Good Morning!!Pangur Bán
From the ninth-century Irish poem
Pangur Bán and I at work,Adepts, equals, cat and clerk:His whole instinct is to hunt,Mine to free the meaning pent.**More than loud acclaim, I loveBooks, silence, thought, my alcove.Happy for me, Pangur BánChild-plays round some mouse’s den.**Truth to tell, just being here,Housed alone, housed together,Adds up to its own reward:Concentration, stealthy art.**Next thing an unwary mouseBares his flank: Pangur pounces.Next thing lines that held and heldMeaning back begin to yield**All the while, his round bright eyeFixes on the wall, while IFocus my less piercing gazeOn the challenge of the page.**With his unsheathed, perfect nailsPangur springs, exults and kills.When the longed-for, difficultAnswers come, I too exult.**So it goes. To each his own.No vying. No vexation.Taking pleasure, taking pains,Kindred spirits, veterans.**Day and night, soft purr, soft pad,Pangur Bán has learned his trade.Day and night, my own hard workSolves the cruxes, makes a mark.Source: Poetry (April 2006)
This is what the poem sounds like in the original medieval Irish:
Now do I really have to think about politics news? I suppose I do.
Wired: A US Treasury Threat Intelligence Analysis Designates DOGE Staff as ‘Insider Threat’
Members of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) team have had access to the US Treasury Department’s payment systems for over a week. On Thursday, the threat intelligence team at one of the department’s agencies recommended that DOGE members be monitored as an “insider threat.”
Sources say members of the Bureau of the Fiscal Service’s IT division and others received an email detailing these concerns.
“There is ongoing litigation, congressional legislation, and widespread protests relating to DOGE’s access to Treasury and the Bureau of the Fiscal Service,” reads a section of the email titled “Recommendations,” reviewed by WIRED. “If DOGE members have any access to payment systems, we recommend suspending that access immediately and conducting a comprehensive review of all actions they may have taken on these systems.”
Although Treasury and White House officials have repeatedly denied it, WIRED has reported that DOGE technologists had the ability to not only read the code of sensitive payment systems but also rewrite it. Marko Elez, one of a number of young men identified by WIRED who have little to no government experience but are associated with DOGE, was granted read and write privileges on two of the most sensitive systems in the US government: the Payment Automation Manager and Secure Payment System at the BFS, an agency that according to Treasury records paid out $5.45 trillion in fiscal year 2024.
“There is reporting at other federal agencies indicating that DOGE members have performed unauthorized changes and locked civil servants out of the sensitive systems they gained access to,” the “Recommendations” portion of the email continues. “We further recommend that DOGE members be placed under insider threat monitoring and alerting after their access to payment systems is revoked. Continued access to any payment systems by DOGE members, even ‘read only,’ likely poses the single greatest insider threat risk the Bureau of the Fiscal Service has ever faced.”
The recommendations were part of a weekly report sent out by the BFS threat intelligence team to hundreds of staffers. “Insider threat risks are something [the threat intelligence team] usually covers,” a source told WIRED. “But they have never identified something inside the bureau as an insider threat risk that I know of.”
Wow.
The Washington Post: Federal judge blocks Musk’s DOGE from access to Treasury Department material.
NEW YORK — A federal judge issued an emergency order early Saturday prohibiting Elon Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service from accessing personal and financial data on millions of Americans kept at the Treasury Department, noting the possibility for irreparable harm.
The ruling came hours after attorneys general from 19 states sued to stop Musk’s team from dealing with sensitive files during its review of federal payment systems — an unprecedented effort that skirted firm security measures that permitted access to systems only to trained Treasury employees.
In a four-page order, Engelmayer said the states that sued the Trump administration “will face irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief.”
“That is both because of the risk that the new policy presents of the disclosure of sensitive and confidential information and the heightened risk that the systems in question will be more vulnerable than before to hacking,” Engelmayer wrote.
He adopted arguments by the states that Treasury records from the agency’s Bureau of Fiscal Services can only legally be accessed by specialized civil servants “with a need for access to perform their job duties.”
Under the order, the Trump administration is prohibited from giving access to political appointees, special government employees or government employees that are not assigned to the Treasury Department. The White House has said that Musk has been designated a special government employee.
The lawsuit, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James (D), says DOGE, a group operating under the direction of President Donald Trump, had no authority to access the Treasury Department’s systems and that doing so was a potentially massive cybersecurity and privacy risk.
A judge halts Musk’s efforts to completely destroy USAID. NBC News: Judge pauses Trump administration effort to gut USAID’s workforce by thousands.
A federal judge on Friday paused a midnight deadline for the U.S. Agency for International Development to be stripped down to a few hundred workers from a workforce of more than 5,000.
U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols issued a pause on efforts to place 2,200 staff on administrative leave and to expedite evacuations for personnel abroad until next Friday at 11:59 p.m
He also rescinded leave for 500 workers already put on leave.
