Lazy Caturday Reads: Some Positive News for Democracy Fans?

Posted: December 13, 2025 | Author: bostonboomer | Filed under: just because | Tags: Affordable Care Act, cat art, caturday, Donald Trump, Health care, Indiana Senate Republicans, Obamacare, redistricting | 4 Comments

Good Afternoon!!

Cat and Butterfly, Ohara Koson

Trump is still “president,” and he continues to do terrible things; but there are beginning to be a few positive signs that his grip on the GOP is waning as his approval ratings continue to drop. One of those signs is the refusal of Republicans in the state senate to follow his demand for redistricting. As some people here know, I grew up in Indiana. I can’t help feeling a bit of Hoosier pride about this.

Thomas Beaumont and Isabella Volmert: Trump was unable to insult his way to victory in Indiana redistricting battle.

If Indiana Republican senators had any doubt about what to do with President Donald Trump’s redistricting proposal, he helped them make up their minds the night before this week’s vote.

In a social media screed, Trump accused the state’s top senator of being “a bad guy, or a very stupid one.”

“That kind of language doesn’t help,” said Sen. Travis Holdman, a banker and lawyer from near Fort Wayne who voted against the plan.

He was among 21 Republican senators who dealt Trump one of the most significant political defeats of his second term by rejecting redistricting in Indiana. The decision undermined the president’s national campaign to redraw congressional maps to boost his party’s chances in the upcoming midterm elections.

In interviews after Thursday’s vote, several Republican senators said they were leaning against the plan from the start because their constituents didn’t like it. But in a Midwest nice rebuttal to America’s increasingly coarse political discourse, some said they simply didn’t like the president’s tone, like when he called senators “suckers.”

Trump didn’t seem to get the message. Asked about the vote, the president once again took aim at Indiana’s top senator, Rodric Bray.

“He’ll probably lose his next primary, whenever that is,” Trump said. “I hope he does, because he’s done a tremendous disservice.”

Sen. Sue Glick, an attorney from La Grange who also opposed redistricting, brushed off Trump’s threat to unseat lawmakers who defied him.

“I would think he would have better things to do,” she said. “It would be money better spent electing the individuals he wants to represent his agenda in Congress.”

My mother used to say that you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Trump never learned that simple lesson.

Jonathan Chait at The Atlantic (gift link): The Indiana Vote Is an Inflection Point.

In rejecting yesterday a redistricting plan backed by President Donald Trump, Indiana’s Republican-controlled senate did not merely deny Republicans two new U.S. House seats in next year’s midterm elections. They also engaged in a mass revolt against the president. The stakes of their defiance reach far beyond the midterms. This vote was possibly the most significant blow yet against the authoritarian ambitions that have defined Trump’s second term.

Tabby Cat. Benson b. Moore

The significance of Indiana’s noncompliance lies not in the specifics of what was refused—attempts to gerrymander electoral maps are hardly unprecedented, even though a mid-decade battle violates norms—but in the act of refusal itself. Trump’s authoritarian project relies on the cultlike hold he has over his party. Republicans have come to understand that the cost of defying Trump is the death of their political career. Trump has proved time and again that he will go to any lengths to destroy his intra-party critics, even if doing so harms the party.

That method was on vivid display in Indiana. Trump expected the state to go along with his plans to redraw its map to help his party in the midterms. When the state’s Republicans held back their support, Trump and his allies went on the attack.

Indiana Republican legislators faced bomb threats and intimidation in their homes (such as “swatting,” phone calls, and the like)—a climate of fear, my colleague Russell Berman reports, unlike anything the state has seen.

Heritage Action delivered a Mafia-like threat, as high-minded scholars apparently do these days: “President Trump has made it clear to Indiana leaders: if the Indiana Senate fails to pass the map, all federal funding will be stripped from the state. Roads will not be paved. Guard bases will close. Major projects will stop. These are the stakes and every NO vote will be to blame.”

This kind of pressure typically bends targets to Trump’s will. What politician is willing to sacrifice their career or their family’s safety for a single act of defiance?

Yet the spines of Indiana Republicans stiffened where so many others snapped. One reason for this may be that the state contains an unusually strong concentration of Trump-skeptical former governors. Mitch Daniels and Mike Pence remain influential in the state, despite having given up national ambitions by failing to submit fully to Trump. Daniels praised the vote as an act of “principled courageous leadership.”

Indiana’s Republicans also demonstrated strength in numbers. Trump employs the psychology of a schoolyard bully who isolates and targets victims one by one. By engineering a 31–19 vote, Indiana’s Republicans worked together to ensure that no single legislator could be blamed for defying Trump.

Use the gift link to read more.

At The Daily Beast, David Rothkopf enumerates the many ways that Trump’s grip on power is waning: President Trump Is Now Triggering His Very Own MAGApocalypse.

It is hard to know whether Donald Trump or the MAGA movement he created is falling apart faster.

The 79-year-old president is deteriorating rapidly before our eyes—cankles puffier, bruises and bandages on his hand more ever present. He’s nodding off at event after event, slurring his words, his behavior increasingly erratic. And he has become painfully sensitive to the fact that his decay is so apparent, going as far as suggesting that media outlets reporting about his health are guilty of treason.

Of course, every effort he makes to prove he’s not one step away from melting into a bubbling orange puddle seems to make it clearer that he’s losing it.

Gertrude Abercrombie, 17 Feb 1909 – 3 Apr 1977

As bad as all that is, however, MAGA may be collapsing even more quickly than its creator. Prominent Republicans are defecting—like Marjorie Taylor Greene—and more are rumored to be threatening to do likewise. More former loyalists are willing to stand up to him—whether Indiana legislators rejecting Trumpian demands that they gerrymander the state or GOP senators leading inquiries into the possibility that war crimes were committed as part of Trump’s “Pirates of the Caribbean” phase.

Others are speaking out against Trump’s opposition to extending vital health subsidies to Americans—including hardliners like Missouri Senator Josh Hawley—or to express their discomfort with new executive orders seeking to block states from enacting AI regulation.

Trump is losing in the courts. His illegal picks to be U.S. attorneys are being kicked out; his efforts to, well, trump up charges against opponents like James Comey and Letitia James have been shot down by grand juries that simply will not go along with cases so obviously fabricated and motivated by retribution rather than any respect for the law.

And he is losing at the ballot box. Recent election results suggest that the onetime star to whom so many MAGA upstarts have hitched their wagons to in the past decade is now electoral poison. Across the country, elections last month produced resounding defeats for the GOP, while in the few elections in which Republicans squeaked out victories, their margins shrank considerably compared to 2024 support for Trump.

Just this week in Miami, Eileen Higgins beat a Trump-favored candidate to become the first Democrat to be voted the city’s mayor in three decades.

The economy is floundering. Deficits are exploding. Tariffs are unpopular. Trump’s inhumane and draconian immigration crackdowns are alienating substantial numbers of his erstwhile supporters, while his foreign policy plans have alienated our allies and empowered our enemies. His overt corruption and catering to billionaires at the expense of average Americans is driving real backlash.

Donald Trump has fallen and, given projections of a rough year ahead, it seems increasingly likely that he can’t get up.

There’s more at the link.

In a guest essay at The New York Times (gift link), E.J. Dionne writes: Trump Is Losing the Reasonable Majority.

Believing in democracy does not require faith that majorities are always right. It does mean having confidence that most of your fellow citizens will, over time, approach public questions with a basic reasonableness. Abraham Lincoln, tradition has it, said it more pithily: “You cannot fool all the people all the time.”

A corollary to Lincoln, that you can’t fool all the people who voted for you all the time, explains the sharp decline in President Trump’s approval ratings.

Cat in Bamboo, Hiroshima, by Jimmy Tsutomu Mirikitani

A significant share of the voters who backed Mr. Trump have decided that he has largely ignored the primary issue that pushed them his way, the cost of living. A billionaire regularly mocking concern about affordability only makes matters worse. They see him as distracted by personal obsessions and guilty of overreach, even when they sympathize with his objectives. Many of his former supporters see him breaking promises he made, notably on not messing with their access to health care.

Some abuses are too blatant to be ignored. A recent The Economist/You Gov poll found that 56 percent of Americans said Mr. Trump was using his office for personal gain; only 32 percent didn’t. A similar 56 percent saw Mr. Trump as directing the Justice Department to go after people he saw as his political enemies; just 24 percent didn’t.

