a calligraphy artist that uses important vajrayana syllables. We encourage you to visit his on line studio.
Recent Comments