“All USAID employees currently on administrative leave shall be reinstated until that date, and shall be given complete access to email, payment, and security notification systems until that date, and no additional employees shall be placed on administrative leave before that date,” Nichols wrote.
Nichols also paused the administration’s plans to impose a 30-day deadline for USAID personnel abroad to return the the United States, saying “such short notice disrupts long-settled expectations and makes it nearly impossible for evacuated employees to adequately plan for their return to the United States.”
Nichols said he would not impose a pause on the funding freeze and scheduled an in-person preliminary injunction hearing for Wednesday.
A spokesperson for Democracy Forward, a progressive nonprofit group that filed a lawsuit against the Office of Management and Budget that resulted in a judge temporarily halting the Trump administration’s freeze on most federal grants and loans, said the organization is confident it will demonstrate standing.
“We are confident our clients will be able to demonstrate standing with more fulsome briefing and are committed to continuing to use the legal process to protect the privacy of the American people and to uphold the rule of law,” the spokesperson said.
Krebs on Security: Teen on Musk’s DOGE Team Graduated from ‘The Com.’
Efficiency (DOGE) was given access to sensitive US government systems even though his past association with cybercrime communities should have precluded him from gaining the necessary security clearances to do so. As today’s story explores, the DOGE teen is a former denizen of ‘The Com,’ an archipelago of Discord and Telegram chat channels that function as a kind of distributed cybercriminal social network for facilitating instant collaboration.
Since President Trump’s second inauguration, Musk’s DOGE team has gained access to a truly staggering amount of personal and sensitive data on American citizens, moving quickly to seize control over databases at the U.S. Treasury, the Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Education, and the Department of Health and Human Resources, among others.
Wired first reported on Feb. 2 that one of the technologists on Musk’s crew is a 19-year-old high school graduate named Edward Coristine, who reportedly goes by the nickname “Big Balls” online. One of the companies Coristine founded, Tesla.Sexy LLC, was set up in 2021, when he would have been around 16 years old.
“Tesla.Sexy LLC controls dozens of web domains, including at least two Russian-registered domains,” Wired reported. “One of those domains, which is still active, offers a service called Helfie, which is an AI bot for Discord servers targeting the Russian market. While the operation of a Russian website would not violate US sanctions preventing Americans doing business with Russian companies, it could potentially be a factor in a security clearance review.”
Mr. Coristine has not responded to requests for comment. In a follow-up story this week, Wired found that someone using a Telegram handle tied to Coristine solicited a DDoS-for-hire service in 2022, and that he worked for a short time at a company that specializes in protecting customers from DDoS attacks.
Internet routing records show that Coristine runs an Internet service provider called Packetware (AS400495). Also known as “DiamondCDN,” Packetware currently hosts tesla[.]sexy and diamondcdn[.]com, among other domains.
DiamondCDN was advertised and claimed by someone who used the nickname “Rivage” on several Com-based Discord channels over the years. A review of chat logs from some of those channels show other members frequently referred to Rivage as “Edward.”
From late 2020 to late 2024, Rivage’s conversations would show up in multiple Com chat servers that are closely monitored by security companies. In November 2022, Rivage could be seen requesting recommendations for a reliable and powerful DDoS-for-hire service.
Read more complex stuff at the link. Basically this kid is a cybercriminal and he could have access to our social security numbers.
There’s lots of creepy news about creepy Elon Musk today.
Greg Sargent at The New Republic: Did Trump Quietly Kill a Sensitive Pentagon Probe into Elon Musk?
In December, more than a month before Donald Trump took the presidential oath of office, The New York Times reported a blockbuster scoop: Elon Musk and his SpaceX company had repeatedly failed to meet federal reporting requirements designed to safeguard national security despite being deeply entangled with the military and intelligence bureaucracy. These included a failure to provide details to the government of Musk’s meetings with foreign leaders, the Times reported.
Those lapses had triggered a number of internal federal reviews, according to the Times. Perhaps most interestingly, the Defense Department’s inspector general had opened a probe of the matter sometime during 2024. The Air Force and the Pentagon Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security also launched reviews in November.
Now that Trump is president and controls the executive branch—including the Defense Department—it’s time to raise what appears to be a forgotten question: What exactly is going on with these government reviews into Musk? Have they continued? Or are they effectively dead?
When Trump fired over a dozen independent inspectors general last month, one of them was the Defense Department IG, Robert Storch. We don’t know whether the Musk probe was a reason for this firing, but it now seems awfully convenient for the SpaceX billionaire, who is known to be enraged about having to face regulations and oversight while enjoying immensely lucrative contracts with the federal government.
Now Democrats fear that Trump’s firing of the Defense Department IG has had the effect of closing down the IG’s investigation into Musk. And they’re demanding that the Pentagon clarify its status.