The upshot: A great many Americans who helped put Mr. Trump in office have absorbed what’s happened since. They may not be glued to every chaotic twist of this presidency, but they do pay attention and have concluded, reasonably, that this is not what they voted for.

How many? Let’s take Mr. Trump’s 49.8 percent of the 2024 popular vote as a base line and compare it with his approval ratings. A New York Times analysis of public polling this month found his net approval rating had dropped to 42 percent. A A.P./NORC poll and a Gallup poll pegged it at 36 percent. This suggests that 15 to 25 percent of his voters have changed their minds

I think of these shifts as the triumph of reasonableness — and not because I agree with where these fellow citizens have landed (although I do). I’m buoyed by the capacity of citizens to absorb new facts and take in information even when it challenges decisions they previously made. It turns out that swing voters are what their label implies. The evidence of their own lives and from their own eyes matters.

Use the gift link to read the rest.

So, there really are some positive signs.

Republicans also continue to hurt themselves by refusing to help millions of Americans who are about to lose access to health care because of the drastically increased costs Republicans instituted with their Big Ugly Bill.

Ali Swenson at the AP: Higher cost, worse coverage: Affordable Care Act enrollees say expiring subsidies will hit them hard.

For one Wisconsin couple, the loss of government-sponsored health subsidies next year means choosing a lower-quality insurance plan with a higher deductible. For a Michigan family, it means going without insurance altogether.

For a single mom in Nevada, the spiking costs mean fewer Christmas gifts this year. She is stretching her budget already while she waits to see if Congress will act.

Less than three weeks remain until the expiration of COVID-era enhanced tax credits that have helped millions of Americans pay their monthly fees for Affordable Care Act coverage for the past four years.

The Senate on Thursday rejected two proposals to address the problem and an emerging health care package from House Republicans does not include an extension, all but guaranteeing that many Americans will see much higher insurance costs in 2026.

Young Cat Sleeping, by Mabel Wellington Jack

Here are a few of their stories.

Chad Bruns comes from a family of savers. That came in handy when the 58-year-old military veteran had to leave his firefighting career early because of arm and back injuries he incurred on the job.

He and his wife, Kelley, 60, both retirees, cut their own firewood to reduce their electricity costs in their home in Sawyer County, Wisconsin. They rarely eat out and hardly ever buy groceries unless they are on sale.

But to the extent that they have always been frugal, they will be forced to be even more so now, Bruns said. That is because their coverage under the health law enacted under former President Barack Obama is getting more expensive -– and for worse coverage.

This year, the Brunses were paying $2 per month for a top-tier gold-level plan with less than a $4,000 deductible. Their income was low enough to help them qualify for a lot of financial assistance.

But in 2026, that same plan is rising to an unattainable $1,600 per month, forcing them to downgrade to a bronze plan with a $15,000 deductible.

Kelley Bruns said she is concerned that if something happens to their health in the next year, they could go bankrupt. While their monthly fees are low at about $25, their new out-of-pocket maximum at $21,000 amounts to nearly half their joint income.

“We have to pray that we don’t have to have surgery or don’t have to have some medical procedure done that we’re not aware of,” she said. “It would be very devastating.”

Read more health care stories a the link.

Speaker Mike Johnson will allow a vote on an Obamacare extension next week, but it is expected to fail. From Politico:

House GOP leadership will permit a floor vote to extend enhanced Obamacare subsidies — an olive branch to moderate members who have been clamoring for a chance to go on record in support of an extension.

Republican leaders unveiled text of their health care package Friday evening, which they plan to put on the floor next week.

“The process” for considering that package “will allow” a vote on an amendment to prevent the subsidies from lapsing Dec. 31, according to a House Republican leadership aide granted anonymity to share the unannounced plans.

It’s a concession from leaders who have been reluctant to endorse an extension of the subsidies, which divides congressional Republicans. It’s a win for centrists and vulnerable incumbents, who see political peril in not acting on the tax credits and have been promising to push discharge petitions that would circumvent leadership and force votes on their own legislative proposals.

Speaker Mike Johnson and senior Republicans met Friday morning on the topic to chart a path forward.

But Republicans leaders ultimately expect the extension vote to fail, resulting in skyrocketing premiums for millions of Americans when the subsidies expire at the end of the year.

You read that right: Johnson has come up with a Republican “health care plan.” AP: Speaker Johnson unveils health care plan as divided Republicans scramble for alternative.

The Senate failed to get anywhere on the health care issue this week. Now it’s the House’s turn to show what it can do.

Speaker Mike Johnson unveiled a Republican alternative late Friday, a last-minute sprint as his party refuses to extend the enhanced tax subsidies for those who buy policies through the Affordable Care Act, also called Obamacare, which are expiring at the end of the year. Those subsidies help lower the cost of coverage.

Two Cats, Eleanore G. Cohen

Johnson, R-La., huddled behind closed doors in the morning — as he did days earlier this week — working to assemble the package for consideration as the House focuses the final days of its 2025 work on health care.

“House Republicans are tackling the real drivers of health care costs to provide affordable care,” Johnson said in a statement announcing the package. He said it would be voted on next week.

Later Friday, though, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said: “House Republicans have introduced toxic legislation that is completely unserious, hurts hardworking America taxpayers and is not designed to secure bipartisan support. If the bill reaches the House floor, I will strongly oppose it.”

So what’s the GOP plan?

The House Republicans offered a 100-plus-page package that focuses on long-sought GOP proposals to enhance access to employer-sponsored health insurance plans and clamp down on so-called pharmacy benefit managers.

Republicans propose expanding access to what’s referred to as association health plans, which would allow more small businesses and self-employed individuals to band together and purchase health coverage.

Proponents say such plans increase the leverage businesses have to negotiate a lower rate. But critics say the plans provide skimpier coverage than what is required under the Affordable Care Act.

The Republicans’ proposal would also require more data from pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, as a way to help control drug costs. Critics say PBMs have padded their bottom line and made it more difficult for independent pharmacists to survive.

Additionally, the GOP plan includes mention of cost-sharing reductions for some lower-income people who rely on Obamacare, but those do not take effect until January 2027.

The emerging package from the House Republicans does not include an extension of an enhanced tax credit for millions of Americans who get insurance coverage through the Affordable Care Act. Put in place during the COVID-19 crisis, that enhanced subsidy expires Dec. 31, leaving most families in the program facing more than double their current out-of-pocket premiums, and in some cases, much more.

I think Republicans will find that this issue will destroy them in the midterm elections.

Lazy Caturday Reads: Mamdani, Greene, Ukraine, and Other News

Posted: November 22, 2025 | Author: bostonboomer | Filed under: just because | Tags: cat art, caturday, Donald Trump, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Russia, Trump weakness, Ukraine, Zohran Mamdani | 3 Comments

Good Afternoon!!

Lornie at the Coast by Amelia Opie

Yesterday was another wild and crazy day in Trump’s U.S.A. I’m sure no one will be surprised to see me say this: the “president” is not well. He may be suffering from dementia and/or may be certifiably insane. He is also stupid, evil, and corrupt. Trump’s one consistent behavior is his willingness to to anything for money. This is the man who runs our foreign policy and controls our nuclear weapons.

Yesterday Trump met in the oval office with New York City mayor elect Zohran Mamdani. I had a feeling that Mamdani would be able to charm Trump, and that’s exactly what happened.

Trump has been screaming for months that Mamdani is a communist, and Republican have centered their plans for the midterms around attacks on Mamdani and his support from Democrats. Now that has been blown out of the water.

Dana Rubinstein and Benjamin Oreskes at The New York Times:

There were smiles and more than a few laughs. Compliments, ranging from genuine to diplomatic, were abundant.

And when reporters tried to interrupt the unexpected buddy movie that emerged in the White House on Friday, President Trump warmly placed his hand on Zohran Mamdani’s arm and gently advised him to keep it simple in response to a question about whether Mr. Mamdani considered him a fascist.

“You can just say yes,” the president said. “It’s easier.”

It was an astonishingly affectionate performance that sent heads spinning, as New Yorkers confronted the once-unthinkable possibility that Mr. Mamdani, the democratic socialist mayor-elect of New York City, and the president actually got along.