“I want to know, where is this investigation?” said Representative Adam Smith of Washington State, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee (HASC), in an interview with me. “My deep concern is that it’s just basically been shut down and buried—and will not be pursued.”
Smith told me that Democrats on the HASC are asking the Defense Department for an update on the IG investigation. It will certainly be interesting to see if the agency clarifies this point, though Smith said there’s “no reason to expect a response anytime soon.”
Read the rest at TNR.
The Washington Post: Lawmakers flooded with calls about Elon Musk: ‘It is a deluge on DOGE.’
Good Afternoon!!Of course it’s a coup, and it is moving unbelievably rapidly.
Timothy Snyder at Thinking About: Of course it’s a coup. Miss the obvious, lose your republic.
Ten Tesla cybertrucks, painted in camouflage colors with a giant X on each roof, drive noisily through Washington DC. Tires screech. Out jump a couple of dozen young men, dressed in red and black Devil’s Champion armored costumes. After giving Nazi salutes, they grab guns and run to one government departmental after another, calling out slogans like “all power to Supreme Leader Skibidi Hitler.”
And that sort of coup attempt would have failed.
Now imagine that, instead, the scene goes like this.
A couple dozen young men go from government office to government office, dressed in civilian clothes and armed only with zip drives. Using technical jargon and vague references to orders from on high, they gain access to the basic computer systems of the federal government. Having done so, they proceed to grant their Supreme Leader access to information and the power to start and stop all government payments.
In the third decade of the twenty first century, power is more digital than physical. The buildings and the human beings are there to protect the workings of the computers, and thus the workings of the government as a whole, in our case an (in principle) democratic government which is organized and bounded by a notion of individual rights.
The ongoing actions by Musk and his followers are a coup because the individuals seizing power have no right to it. Elon Musk was elected to no office and there is no office that would give him the authority to do what he is doing. It is all illegal. It is also a coup in its intended effects: to undo democratic practice and violate human rights.
In gaining data about us all, Musk has trampled on any notion of privacy and dignity, as well as on the explicit and implicit agreements made with our government when we pay our taxes or our student loans. And the possession of that data enables blackmail and further crimes.
In gaining the ability to stop payments by the Department of the Treasury, Musk would also make democracy meaningless. We vote for representatives in Congress, who pass laws that determine how our tax money is spent. If Musk has the power to halt this process at the level of payment, he can make laws meaningless. Which means, in turn, that Congress is meaningless, and our votes are meaningless, as is our citizenship.
Joyce Vance at Civil Discourse: Is It Really a Coup?
Is it really a coup if it doesn’t feel like one? If your day-to-day life hasn’t changed? Can it be a coup if I can still write posts like this?
What we’ve seen over the last two weeks and accelerating over the weekend looks like a coup, a hostile, undemocratic takeover of government. Merriam-Webster says a coup is “a sudden decisive exercise of force in politics and especially the violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group.” No violence so far because this is a coup fueled by tech bros, not the military. But we’re watching the alteration of government happen before our eyes.
Historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat calls it “a new kind of coup,” writing in Lucid about Elon Musk’s seeming power sharing with Trump: “And here is where the U.S. 2025 situation starts to look different. The point of personalist rule is to reinforce the strongman. There is only room for one authoritarian leader at the top of the power vertical. Here there are two.” It is unusual, but it is still an effort to use extra-legal, undemocratic practices to radically alter American democracy, undoing the balance of power the Founding Fathers established between the three branches of government by consolidating power in the hands of the presidency as a complacent, Republican-led Congress looks on.
Monday night, Heather Cox Richardson started her nightly column by explaining that if Republicans wanted to do away with the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the federal agency the Trump administration suddenly shuttered over the weekend, they could do that legally. Republicans now control the White House and Congress. There is a 6-3 majority of justices appointed by Republican presidents on the Supreme Court. But instead of doing it lawfully, with Congress passing a bill for Donald Trump to sign, Richardson writes, “They are permitting unelected billionaire Elon Musk, whose investment of $290 million in Trump and other Republican candidates in the 2024 election apparently has bought him freedom to run the government, to override Congress and enact whatever his own policies are by rooting around in government agencies and cancelling those programs that he, personally, dislikes.”
Richardson concluded: “The replacement of our constitutional system of government with the whims of an unelected private citizen is a coup. The U.S. president has no authority to cut programs created and funded by Congress, and a private citizen tapped by a president has even less standing to try anything so radical.”
So, “coup” is the correct way to label the transformation of government we are living through. But with so much continuing normally, it’s easy to doubt what you’re seeing. Even experiencing it from the perspective of historians who understand this moment through the lens of history, it doesn’t seem quite real.
Ruth Ben-Ghiat at Lucid: A New Kind of Coup: Trump and Musk are Updating the Autocratic Playbook.
It seems like the plot of a political thriller. We are living through a new kind of coup in which Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, has taken over the payment and other administration systems that allow the American government to function, and has locked out federal employees from computer systems. Many of Musk’s collaborators in this endeavor previously worked for his private companies and/or helped him take over Twitter.
Musk is subject to no Congressional or other oversight because he seems to have no real official function other than as head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, a plunder operation that was named after the cryptocurrency DOGE….
What is happening now builds on classic authoritarian dynamics as I described them in Strongmen and in many essays for Lucid. There is always an “inner sanctum” that really runs the show, with its mix of family members and cronies, some with histories of working with or for foreign powers. And there is almost always a purge of the federal bureaucracy. That is now being carried out on a mass scale.
Historian Heather Cox Richardson, former FBI agent Asha Rangappa, former U.S. Attorney Joyce White Vance, and others have analyzed these processes and the interrelated factions that are implementing what I have called a Fascist-style counterrevolution: the MAGA loyalists inside and outside of the GOP, the Project 2025/Heritage Foundation crew (roughly two-thirds of the executive orders Trump has issued conform to Project 2025 plans), and the technocrats around Musk and Peter Thiel.
Vice President J.D. Vance shows the overlap among the categories. Vance is a MAGA loyalist; he wrote the forward to Heritage CEO Kevin Robert’s book Dawn’s Early Light: Taking Back Washington To Save America; and he is the surrogate of Thiel, who bankrolled not only Vance’s Senate race but also his private business ventures.
All of these individuals and groups want to rearrange government around an extremist ideological project of Christian nationalism and White supremacy, and most of them want to enact neoliberal deregulation and privatization meaures to “free” America from “corruption” and “drain the swamp.” This is part of the “revolution” Roberts has long talked about, and it has a history that runs through right-wing dictatorships across a century.
The speed of its implementation makes Trump’s takeover stand out within an authoritarian framework. The more corrupt and criminal the autocrat, the more he is obsessed with punishing enemies and feeling safe. Cue the immediate execution of the revenge and retribution part of this plan, with anyone who was involved in attempts to bring Trump and his collaborators to justice for the Jan. 6 insurrection or anything else, FBI employees included, is now a target.
Dave Troy at America 2.0: America Under Attack, Week 2: What We’re Monitoring.
Attacks on the United States have unfolded much as anticipated, with Donald Trump issuing an overwhelming number of executive orders and provocations, while Elon Musk dismantles the government from the inside out. Frankly, the number of individual actions taking place are too many to count, much less keep up with. Tariffs and market crashes are old news, while capturing Gaza is the latest provocation. Rather than react to everything, we are taking an active stance in monitoring several specific attack vectors. Here’s what we’re monitoring this week.
Neoreactionary Movement and Network State
In addition to Peter Thiel and Elon Musk, the public is beginning to become aware of the names Curtis Yarvin, Nick Land, and Balaji Srinavasan. Those of us watching the rise of extremism in tech circles know these names well, but they have been less well-known to lawmakers. Yarvin seeks to eliminate government where possible and privatize the rest. One of Yarvin’s proposals, called “RAGE” stands for “Retire All Government Employees.” Yarvin is also a monarchist, and Musk sees himself as king. Several of his team of young DOGE engineers are also aligned with Monarchism. Several politicians are being briefed on the Neoreactionary movement and its connections to Musk. The related “Network State” movement led by Srinavasan is also rooted in Neoreactionary philosophy and has been linked to Trump’s efforts to annex Greenland. (See: Meet the Bros Behind Trump’s Greenland Bluster; See: Neoreactionary Movement Memo)
DOGE: Agency ‘Deletions’ and Illegal Activity
Elon Musk has engaged a team of young engineers to attack and shut down the US Agency for International Development (USAID) as well as the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and 18F, a technology services arm of the General Services Administration. DOGE has also been reported to have altered contracts across multiple agencies (including plans to sell or eliminate real estate holdings), as well as gained direct read-write access to the US Treasury’s payments systems, pushing new code into live production use. This presents a serious security and operational risk to the United States. The House Oversight Committee has voted to subpoena Elon Musk for testimony before the committee.
Project Russia
We have previously reported on Project Russia, the Kremlin’s plans for destroying Western democracies. Musk’s current actions — nullifying the rule of law, bypassing Congress, introducing financial instability — are aligned with prescriptions outlined in Project Russia, which include replacing democracy with a supranational monarchy led by an enlightened prince-king. Project Russia also includes plans to collapse the global economy, especially the dollar. Uncertainty around tariffs along with government shutdown (March 14) and potential US debt default (Q2 2025) pose major national security risks. (See: Project Russia: The Kremlin’s Playbook for Undermining Democracies)
David Kurtz at Talking Points Memo: A Full-Blown Constitutional Crisis With No End In Sight.