“I mean, it did seem like a little bit of a bromance,” said Nicole Malliotakis, the Republican congresswoman from the conservative stronghold of Staten Island. “Based on the election results, we knew Mamdani was charming, but who thought he’d be able to charm the president?”

I thought he would. Mamdani is quite charming and popular and Trump is weak and unpopular. His polls are terrible, and continuing to drop. He has wrecked the economy, sent troops into American cities for no reason, pardoned thousands of convicted criminals, blown up fishing boats in the Caribbean for no reason, torn down part of the White House, and his tariffs have increased the cost of everything.

Back to the NYT story:

For weeks, New York leaders have been bracing for the likelihood of a devastating confrontation between the Trump administration and a City Hall led by Mr. Mamdani. They have gamed out what, precisely, it might look like if Mr. Trump sends federal troops or a surge of immigration enforcement agents into New York City. They have fretted about more funding cuts. They have formed rapid-response groups and enlisted the help of business leaders.

They have had reason to worry. Not only has Mr. Trump threatened New York City, but he also personally tried to prevent Mr. Mamdani from winning the mayoral election, even going so far as to urge Republicans to abandon their party nominee in favor of Andrew M. Cuomo, the Democratic former governor.

But then the cameras went live on Friday from the Oval Office. There was Mr. Mamdani, standing with a quiet smile by Mr. Trump’s side as the president lavished him with praise; commended his decision to keep the current police commissioner; applauded his pro-housing, pro-affordability inclinations; and helped him swat away unfriendly questions from the conservative press.

To hear Mr. Trump tell it, the two men, who occupy starkly opposing positions on Israel and Gaza, even found common ground there.

Casting himself as the consummate peacemaker, Mr. Trump said Mr. Mamdani, too, “feels very strongly” about “peace in the Middle East.”

Ron Filipkowski at Meidas+:

… Zohran Mamdani visited Trump today at the WH, and it did not go the way most Republicans thought it would. Trump has always recognized and fawned over star power, and that is exactly the way he treated Mamdani. Fox reporter to Mamdani: “You referred to Trump as despot… Trump interrupts: I’ve been called much worse than a despot. So it’s not that insulting.”

… I was laughing hysterically during this entire meeting with Trump praising Mamdani. I was a one-way love fest from Trump to Mamdani, with Zohran playing it cool the entire time.

… Trump: “I tell you, the press has eaten this thing up. I have had a lot of meetings with the heads of major countries, nobody cared. The biggest people come over from other countries and nobody cares but they did care about this meeting, and it was a great meeting.”

… Q to Trump – “Would you feel comfortable living in NYC under a Mamdani admin? Trump: Yeah, I would.”

… Republican campaign consultants built their entire midterm strategy around making Mamdani into the devil incarnate and the face of Democratic Party, then Trump slobbers all over him today in the Oval!

… Trump then proceeded to end Elise Stefanik’s campaign for governor: Q – “Stefanik has campaigned on calling Mamdani a jihadist. Do you think you’re standing next to a jihadist? Trump: No… but she’s out there campaigning. You say things sometimes in a campaign. You’d have to ask her about that. I met with a man who is a rational person.”

… I’m dying!!! I soooo wish I could see her face right now. (First time I’ve ever said that).

… Mamdani: “I told the president that, you know, so much of the focus of our campaign has been on the cost of living crisis and when we asked those New Yorkers who had voted for the president, when we saw an increase in his numbers in NYC, that came back to the same issue: Cost of living, cost of living, cost of living. Trump: We have to get Con Edison to start lowering their rates. Mamdani: Absolutely.”

… I just pissed my pants laughing. I’m crying!

… Trump: “He has a chance to do something great for NY and he does need the help from the fed govt. And we will be helping him. But he’s different than your average candidate. He came out of nowhere.”

… Love is love. There’s no point in fighting it.

By Eduard Zentsik, 1975

I’m really starting to feel more hopeful for the future of our country. Trump is getting weaker by the day and it hasn’t even been a year yet. If the Democrats can manage to take over the House in the midterms, he will be a lame duck in danger of impeachment.

Norman Eisen at The Contrarian: Has Trump’s Power Peaked?

Since Jan. 20, this column and The Contrarian have been clear-eyed that Donald Trump is not merely a rhetorical autocrat; he actually wants to be a dictator. But if all dimensions of our society wake up and assert peaceful, lawful, vigorous pro-democracy power in opposition, his autocratic push can be defeated and democracy reinforced. This week’s events culminating in Trump’s Oval Office U-turn on Mamdani were an inflection point in that opposition. They were a sign that we are headed for a democracy U-turn of the kind that many nations have achieved in ousting authoritarianism.

The most dramatic evidence of democracy’s resilience and Trump’s dictatorial frustration was his getting steamrolled on the bill requiring the release of the government’s Epstein files, including those relating to Trump. He has for months fought the disclosure of these files and the remainder of his administration’s materials about the child rape and sex trafficking ring run by his long-time associate Jeffrey Epstein. Trump went so far as to privately lobby or publicly attack the handful of Republicans who originally joined all Democrats in the House in forcing a vote on a bill to release the files.

He ultimately failed—and abysmally so, with the bill passing both houses of Congress with just one vote against it (the execrable Rep. Clay Higgins). It was a sign of just how potent the Epstein scandal is and how politically shaky the president is at the moment.

Trump’s lack of strongman cred was further revealed when, in the span of 24 hours, we went from wondering whether Trump’s allies would block consideration of the bill in the Senate to unanimous consent to pass the legislation as soon as it arrived from the House. That was an indication of Trump’s weakness, sure, but credit where credit is due: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer read the room and pounced on the opportunity to move the bill….

But the signs of Trump’s weakness did not stop there. We saw an unhinged tantrum from him that can be explained by his own feelings of inadequacy. It came after members of Congress cut a video telling service members that they should not follow illegal orders.

Trump went haywire threatening the six members of the House and Senate who cut the video, all veterans: Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona, Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado, Rep. Chris DeLuzio of Pennsylvania, Rep. Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, and Rep. Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania. He called the video “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL” and called the lawmakers “traitors” who “should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL.”

A video by members of Congress urging that the law be followed hardly amounts to sedition. But, given Trump’s other bizarre and baseless criminal investigations, we need to take his threats seriously. This whole controversy shows just how unhinged he has become with his continued losses. And it appears that more defeats are ahead for Trump in his wave of unfounded revenge prosecutions.

Read the rest at the Substack link above.

At The New York Times, Annie Karni reports on another surprising turn of events: Marjorie Taylor Greene Says She Plans to Resign in January.

Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, the hard-right Georgia Republican, said on Friday night that she would resign from Congress in January.

Her announcement came days after President Trump branded her a “traitor” for breaking with him and helping compel the Justice Department to release its files related to Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender.

By Gina Litherland

Ms. Greene, who was elected in 2020 and positioned herself as a die-hard Trump supporter until a series of recent ruptures with the president on a variety of issues, made the abrupt announcement in a video and statement she posted online, filmed from her home in Georgia, her Christmas tree on display behind her.

“Loyalty should be a two-way street, and we should be able to vote our conscience and represent our district’s interest,” Ms. Greene wrote in a long post. She said that if she had been cast aside by “MAGA Inc,” it was indicative that “many common Americans have been cast aside and replaced as well.” [….]

It is extremely unusual for a member of Congress to up and leave in the middle of a term, barring an illness or some extenuating circumstance that makes it impossible to carry on.

But Ms. Greene said she had made the decision to leave because she did not want to endure a “hurtful and hateful primary against me by the president we all fought for, only to fight and win my election while Republicans will likely lose the midterms.”

She added: “I refuse to be a ‘battered wife’ hoping it all goes away and gets better.”

Her impending departure will shrink the already slim Republican House majority, bringing it down to 218 members until her seat in a deep-red district can be filled.

There are rumors that Greene may run for Georgia governor or senator.

Trump is finally abandoning Ukraine.

Reuters: Exclusive: US threatens to cut intel, weapons to press Ukraine into peace deal, sources say.

KYIV, Nov 21 (Reuters) – The United States has threatened to cut intelligence sharing and weapons supplies for Ukraine to press it into agreeing to the framework of a U.S.-brokered peace deal, two people familiar with the matter said.

The sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that Kyiv was under greater pressure from Washington than during any previous peace discussions, and that the U.S. wanted Ukraine to sign a framework of the deal by next Thursday.

“They want to stop the war and want Ukraine to pay the price,” one of the sources said.

Washington has presented Ukraine with a 28-point plan, which endorses some of Russia’s principal demands in the war, including that Kyiv cede additional territory, curb the size of its military and be barred from joining NATO.

A delegation of senior U.S. military officials met with President Volodymyr Zelenskiy in Kyiv on Thursday to discuss a path to peace.

The U.S. ambassador in Ukraine and the army public affairs chief travelling with the delegation described the meeting as a success and said Washington sought an “aggressive timeline” for the signature of a document between the U.S. and Ukraine.

In the art room,, Charles Keiger

David E. Sanger at The New York Times (gift link): Trump Offers a Ukraine Peace Plan the Kremlin Can Love.

After veering wildly this year over how to bring an end to the war in Ukraine, President Trump appeared in recent weeks to have settled into a strategy of suggesting he was willing to put long-term pressure on Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin.

He imposed new sanctions on oil sales, though not as strong as many in Congress would have liked. He agreed to provide arms to Ukraine’s forces as long as they were purchased by the Europeans, bringing billions of dollars to American defense contractors. At one point, he even floated the notion that he would provide Ukraine with Tomahawk missiles, only to back away from offering the long-range weapons after a conversation with Mr. Putin appeared to convince him it could escalate into a direct American conflict with Russia.

Then he blew the whole thing up — yet again.

Many of the 28 points in the proposed Russia-Ukraine peace plan offered by the White House read like they had been drafted in the Kremlin. They reflect almost all Mr. Putin’s maximalist demands: Ukraine would have to cede to Russia all of the lands that Moscow has declared for itself in Donetsk and Luhansk. The United States would recognize that as Russian territory. No NATO forces could be based inside Ukraine that might prevent the Russians from regrouping and taking the whole country. The Ukrainian military would be limited to 600,000 troops, a 25 percent cut from current levels, and it would be barred from possessing long-range weapons that could reach into Russia.

In return, all sanctions on Russia would be lifted, and the country would be “reintegrated into the global economy,” — Mr. Putin’s most critical objective at a time when Russia is reeling from the long-term costs of a war he thought would be over in a week or two.

To add to the pressure, Mr. Trump set a short deadline, Thursday, Thanksgiving Day in the United States, for Ukraine to decide whether to give up not only part of its territory, but also its ability to defend itself with a fully staffed military and an arsenal of long-range weapons.

It is unclear what would happen if President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine were to refuse to surrender both his territory and Ukraine’s freedom to defend itself and form alliances with other nations, especially in Europe. But the implicit threat is a loss of military support — and critical intelligence — from the United States, especially if Mr. Trump decides to wash his hands of the conflict, no matter what the risk to European allies.

Use the gift link if you want to read more.

Anne Applebaum at The Atlantic (gift link): The Murky Plan That Ensures a Future War.

The 28-point peace plan that the United States and Russia want to impose on Ukraine and Europe is misnamed. It is not a peace plan. It is a proposal that weakens Ukraine and divides America from Europe, preparing the way for a larger war in the future. In the meantime, it benefits unnamed Russian and American investors, at the expense of everyone else.

By Tokuhiro Kawai

The plan was negotiated by Steve Witkoff, a real-estate developer with no historical, geographical, or cultural knowledge of Russia or Ukraine, and Kirill Dmitriev, who heads Russia’s sovereign-wealth fund and spends most of his time making business deals. The revelation of their plan this week shocked European leaders, who are now paying almost all of the military costs of the war, as well as the Ukrainians, who were not sure whether to take this latest plan seriously until they were told to agree to it by Thanksgiving or lose all further U.S. support. Even if the plan falls apart, this arrogant and confusing ultimatum, coming only days after the State Department authorized the sale of anti-missile technology to Ukraine, will do permanent damage to America’s reputation as a reliable ally, not only in Europe but around the world.

The central points of the plan reflect long-standing Russian demands. The United States would recognize Russian rule over Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk—all of which are part of Ukraine. Russia would, in practice, be allowed to keep territory it has conquered in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson. In all of these occupation zones, Russian forces have carried out arrests, torture, and mass repression of Ukrainian citizens, and because Russia would not be held accountable for war crimes, they could continue to do so with impunity. Ukraine would withdraw from the part of Donetsk that it still controls—a heavily reinforced and mined territory whose loss would open up central Ukraine to a future attack.

Not only would this plan cede territory, people, and assets to Russia; it also seems deliberately designed to weaken Ukraine, politically and militarily, so that Russia would find it easier to invade again a year from now, or 10 years from now. According to a version of the text that appeared in the Financial Times yesterday, the plan does state that “Ukraine’s sovereignty would be confirmed.” But it then imposes severe restrictions on Ukrainian sovereignty: Ukraine must “enshrine in its constitution” a promise to never join NATO. Ukraine must shrink the size of its armed forces to 600,000, down from 900,000. Ukraine may not host foreign troops on its soil. Ukraine must hold new elections within 100 days, a demand not made of Russia, a dictatorship that has not held free elections for more than two decades.

In return, the plan states that Ukraine “would receive security guarantees.” But it does not describe what those guarantees would be, and there is no reason to believe that President Donald Trump would ever abide by them.

Read more with the gift link, if you wish.

One more on the Ukraine story from Politico: ‘Witkoff needs a psychiatrist’: Europeans fume at Trump’s plan to profit from frozen Russian assets.

BRUSSELS — Donald Trump has hurled a wrench into one of the most sensitive negotiations currently under way in Europe, potentially derailing efforts to help fund Ukraine to stay in the fight against Russia.

For months European Union officials have been trying — and failing — to work out a way to use around €140 billion of immobilized Russian state assets held largely in Belgium to support Kyiv’s war effort. The cash is desperately needed as Ukraine is at risk of running out of money early next year.

Talks in Brussels are now at an extremely delicate stage, diplomats said, as top officials try to finesse a legal text that would enable the frozen funds to be used for a loan to the Ukrainian government.

By Tokuhiro Kawai

But the United States’ new 28-point blueprint for a ceasefire includes a rival idea for using those same assets for American-led reconstruction efforts once a truce has been agreed. The U.S. would take “50 percent” of the profit from this activity, the document said.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy warned that the new Trump plan confronted his country with one of the most difficult moments in its history: a potential choice between losing its “dignity” and losing “a key partner.”

Multiple EU diplomats and officials said they feared the proposals, from Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff, would wreck their chances of the loan proposal being agreed by the EU’s 27 governments. European leaders had been hoping to finalize the so-called “reparations loan” deal at a crunch summit next month.

A former French official, granted anonymity like others to discuss sensitive matters, said the Witkoff idea “is, of course, scandalous.”

“The Europeans are exhausting themselves trying to find a viable solution to use the assets for the benefit of Ukrainians and Trump wants to profit from them,” the person said. “This proposal is likely to be rejected by everyone.”

A few more stories to check out:

The New York Times: What to Know About the Nearly 10% Climb in a Key Medicare Expense for 2026.

CNN: Washington resident dies of complications from bird flu strain never before reported in humans.

The Washington Post: White House blew past legal concerns in deadly strikes on drug boats.

AP: Leaders adopt a declaration at the start of South Africa’s G20 summit despite US opposition.

The Washington Post: EPA just approved new ‘forever chemical’ pesticides for use on food.

That’s it for me. I hope you’re enjoying the weekend.

Lazy Caturday Reads: Epstein, Epstein, Epstein, and More News

Posted: November 15, 2025 | Author: bostonboomer | Filed under: just because | Tags: Bill Clinton, cat art, caturday, China soybean purchases, Donald Trump, Epstein Files, Jeffrey Epstein, Larry Summers, Nicolas Maduro, Pam Bondi, Reid Hoffman, Steve Bannon, TACO Trump, Trump Tariffs, Venezuela | 6 Comments

Good Afternoon!!

Elizabeth Taylor with her Siamese cat, 1956, photo by Sanford Roth

Epstein, Epstein, Epstein. He’s everywhere in the news. We still haven’t seen the DOJ Epstein files, but we’re already learning more about Epstein’s relationship to Trump from the recently released text messages. We don’t know yet how bad it will get when the files are released, but the extent to which Trump is publicly panicking suggests it will be very bad for him.