President Trump’s extraordinary assault on the constitutional order is inflicting unimaginable damage on democracy at home, on U.S. national interests abroad, on individual rights, and on the health, safety and welfare of all Americans. It is a full frontal assault on the people and on the government they elected him to run.
What now?
With congressional Republicans in abject subservience to Trump, the only potential constraint on his lawlessness are the federal courts. Emphasis on “potential.” But even if a judiciary stacked with Trump appointees stands tall, it’s critical to understand that the courts alone cannot save us from the constitutional disorder of a sidelined legislative branch over which the executive runs roughshod or of an immunized president who is not only failing to take care that the laws be faithfully executed but is violating the laws on a near-daily basis.
As I’ve emphasized this week, one important measure of how bad things will get is whether Trump begins to ignore court orders. That wouldn’t spell a constitutional crisis only because this already is a constitutional crisis. But it would mean that we’ve well and truly crossed the Rubicon into something that is no longer a democracy, with Trump as an American strongman, even if he continues to prop up some of the trappings of the former republic, like Congress. We may already be there.
Whether the judicial branch serves as a bulwark against Trump’s worst excesses or is merely the next domino to fall will play out over the coming weeks. But even if the judiciary holds the line, it cannot undo all the colossal damage already wreaked by Trump and his billionaire wingman. It can’t fully stop ongoing damage from what has already been done or fully corral future yet-to-be-done damage from a renegade Trump.
While the focus is now shifting to the courts and the dozens of important lawsuits that have been filed in recent days to try to rein in all manner of blatant presidential lawlessness, judges can only do so much. While fighting Trump in the courts is critical and could shape much of the next four years and beyond, it an extremely limited response to the breakdown in the constitutional order that is underway….
A sampling of just some of important lawsuits filed in recent days:
- FBI agents suing to stop the release of the names of employees involved in the Trump and Jan. 6 prosecutions;
- federal employee unions suing over Trump’s bogus deferred retirement offer;
- a doctors group suing over the removal of public health data from government websites;
- two anonymous federal workers suing to stop Elon Musk’s team from continuing to use an unauthorized server at OPM to send blast emails to everyone in government;
- a coalition of labor union suing to block the Musk team from continuing to access sensitive payment systems at Treasury.
This is only a partial list and excludes a whole different category of lawsuits by targets of Trump seeking to vindicate their individual rights, like trans prisoners.
Tyler McBrien at the New York Times: What Is ‘State Capture’? A Warning for Americans.
On Friday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent reportedly granted aides of Elon Musk access to the department’s payments system, which handles more than $5 trillion and sensitive data on Social Security and Medicare benefits and grants. The system also contains data on government contractors in direct competition with Mr. Musk’s own companies.
It was the latest troubling report of the administration’s interventions into practically every corner of the federal government that also include President Trump’s firing, sidelining and encouraging civil servants to quit.
The full picture of the government overhaul has yet to come into focus, and the contours of Mr. Musk’s role and mission in that transformation remain sketchy. (On Monday, President Trump tried to offer some clarity, saying that “Elon can’t do and won’t do anything without our approval.”)
But the cumulative effect of these stories offers at best a complicated answer to what should be an uncomplicated question: Who exactly is running the federal government?
It’s troubling enough not to be able to answer emphatically with “democratically elected leaders.” Even more troubling is the possibility that the actual answer is Mr. Musk — the world’s richest man — and other unaccountable, unelected, unconfirmed allies cozy with the president.
Political economists have a name for that: state capture. State capture occurs when wealthy private interests influence a government to such a degree that they can freely direct policy decisions and public funds for their own benefit or for the benefit of their ideological fellow travelers (or both).
Revelations of this especially pernicious, widespread form of corruption have occurred in other countries — a striking example occurred in the country of Mr. Musk’s birth, South Africa — and they offer cautionary tales for democratic governments everywhere.
The details vary by context, but the political scientist Elizabeth David-Barrett lays out three general mechanisms of state capture. They now sound familiar: shaping the rules of the game through law and policy; influencing administrative decisions by capturing the budget, appointments, government contracts and regulatory decisions; and disabling checks on power by dismantling accountability structures like the judiciary, law enforcement and prosecution, and audit institutions like the inspectors general and the media.
Some of these strategies could come straight from the Project 2025 playbook or Trump administration executive orders. This should disturb all Americans. According to Ms. David-Barrett, state capture creates broad, long-lasting systemic inequality and diminished public services. Changing the rules of the game to allow such collusion to flourish, she writes, “leaves those few holders of economic power in a strong position to influence future political elites, consolidating their dominance in a self-perpetuating dynamic.”
Garrett Graff at Doomsday Scenario: Today, Right Now, is the Easiest Moment To Draw the Line Against Donald Trump.