In Trump’s latest effort to control the Epstein story, he ordered Attorney General Bondi to investigate Democrats who had connections to the child sex trafficker.

AP: At Trump’s urging, Bondi says US will investigate Epstein’s ties to Clinton and other political foes.

Acceding to President Donald Trump’s demands, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said Friday that she has ordered a top federal prosecutor to investigate sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s ties to Trump political foes, including former President Bill Clinton.

Bondi posted on X that she was assigning Manhattan U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton to lead the probe, capping an eventful week in which congressional Republicans released nearly 23,000 pages of documents from Epstein’s estate and House Democrats seized on emails mentioning Trump.

Trump, who was friends with Epstein for years, didn’t explain what supposed crimes he wanted the Justice Department to investigate. None of the men he mentioned in a social media post demanding the probe has been accused of sexual misconduct by any of Epstein’s victims.

Hours before Bondi’s announcement, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that he would ask her, the Justice Department and the FBI to investigate Epstein’s “involvement and relationship” with Clinton and others, including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers and LinkedIn founder and Democratic donor Reid Hoffman.

Trump, calling the matter “the Epstein Hoax, involving Democrats, not Republicans,” said the investigation should also include financial giant JPMorgan Chase, which provided banking services to Epstein, and “many other people and institutions.”

There’s no evidence that any of the people Trump is targeting were involved in sexual abuse or sex trafficking.

A JPMorgan Chase spokesperson, Patricia Wexler, said the company regretted associating with Epstein “but did not help him commit his heinous acts.”

“The government had damning information about his crimes and failed to share it with us or other banks,” she said. The company agreed previously to pay millions of dollars to Epstein’s victims, who had sued arguing that the bank ignored red flags about criminal activity.

Clinton has acknowledged traveling on Epstein’s private jet but has said through a spokesperson that he had no knowledge of the late financier’s crimes. He also has never been accused of misconduct by Epstein’s known victims.

Clinton’s deputy chief of staff Angel Ureña posted on X Friday: “These emails prove Bill Clinton did nothing and knew nothing. The rest is noise meant to distract from election losses, backfiring shutdowns, and who knows what else.” [….]

Summers and Hoffman had nothing to do with either case, but both were friendly with Epstein and exchanged emails with him. Those messages were among the documents released this week, along with other correspondence Epstein had with friends and business associates in the years before his death.

Nothing in the messages suggested any wrongdoing on the men’s part, other than associating with someone who had been accused of sex crimes against children.

At Letters from an American, historian Heather Cox Richardson writes:

In a transparent attempt to distract from the many times his own name appears in the documents from the Epstein estate members of the House Oversight Committee released Wednesday, President Donald J. Trump asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate Democrats whose names appeared in the documents. He singled out former president Bill Clinton, former treasury secretary Lawrence H. Summers, and Reid Hoffman, who founded LinkedIn and who is a Democratic donor.

Marlon Brando and cat

Although the attorney general is the nation’s chief law enforcement officer and is supposed to be nonpartisan in protecting the rule of law, Bondi responded that the Department of Justice “will pursue this with urgency and integrity.” Maegan Vazquez and Shayna Jacobs of the Washington Post note that reporters have already covered the relationship of Epstein with Clinton, Summers, and Hoffman for years, and that in July, Justice Department officials said an examination of the FBI files relating to Epstein—a different cache than Wednesday’s—“did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.”

Meidas Touch noted: “In normal times, it would be a major scandal for the President to direct his AG to criminally investigate his political opponents to deflect from his own involvement in a major scandal—and for the AG to immediately announce she is doing it. The Epstein scandal and cover up just got even bigger.”

This scandal truly has Trump flailing. I hope this will be the one that really brings him down, but he somehow seems to wriggle out of every scandal. But he certainly is terrified of the Epstein files being released.

Politico: House plans to vote Tuesday on releasing Epstein files.

House Republican leaders are planning to hold a vote Tuesday on legislation to force the release of federal files related to Jeffrey Epstein, according to three people granted anonymity to discuss internal plans ahead of a public announcement.

The tentative scheduling decision follows a successful effort by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) to sidestep Speaker Mike Johnson and force a floor vote on their bipartisan bill to compel the Justice Department to release all of its records related to the late convicted sex offender.

President Donald Trump has made repeated attempts to kill the effort, which continued in a series of Truth Social posts Friday. But Johnson said Wednesday he intends to move quickly to hold the vote and put the matter to bed.

Under the current GOP plan, the House Rules Committee would approve a procedural measure Monday night to advance eight bills for floor consideration, including language to tee up the Epstein legislation. If that measure is approved on the floor, likely early Tuesday afternoon, debate and a final vote on the Epstein bill could immediately follow. GOP leaders are considering whether to postpone the Epstein vote until Tuesday evening….

The four Republicans who signed on to the discharge petition forcing the vote — Massie, plus Reps. Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Nancy Mace of South Carolina — are likely to examine Johnson’s moves very closely. They could together block any procedural measure that would undercut the Epstein legislation, postpone it or otherwise alter it.

One more story on the Epstein texts from Jason Wilson at The Guardian: Steve Bannon advised Jeffrey Epstein for years on how to rehab his reputation, texts show.

Hundreds of texts over almost a year show Maga influencer Steve Bannon and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein workshopping legal and media strategies to protect Epstein from the legal and publicity quagmire that enveloped him in the last year of his life.

The texts, released by the House oversight committee on Wednesday, show that as early as June 2018, the pair were devising responses to the gathering storm of public outrage about Epstein’s criminal history, his favorable treatment by the justice system, and his friendships with powerful figures in business, politics and academia.

Bannon conspiratorially described the renewed scrutiny of Epstein as a “sophisticated op”, and over time he counseled Epstein in his adversarial responses to media outlets, the justice system and his victims.

All the while, both men were also strategizing how best to promote Bannon’s rightwing populist agenda, and the political fortunes of its standard bearer, Donald Trump.

In all of Epstein’s messages, the identity of his correspondent is redacted. But Bannon’s identity in the threads cited in this reporting is clear from contextual clues including his documented activities at the time, details of his business and media pursuits, and other disclosures. In one document, the sender’s phone number is not redacted – and it is the same number linked to Bannon in a legal case against Trump adviser Roger Stone.

Read the rest at The Guardian.

Trump is also beginning to panic about the economy and the negative effects of his insane tariffs.

David J. Lynch at The Washington Post: Trump goes on defense over tariffs as prices on everyday items keep rising.

President Donald Trump’s bid Friday to sootheconsumers by dropping tariffs on a wide array of groceries, including coffee, beef, bananas and tomatoes — contradicting his repeated claims that the levies were not affecting retail prices — shows he is on the defensive over his signature policy initiative.

Public opposition, eroding support on Capitol Hill and a potentially lethal challenge before the Supreme Court have Trump scrambling to defend his economic strategy even as the administration notches diplomatic agreements that are cementing its high-tariff approach to rebalancing global trade.

Sophia Loren with her cat, 1959

Public opinion is the immediate worry, following recent Democratic electoral victories in Virginia and New Jersey that were fueled by Americans’ ire over the cost of living. By a nearly 2-to-1 margin, registered voters disapproved of the president’s tariffs in a recent Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll, a finding that has been consistent all year and could imperil Republican candidates in next year’s congressional elections.

The president on Friday issued an executive order rolling back import taxes on many foods, his most significant retreat on the emergency tariffs he imposed in April, which were billed at the time as loophole-free. In September, the White House had signaled that some products that are not generally produced in the United States could be spared tariffs once nations where they originate reached trade deals with the United States. But Friday’s exemptions apply to products from any nation, even those that have not agreed on trade terms.

“They know that they shouldn’t have imposed a lot of these tariffs and that they’re hurting affordability for consumers. Now they’re looking for a way to justify lowering them. And that’s fine. But did we really need to go through all this in the first place?” said Christopher Padilla, senior adviser to the Brunswick Group and a former trade official in the George W. Bush administration….

This week’s tariff cuts appear aimed at responding to public concern over high prices. Inflation overall is running at an annual rate of 3 percent, above the Federal Reserve’s 2 percent target for price stability but well down from the mid-2022 peak of 9.1 percent.

Prices on many everyday items, however, continue to soar. Through September, the most recent data available, coffee prices were up 19 percent over the previous 12 months, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Bananas were up 7 percent.

Elizabeth Buchwald at CNN: Trump’s latest tariff TACO probably won’t make your life more affordable.

Americans could soon see some goods get cheaper after President Donald Trump exempted certain agricultural imports from a set of tariffs on Friday. But any price drops likely won’t be enough to make life feel more affordable any time soon.

The executive order exempted products like coffee, beef and some fruit from Trump’s “reciprocal” tariffs, which began rolling out in April.

The new exemptions are part of what traders have dubbed TACO, or Trump Always Chickens Out, to describe times when the president backs off a policy after unintended consequences pop up. In the case of tariffs, Trump has already reversed a number of his measures, a sign that the administration is reshaping his signature economic tool.

The latest TACO comes after voters, worried about affordability, gave Republicans a drubbing in recent off-year elections.

Why this likely won’t help consumers much:

Nevertheless, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the new exemptions generally won’t help improve affordability.

“It depends on what the importers do with the tariff,” he said in a CNBC interview on Friday. “So when you look at the overall price trend, it hasn’t been because of tariffs. It’s been because of these other events going on and just supply and demand.”

Steve Martin and cat

But in cases where tariffs have been passed along to consumers, prices could drop, Greer said.

One potential example: bananas. American consumers are paying about 8% more for bananas than before Trump’s second term began.

The US largely imports bananas from South American countries. With bananas exempt from “reciprocal” tariffs that started at 10%, prices could go back to where they were earlier this year, said Sarah House, senior economist at Wells Fargo. But it’s unlikely to be something most consumers notice unless they’re buying bananas often, she added.

But not everyone is convinced it will even do that much.

“It is not clear that lowering tariffs will lower prices — it depends on what retailers think they can get away with. The import price of bananas has fallen since tariffs were imposed, but the US consumer price has risen,” Paul Donovan, chief economist at UBS global wealth management, said in a note last week. (The United States tracks import prices before accounting for tariffs. In some cases, import prices have fallen as exporters lower what they charge as a way to share in the tariff expense importers pay.)

Lazy Caturday Reads

Posted: October 11, 2025 | Author: bostonboomer | Filed under: just because | Tags: America250, cat art, caturday, CDC massive firings, China tariffs, Donald Trump, federal employee layoffs, government shutdown 2025, health care subsidies, Melania Trump, Mike Johnson, No Kings protests, Qatar air base, SCOTUS emergency orders, Trump Arch | 8 Comments

Good Day!!

portrait by Gurutze Ramos

It’s finally starting to feel like Autumn here. Leaves are starting to change color and temperatures are dropping into the 50s and 60s. We’re expecting a Nor’easter over the long weekend, with rain, high winds, and coastal flooding.

I’m still having trouble dealing with the news; it has just gotten to be too painful watching Trump and his thugs destroy my country. But the horror continues, whether I’m paying attention or not. Of course, the top story is the effects of the government shutdown.

The promised layoffs and firings of government workers have begun.

This morning’s Boston Globe has a story on the effects here in the Boston area: Local federal workers say they’ve never seen a shutdown like this.

Beth Willwerth, a federal employee at the Andover IRS office, learned she had been furloughed 15 minutes before she spoke to the Globe on Friday.

Willwerth, who is also the chapter president of the National Treasury Employees Union Chapter 68,has been with the IRS since 2009. This is her fourth shutdown.

“This is far different than anything I have ever seen,” she said. “I have never seen anything like this in my 16 years here. I have never hugged so many people coming into my office crying.”

As the government shutdown entered its 11th day, with no sign of a deal in sight, government workers are seeing their paychecks shrink or cut entirely, learning they are newly furloughed, or facing layoffs, as President Trump had promised. They’re dipping into savings and taking side hustles to make ends meet. Federal workers tell the Globe it’s more than just about finances. They’ve never seen a shutdown this chaotic, or this seemingly vindictive.

Many are continuously, unpleasantly surprised by breaking developments, particularly news of an increasing number of federal workers getting fired. By Friday afternoon, federal health, homeland security, education, energy, and Treasury Department employees had been laid off.

Mere hours later, 98 field staff working at the Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity offices at the US Department of Housing and Urban Development across the nation had been notified they’d be laid off effective Dec. 9, a representative from local 3258 of the American Federation of Government Employees told the Globe. The office helps enforce the Fair Housing Act by investigating housing discrimination complaints and mediating cases.

The number of laid-off field staff includes all 11 field staff from the Boston Regional HUD Office.

CNN: Trump administration lays off thousands of federal workers during government shutdown.

More than 4,000 federal employees receivedlayoff notices Friday as part of the Trump administration’s broad effort to reshape the government while it remains shutdown, according to a court filing Friday.

The filing provides greater insight into an announcement from President Donald Trump’s budget chief earlier in the day that the administration had begun government-wide reductions in force that had been anticipated since federal funding lapsed on October 1.

“The RIFs have begun,” Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought posted on X, without elaborating on how many federal workers had received RIF – or reduction in force – notices.

As of Friday evening, RIF notices had gone out to employees at the departments of Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Homeland Security and Treasury, according to department spokespeople, union representatives and sources directly impacted.

Treasury and HHS saw the highest number of reductions, with more than 1,000 workers laid off at each department, according to the filing in a lawsuit brought by two federal employee unions seeking to stop the layoffs.

Also, the US Patent and Trademark Office, which is part of the Commerce Department, issued lapse-related RIF notices to employees last week, according to the filing. And the Environmental Protection Agency sent “intent to RIF” notices to 20 to 30 employees, though it hasn’t made a final decision on whether or when it would lay off those workers.

Other agencies are “actively considering” whether to conduct additional RIFs related to the shutdown, the filing said.

Trump said late Friday afternoon that he plans to fire “a lot” of federal workers in retaliation for the government shutdown, vowing to target those deemed to be aligned with the Democratic Party.

Lazy Caturday Reads: Literary Cats Along With Some News

Posted: October 4, 2025 | Author: bostonboomer | Filed under: just because | Tags: 82nd Airborne, cat art, caturday, deportations, Donald Trump, drone strikes on boats, extrajudicial executions, Howard Lutnick, immigration, Jeffrey Epstein, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, literary cats, Mark Hertling, Miranda Devine, Pete Hegseth, Portland OR, Signal app leaks, Venezuela | 5 Comments

Good Afternoon!!

Haruki Murakami with Kafka

It’s the end of another week in which lots of bad things happened. Frankly, I can’t keep track of everything anymore. Here are some of the stories that interested me most.

I’m still recovering from Tuesday’s insane performances by Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump in front of 800 military leaders whom they forced to travel to Quantico Marine Corps base from all over the world. Former Lt. General Mark Hertling writes about it at The Bulwark: Questions After Quantico.

THE SPEECHES ON TUESDAY IN QUANTICO—by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine, Secretary of Defense (or War, as he would have it) Pete Hegseth, and President Donald Trump—were over in just two hours. But for the generals, admirals, and senior enlisted who left that auditorium and started their long flights home to the Pacific, Europe, and the Middle East, those speeches were just the beginning. Because when Washington speaks—especially when it speaks with bluster, ambiguity, or hostility—it is the commanders who must translate to their troops, steady their units, and respond to the challenges of new orders.

I’ve been that commander. I’ve flown back overnight from Washington to Germany, walked into my headquarters in Heidelberg, and faced staff officers and soldiers who were waiting—not for a policy memo, not for another directive from the Pentagon, but for their commander to tell them what it all meant and to give them implementing instructions. After Tuesday’s meeting, they will want to know what things they will have to change, if their country still believes in them, if the oath they swore still anchors their service, if the mission they’re preparing for or executing still has clarity and legitimacy….

…[T]he shockwaves of the Quantico gathering are only now beginning to reverberate through bases in Europe, the Pacific, the Middle East, and beyond. Because when those commanders and their enlisted advisors returned to their posts, bases, air wings, or carrier strike groups, the questions began.

As the speech was being publicly broadcast, female soldiers living on the Kasernes of Germany watching on the Armed Forces Network were asking one another: Does this mean our opportunities to serve in jobs we love are closing again? Will I still be allowed to compete fairly for assignments and promotions? Black soldiers, weary and wary of subtle slights and systemic hurdles, will wonder if the new emphasis on “appearance” and “discipline” means a return to the days when shaving profiles for painful and unsightly face “bumps” were treated as liabilities instead of as a need for legitimate accommodations. Sikh soldiers, who after long battles were only recently granted the right to wear turbans and keep beards as part of a commonsense accommodation for their faith, will now wonder if that right will again be questioned. For each of them, their unique individuality and love for service in uniform are inseparable.