Needless to say, things haven’t gotten better since Saturday. I watched with sadness, but not surprise, over the last 24 hours as Sen. Susan Collins, who has never hesitated over the last decade to disappoint American democracy, agreed to support Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence, a move sure to undermine American security and erode our standing with allies, and Bill Cassidy — a doctor! a lifelong vaccine advocate! — agreed to support antivax conspiracist RFK Jr. as the head of nation’s health services, overseeing programs he couldn’t even correctly explain at his confirmation hearing.
At the same time, as Elon Musk continues his junta-style takeover of the operations of the federal government, we are watching spreading chaos and the wholesale, illegal, and unconstitutional destruction of the US civil service—arguably not just one of the most important institutions in American life but one of the most important and revered institutions in the entire world, a force of millions of nonpartisan dedicated public servants that has been the backbone of the entire last eighty years of the American Century.
Here’s the challenge and sad truth we face, the challenge this week makes crystal clear:
Today, right now, right here, is the easiest moment to draw the line against Donald Trump. Every day from here, it will get harder — the politics more inevitable, the destruction more irreversible, the sheer waste more costly, the downstream impacts on American life and the world beyond more catastrophic.
The challenge is that fact has also been true every day for the last nine years.
Yet every day for the last nine years, nearly every Republican and every institution in American life in the US has hoped that someone else would be the one to draw the line against Donald Trump.
It would have been easiest for the Republican Party to draw the line against birtherism even before Donald Trump ever ran for president.
Then it would have been next easiest to oppose Trump in 2015 and 2016 in his first presidential primary. It would have been easiest to draw the line after he’d insulting Mexicans in his speech declaring his presidential run, easiest to next the draw the line the following month after he’d insulted John McCain for being a POW, easiest to draw the line in the months that followed the same way that — right or wrong — the Democratic Party actually did against unite against Bernie Sanders in 2020 as it coalesced in the course of 48 hours around Joe Biden.
Yet each of Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Rick Perry, John Kasich, Ted Cruz, and the rest each hoped that one of the others would be the leader needed at the time. Had any of them—or all of them—acted then, we might be just wrapping up the end of eight years of the Rubio, Bush, Perry, or Kasich administration, a period of time where hundreds of thousands of extra Americans didn’t have to die because of the mismanaging of the Covid pandemic.
And so on…please read the rest at the Substack link.
I have no commentary to share today, because I have no words. I’m overwhelmed and heartbroken and completely at a loss.
“And just like that, America is respecting on the world stage once again.” John Buss, @repeat1968
I’m going down a very dank, dark rabbit hole today because one of the things that concern me the most are the ongoing threats that President Eject Incontinentia Buttocks against people who make him feel bad about himself or correct his story weaving for the sake of reporting reality. We keep seeing the lists and hearing direct attacks on what he considers “enemies.” This ranges from politicians of past and present to members of the press. It is the true sign of a despot, and one of the major things the U.S. Constitution and our form of government were designed to toss in history’s trash heap. The other is the feudal tradition of bending or taking the knee. That is why public servants take an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution and not to a cult of personality.
It is evident during this transition period that these feudal and dictatorial aspirations are a serious part of the vetting of Cabinet officers and the oncoming attempt to prosecute and persecute outspoken critics of the tremendous number of unfit, immoral cretins, loyal to an insane and craven political figure. King George was the Mad King we had to dethrone to gain independence. What do we do with a Mad Politician chosen by the Electoral College and many voters who live in states with more livestock than people? He’s an obvious threat to democracy, but he managed to Pied Piper, a bunch of rubes.
An interview this weekend shows how obsessed he is with ensuring his warped reality rules the day and the country.
Let me share a few headlines that are giving me some severe heartburn. This is from CNN and is reported by Trump lays out sweeping early acts on deportation and January 6 pardons, says Cheney and others ‘should go to jail.’”
President-elect Donald Trump in a television interview that aired Sunday previewed a sweeping agenda for his first days in office, outlining how his administration will prioritize deporting migrants with criminal records, vowing to pursue pardons for January 6 defendants on his first day, and raising the possibility that former Rep. Liz Cheney and other political opponents could face jail time.
Trump said he would not seek “retribution” against President Joe Biden and against his political enemies, but he repeatedly left room for his appointees to decide whether to go after specific people. He suggested members of Congress who led the investigations into his conduct during the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol should be put in jail and that he’ll look on his first day at issuing pardons to supporters involved in the riot.
“These people have been there, how long is it? Three or four years? You know, by the way, they’ve been in there for years, and they’re in a filthy, disgusting place that shouldn’t even be allowed to be open,” he said. Nearly 1,200 people either have pleaded guilty or were found guilty at trial for crimes connected to the January 6 attack, according to the Justice Department. More than 645 defendants were ordered to serve some jail time.
Trump said he would not direct his Justice Department to investigate members of Congress and Biden administration officials who led the investigations into his role in January 6, but continued to suggest his DOJ would be justified in deciding to launch investigations without his input.