And gay and transgender service members—many of whom finally felt able to serve openly over the last decade—felt the floor shift beneath them yet again. Do I need to start making plans to leave? one staff sergeant might quietly ask her first sergeant. Or do I just keep my head down and hope this storm passes? Keeping your head down is sometimes needed in combat when engaging with the enemy; it’s not something we want from our soldiers who are living their Army value of “personal courage.”

There will be broader, increasingly gnawing concerns for the staffs: Are we really being asked to prepare for missions inside our own cities? What happens if peaceful protesters are described as “enemies”? Where does that leave the oath we swore—to the Constitution, not to a man or a party?

These aren’t abstract policy questions. They will be whispered in barracks hallways, posed after hours in a motor pool, or texted late at night to a trusted squad leader. They are the lived reality of a military force watching politics intrude on their profession. And with each one, there is the question of degraded morale, an erosion of trust.

How will commanders handle these overwhelming questions? Read what Hertling has to say about it at The Bulwark.

Patricia HIghsmith with Ripley

I’m also still gloating about the latest exploit by Trump’s stupidest cabinet member (and that’s really saying something, considering that group of morons) Howard Lutnik. Lutnick gave an interview to a podcast hosted by Miranda Devine of the New York Post in which he told personal stories about Jeffrey Epstein, who was once Lutnick’s next door neighbor in New York City. Could there be anything more guaranteed to enrage Trump?

Josh Christenson at The New York Post: Howard Lutnick tells ‘Pod Force One’ ex-neighbor Jeffrey Epstein showed off massage room, m ade creepy comment during townhouse tour.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, in a notable break with the Department of Justice, claimed late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein was “the greatest blackmailer ever” — and may have traded the feds video of his rich and well-connected associates getting massages from young women in exchange for a controversial 2008 plea deal.

Lutnick made the shocking allegations to The Post’s Miranda Devine on the latest episode of “Pod Force One,” out now.

The 64-year-old cabinet secretary said Epstein himself showed off his notorious “massage room” while giving Lutnick and his wife a tour of the infamous East 71st Street townhouse after the couple moved in next door to the since-disgraced financier in 2005.

“I say to him, ‘Massage table in the middle of your house? How often do you have a massage?’” Lutnick recalled. “And he says, ‘Every day.’ And then he gets, like weirdly close to me, and he says, ‘And the right kind of massage.’”

Lutnick said he and his wife quickly excused themselves and left Epstein’s home, “and in the six to eight steps it takes to get from his house to my house, my wife and I decided that I will never be in the room with that disgusting person ever again.”

When asked by Devine whether Epstein’s rich and powerful associates — including the likes of Prince Andrew and Microsoft founder Bill Gates — “could hang around him and not see what you saw, or did they see it and ignore it,” Lutnick responded, “They participated.”

“They get a massage, that’s what his MO was. ‘Get a massage, get a massage,’ and what happened in that massage room, I assume, was on video,” the commerce secretary went on. “This guy was the greatest blackmailer ever, blackmailed people. That’s how he had money.” [….]

Lutnick added: “I assume way back when they traded those videos in exchange for him getting that 18-month sentence, which allowed him to have visits and be out of jail. I mean, he’s a serial sex offender. How could he get 18 months and be able to go to his office during the day and have visitors and stuff? There must have been a trade.

“So, my assumption, I have no knowledge, but my assumption is there was a trade for the videos, because there were people on those videos,” he also claimed.

Hahahaha!! Trump has tried so hard to distract from the Epstein files. He was pals for years with the guy who nauseated Howard Lutnick after one brief interaction. Now Democrats in the Congress want Lutnick to testify for their committees. You can watch the video of the Lutnick interview at the NY Post link.

Gore Vidal with Caligula

Swapna Venugopal Ramaswamy at USA Today: Trump’s commerce secretary calls Jeffrey Epstein the ‘greatest blackmailer.’

For months, President Donald Trump has pleaded with his supporters to move on from the Jeffrey Epstein controversy − calling it a “Democratic hoax” − even as he faces growing calls from Congress and many in his own MAGA base for more disclosure on the jet-setting sex offender.

But Trump’s fellow billionaire and Commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, apparently didn’t get the memo.

Lutnick held forth on a recent podcast about how he found Epstein, who was a close friend of Trump’s for more than a decade, to be “gross” and believed he was a “blackmailer.”

“He was gross,” said Lutnick, in a Oct.1 podcast interview with New York Post’s Miranda Devine. Lutnick described Epstein as the “greatest blackmailer ever” and suggested he had used compromising videos of prominent men to get a 2008 sweetheart deal in Florida amid a child prostitution investigation.

Those comments sharply differ from a memo released by the Justice Department and FBI in July which said that there was no “credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals” or that he kept an “incriminating client list.”

One more on Lutnick by Asawin Suebsaeng at Zeteo: ‘F***ing Dumbass’: Trump Officials Want Howard Lutnick Sidelined After Epstein Comments.

Top officials in Donald Trump’s administration are furious with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, knowledgeable sources tell Zeteo, after he went on a tabloid podcast this week and blabbed about the one sex criminal who Team Trump wants to talk about least: Jeffrey Epstein. Not only that, but Lutnick went off script and undermined the government’s entire story about the late Epstein.

For months, President Trump and the highest levels of his administration have been trying to sell the public and his MAGA supporters on their conclusion that Epstein, the notorious sex offender and former Trump pal,did not run a secret sexual-blackmail operation targeting wealthy, powerful elites.

Sylvia Plath with “Daddy”

On Wednesday morning, the New York Post published parts of its podcast sit-down with Lutnick, who was once Epstein’s neighbor. The Trump Cabinet member told the Post about his tour of Epstein’s townhouse, where Epstein showed him his “massage room.” Lutnick said he was quickly “disgusted,” before asserting that Epstein’s rich and famous associates not only knew about his bad behavior but “participated.” He called Epstein a “blackmailer,” something the Trump administration strenuously denies.

Several senior Trump officials, some of whom were responsible for carefully curating the messaging regarding the administration’s decision to end its Epstein investigation, were apoplectic on Wednesday, bemoaning to one another about why Lutnick is still employed by the president and why the commerce secretary is allowed to do media appearances, four senior Trump administration appointees tell Zeteo.

“That fucking dumbass,” one of the senior Trump administration officials told Zeteo on Wednesday, after seeing a clip of Lutnick riffing on Epstein. “I’ve worked with him and can tell you he doesn’t think he did anything negative… That’s not how he thinks. He just talks and talks, and doesn’t care what unhelpful bullshit comes out.”

Well, Trump appointed that dumbass, along with a bunch of other idiots in his cabinet.

In more serious news, Trump is still murdering people in small boats off the coast of Venezuela.

Kathryn Armstrong at BBC News: Four killed in latest US strike on alleged drug vessel near Venezuela.

US forces have killed four people in an attack on a boat off the coast of Venezuela that was allegedly trafficking drugs, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth says.

“The strike was conducted in international waters just off the coast of Venezuela while the vessel was transporting substantial amounts of narcotics – headed to America to poison our people,” Hegseth wrote in a post on X.

It is the latest in a number of recent deadly strikes that the US has carried out on boats in international waters it says are involved in “narco-trafficking”.

The strikes have attracted condemnation in countries including Venezuela and Colombia, with some international lawyers describing the strikes as a breach of international law.

Hegseth said the attack took place in the US Southern Command’s area of responsibility, which covers most of South America and the Caribbean.

“Our intelligence, without a doubt, confirmed that this vessel was trafficking narcotics, the people onboard were narco-terrorists, and they were operating on a known narco-trafficking transit route,” Hegseth said about Friday’s attack.

“These strikes will continue until the attacks on the American people are over!!!!”

US President Trump also confirmed the strike on his Truth Social platform, saying that the boat was carrying enough drugs “to kill 25 to 50 thousand people”.

However, the US has not provided evidence for its claims or any information about the identities of those on board.

An opinion piece from W.J. Hennigan at The New York Times (gift link): If We’re at War, Americans Deserve to Know More About It.