When asked about the possibility of investigating special counsel Jack Smith, who brought the two since-dropped federal cases against him, Trump said he wants his pick for attorney general, Pam Bondi, to “do what she wants to do.”
“She’s very experienced. I want her to do what she wants to do. I’m not going to instruct her to do it,” he said.
Trump was more direct when speaking about the members of Congress who led the January 6 committee, telling Welker that the co-chairs of the committee — Republican Cheney, who has since left Congress, and Democrat Bennie Thompson — should “go to jail.”
“Cheney was behind it. So is Bennie Thompson and everybody on that committee,” he said. “For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail.”
Trump also suggested that committee members might do well to receive preemptive pardons from Biden to protect themselves from criminal prosecution. CNN reported last week that Biden White House aides, administration officials and prominent defense attorneys in Washington were discussing potential preemptive pardons or legal aid for people who might be targeted by Trump.
“Biden can give them a pardon if he wants to,” Trump said. “And maybe he should.”
In a statement later Sunday, Cheney said, “Donald Trump’s suggestion that members of Congress who later investigated his illegal and unconstitutional actions should be jailed is a continuation of his assault on the rule of law and the foundations of our republic.”
Republican former Rep. Adam Kinzinger, who served on the committee, told CNN’s Manu Raju on Sunday he’s “not worried” about the Trump administration investigating him or his fellow committee members.
The Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause protects lawmakers from certain law enforcement actions targeted at their legislative duties.
CNN has reached out to Thompson for comment.
The problem is mostly with “political enemies.” However, it does go deeper than that. This is from Phillip Bump’s column today at the Washington Post.”Trump sees the investigators, not the rioters, as the Jan. 6 criminals. It’s not just that he seeks to avoid accountability. It’s that he hopes to invert it.” So, the criminals arrested by law officers, prosecuted in courts, and found guilty in the process by a duly appointed Judge or Jury are the law breakers here? How horrifying is that?
History will tell the story of the riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, in direct terms. President Donald Trump, increasingly desperate to block Joe Biden’s inauguration to replace him, summoned his supporters to Washington for a “wild” protest. Tens of thousands came, including members of violent, fringe-right groups.
As legislators convened to formalize Biden’s victory, angry throngs of Trump supporters pushed toward the building, some engaging in violent altercations with law enforcement in an effort to stop Congress from counting electoral votes. Hundreds were injured, including more than 100 police officers.
Congress tried to hold Trump accountable for his role in the riot twice, first by impeaching him — enough Republican senators sided with Trump to prevent conviction — and then by launching a high-profile investigation of his broad effort to retain power. Meanwhile, the justice system went to work arresting and imprisoning those who had engaged in the riot. Special counsel Jack Smith brought federal charges against Trump.
Pressed whether he’d direct Bondi or Kash Patel, his pick to lead the FBI, to send them to jail, Trump said, “No, not at all,” before adding, “I think they’ll have to look at that.”
Asked whether he plans to follow up on his frequent campaign promise to investigate Biden — whom he repeatedly labeled as “corrupt” and a “criminal” on the campaign trail — Trump said he doesn’t want to “go back into the past.”
“I’m really looking to make our country successful. I’m not looking to go back into the past,” he said, adding, “Retribution will be through success.”
When asked about previously saying he would direct his Justice Department to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Biden, Trump said he would not do that but left the door open for top DOJ officials to make their own determinations.
“No, I’m not doing that unless I find something that I think is reasonable,” he said. “But that’s not going to be my decision. That’s going to be Pam Bondi’s decision, and, to a different extent, Kash Patel, assuming they’re both there, and I think they’re both going to get approved.” Trump has tapped Patel to lead the FBI, despite the current director, Trump appointee Christopher Wray, still having several years left in his 10-year term.
Throughout the interview, Trump at times struck a more temperate tone toward his political opponents and appeared to prioritize uniting the country over exacting vengeance. He said he plans to make unity a central theme of his inauguration address and expressed confidence that his administration will achieve a level of success that will bring the country together.
But Trump invoked similar calls for unity at various points throughout his campaign — including in the wake of the first assassination attempt against him — before often reverting to bitter, divisive rhetoric and personal attacks. During the NBC interview, Trump again refused to concede that he lost the 2020 presidential election.
President Eject Incontinentia Buttocks rejects reality for a version that suits his malignant narcissism and purposes. The New Republic’s Greg Sargent interviews Brian Beutler about this on his PodCast. “Transcript: Trump’s Private Rage at “Traitors” Reveals Dark 2025 Plans. An interview with Brian Beutler, author of the “Off Message” Substack, who explains how Democrats can and must do more to alert the public to the dangers of a second Trump term.” Dangers, indeed.