The Trump administration told Congress this week that the United States is engaged in an “armed conflict” with drug cartels.

The average American knows vanishingly little about what its government seeks to accomplish in this fight. Citizens aren’t in possession of the metrics by which to judge the administration’s pursuit of those goals.

George Bernard Shaw with Pygmalian

We haven’t been told which specific drugs they seek to stop. We haven’t been told much about which specific groups they seek to destroy. We haven’t been told much about what legal authorities they are acting on.

Withholding this information from the American public is the administration’s way to escape scrutiny. At the very least, the country deserves some evidence of whether the military operation is working.

If stopping the flow of drugs is the goal, the actions taken so far have been unpersuasive. American forces, at the direction of President Trump, executed a lethal airstrike on Friday on a boat off Venezuela, killing four people on board. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth posted a video of the attack on X, saying, “The vessel was transporting substantial amounts of narcotics – headed to America to poison our people,” adding that it was “affiliated with Designated Terrorist Organizations.”

This is the sort of vague language the administration has used in its campaign over the past two months as it directs the military to sporadically launch airstrikes — now totaling four — against boats in the region that the government says are running drugs. No corresponding evidence has been provided to the public to support the actions. The operation amounts to extrajudicial executions, according to U.N. officials.

A bit more:

Without delving into the strikes’ questionable legality again, the bombing runs fall well short of decisive military actions. It would be hard to convince anyone that blowing up a few motorboats — and all the people aboard them — will prove conclusive in winning the half-century-old war on drugs.

For one thing, this isn’t how the Pentagon combats enemy networks. Say what you will about the many failures of America’s global war on terrorism, but it’s undeniable the U.S. military became frighteningly proficient at penetrating and taking apart organizations over the past quarter-century.

Instead of systematically killing low- and midlevel henchmen in pinprick airstrikes, U.S. forces learned that more information could be gleaned through capturing those suspects and gathering, bagging and tagging their personal electronics for intelligence analysis. A phone from a suspect’s pocket in Iraq, for instance, would often include enough information, such as phone numbers and text conversations, so that a follow-on raid on other operatives could be planned. This is how U.S. forces mapped out countless terrorist groups’ leadership ranks along with the fighters under their command.

The infrastructure for ship interdictions already exists in the Caribbean. The U.S. Coast Guard and Navy have long interdicted vessels that they suspected of drug running.

Why the administration has opted to blow apart potential leads and sources instead of exploiting them is anyone’s guess.

These are serious questions, but Trump and Hegseth aren’t serious people. All they are interested in is blowing people and boats up and posting videos of the action. It’s disgusting that they are getting away with doing this in our name. You can use the gift link to read the rest of this thoughtful article.

The Abrego Garcia case is still going on, and there was a notable ruling yesterday.

Alan Feuer at The New York Times (gift link): Judge Finds ‘Likelihood’ That Charges Against Abrego Garcia Are Vindictive.

A federal judge in Nashville ruled on Friday that there was a “realistic likelihood” that the indictment filed against Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, the immigrant who was wrongfully deported to El Salvador in March and then brought back to face criminal charges, amounted to a vindictive prosecution by the Justice Department.

The ruling was an astonishing rebuke of both the department and some of its top officials, including Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general. Mr. Blanche was called out by name in the ruling for remarks he made about Mr. Abrego Garcia’s case on the same day in June he was returned to U.S. soil to face the charges in Federal District Court in Nashville.

Doris Lessing with Black Madonna

In a 16-page decision, Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr. said there was evidence that Mr. Abrego Garcia’s prosecution “may stem from retaliation” by the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Judge Crenshaw found that Trump officials may have sought to punish Mr. Abrego Garcia for having filed a lawsuit successfully challenging his initial “unlawful deportation” to El Salvador.

Moreover, Judge Crenshaw indicated how he was serious about getting to the bottom of the issue of vindictiveness. He said he intended to permit Mr. Abrego Garcia’s lawyers to pry, at least in part, into the Trump administration’s process of deciding to bring an indictment in the first place and how the charges related to the deportation case.

Vindictive prosecution motions are exceedingly difficult to win because of the high threshold required to prove that prosecutors acted improperly by filing criminal charges. Under the law, cases can be considered vindictive only if defendants can show that prosecutors displayed animus toward them while they were seeking to vindicate their rights in court, and that the charges would not have been brought except for the existence of that animus.

While Judge Crenshaw has not yet made a final decision on the issue of vindictiveness, the fact that he is even considering doing so in Mr. Abrego Garcia’s case is a hugely embarrassing blow to the Trump administration. From the moment Trump officials acknowledged that they had mistakenly expelled Mr. Abrego Garcia to El Salvador, President Trump and his top aides began a relentless barrage of attacks against him, calling him a violent member of the street gang MS-13, a wife beater and even a terrorist, effectively blaming him for being the victim of their own administrative error.

The judge’s ruling highlighted the ways in which the habit many Trump officials have of speaking out of court about legal cases has — or could — come back to haunt them.

Use the gift link to read the rest if you’re intersted.

Trump has been talking about sending troops to cities governed by Democrats. Lately he’s been focusing on Portland, Oregon. This is just beyond belief. And we know about it because of another leak from Signal.

Catherine Bouris at The Daily Beast: Trump Goon Spills Bonkers Plan to Deploy 82nd Airborne to Blue City.

A senior White House official accidentally disclosed that the Trump administration was considering deploying an elite army strike force into Portland by using Signal in a public place.

The Minnesota Star Tribune reported Friday that Anthony Salisbury, one of Stephen Miller’s top deputies, was observed discussing the plans via Signal in view of members of the public while traveling in Minnesota. The newspaper was then contacted by one member of the public who was troubled to see sensitive military plans discussed so openly.

Aldous Huxley with Limbo

In the messages, senior White House officials discussed the potential deployment of the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division, an elite unit that specializes in parachuting into hostile territory. The division has been deployed in both world wars, including the Battle of the Bulge, as well as Vietnam and Afghanistan.

Across several conversations, the Star Tribune reports, Salisbury spoke about a range of matters with Pete Hegseth adviser Patrick Weaver as well as other officials.

In one of the messages, Weaver revealed that Hegseth wanted Trump to explicitly instruct him to send soldiers to Portland.

“Between you and I, I think Pete just wants the top cover from the boss if anything goes sideways with the troops there,” Weaver reportedly said.

Noting the potentially disastrous optics around sending an elite division into an American city, Weaver told Salisbury, “82nd is like our top tier [quick reaction force] for abroad. So it will cause a lot of headlines. Probably why he wants potus to tell him to do it.”

Ultimately, Trump opted to send 200 National Guard soldiers into Portland, following a similar playbook used in other Democrat-controlled cities like Los Angeles and Washington D.C. Both the state of Oregon and the city of Portland have sued to stop the deployment.

	dakinikat on Thursday Cartoons: Jaws
	bostonboomer on Thursday Cartoons: Jaws
	Mama Lopez on Thursday Cartoons: Jaws
	dakinikat on Wednesday Reads: Is Trump…
	dakinikat on Wednesday Reads: Is Trump…
	dakinikat on Tuesday Cartoon Overload
	FactualFactCheckAfte… on Wednesday Reads: Is Trump…

Sky Dancing

a place to discuss real issues

Lazy Caturday Reads: Some Positive News for Democracy Fans?

Good Afternoon!!

Lazy Caturday Reads: Mamdani, Greene, Ukraine, and Other News

Good Afternoon!!

Lazy Caturday Reads: Epstein, Epstein, Epstein, and More News

Good Afternoon!!

Lazy Caturday Reads

Good Day!!

Lazy Caturday Reads: Literary Cats Along With Some News

Good Afternoon!!

COVID-19 LINKS

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Grab our RSS Feed

Follow Blog via Email

Like Sky Dancing on Facebook

The Front Page Team

Contact us

Memeorandum

Crooks and Liars

Democracy NOW

The UK Guardian

About our Banner

Categories

Archives

Find it here!

Blog Stats

a place to discuss real issues

Good Afternoon!!

Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:

Good Afternoon!!

Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:

Good Afternoon!!

Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:

Good Day!!

Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:

Good Afternoon!!

Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:

COVID-19 LINKS

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Grab our RSS Feed

Follow Blog via Email

The Front Page Team

Contact us

About our Banner

Categories

Archives

Find it here!

Blog Stats