The New York Times reports that Donald Trump is telling advisers that his biggest regret from his first term was that he appointed “traitors.” Not traitors to the country, of course; traitors to him. As a result, his transition team is grilling prospective officials to gauge their loyalty to Trump; that is, loyalty to the person. Is there some way for Democrats to explain how absurd and dangerous all this is in a manner that gets through to the public? We’re talking about this today with Brian Beutler, author of the excellent Substack Off Message, who’s been arguing that Dems need to get more aggressive with their communications about all this right now before Trump takes office. Thanks for coming back on, Brian.
Brian Beutler: It’s always good to be with you.
Sargent: The New York Times reports that he’s privately telling advisors that his biggest first-term regret was appointing traitors. Importantly, traitors are those who came to see Trump accurately as a threat to the system: Chief of Staff John Kelly, Defense Secretaries Jim Madison, Mark Esper, and even Attorney General William Barr, who was relentlessly loyal up to the very last minute. That’s his regret, appointing people who describe the threat he poses accurately. Brian, in some sense, this isn’t a surprise, but it’s rarely reported quite this clearly. Your thoughts?
Beutler: It’s inauspicious. And it probably portends some conflict between him and the Senate insofar as the people that he’s vetting are going to be appointed to positions that require Senate confirmation. That’s because, as I understand, the loyalty test as reported in the article is not just, Do you support Donald Trump? Do you support the MAGA movement? Do you support its policy goals?—it’s really, Do you believe Donald Trump won or lost the 2020 election? If they acknowledge the truth that he lost, they’re out, they’re not going to get the nomination.
And similarly, with questions like, Do you think January 6 was good or bad? Do you think it was something that Donald Trump is responsible for? Are these patriots or are they insurrectionists?, if you answer that the wrong way, you’re not getting the job. And insofar as anyone who answers the way Trump wants them to answer has to go before the Senate. Well, it’s going to raise questions for both Democrats and Republicans in different ways.
Democrats are going to have to decide whether those are red lines for them that they won’t cross. If Trump finds somebody who’s qualified as in their resume is good, that they’re credentialed to do the job he’s appointed them to, but they’re also supportive of the Big Lie or they think that the insurrection was OK, will Democrats look past that to say, Well, at least you’ll know how to do the job that you’re being appointed to do? I would like Democrats to say there will be zero Democratic votes for any nominees who take that loyalty test. And if they do that, then it will fall to Republicans.
Are 50 out of 53 Republican senators willing to take that vote? An ancillary benefit of Democrats drawing a hard line here is that’ll be really tough for them because there are still at least a handful of Senate Republicans who don’t support the Big Lie, who won’t repeat it, and who think the people who peddle it are real threats to democracy. Then we’ll find out whether they just decided, You know what, Trump won, so it’s revisionist history all the way down now.
Sargent: His use of the term traitors in his conversations with his advisors, which shows that he’s still seething with anger about those who refuse to go along with his rewritten history: This is one of the keys to understanding what he really intends with current picks like Pete Hegseth as defense secretary, Kash Patel as FBI director, and Pam Bondi as attorney general. It won’t be that hard for all Democrats to oppose Pete Hegseth and Kash Patel, but I’m not sure all Democrats will oppose Pam Bondi.
We do have precedent for politicizing the FBI. I remember all of this very well, as well as the entire setup with AG John Mitchell. I had thought laws were put into place to prevent this from happening again. I also was aware that many Republicans at the time thought those laws went too far. Aaron Rupar and Thor Bensure, writing for Public Notice, share this headline. “The J. Edgar Hoover precedent for weaponizing the FBI. “Yes, we could have a repeat of that,” Frank Figliuzzi tells us.”
After serving in the FBI for more than two decades, in 2011 Frank Figliuzzi became the assistant director of the FBI’s counterintelligence division, where he worked alongside FBI Director Robert Mueller. Suffice it to say he saw a lot in his career.
So it should be taken seriously that Figliuzzi, now an MSNBC senior national security and intelligence analyst, describes Trump’s picks to run what are sometimes referred to as the power ministries — among them the DOJ (including the FBI) and the defense department — as a “hijacking of the entire national security structure.”
“My chief concern is this single characteristic that seems to run through these nominees — blind allegiance to Donald Trump,” Figliuzzi told us.
We recently connected with Figliuzzi to get his insight on Trump’s picks and what they signal about how the federal government will operate over the next four years. He warned that “we could be heading toward tremendous abuses of power, with the FBI going after Trump’s political enemies.” And he noted that a previous FBI director provided the president-elect and his choice to run the bureau, Kash Patel, with a blueprint.
Benson interviewed Figluzzi. It went like this.
Thor Benson
As someone who’s focused on national security and has a background there, what are your top concerns with Trump’s choices for national security roles?
Frank Figliuzzi
Sadly, we’ll have to rank order them.
It’s not just that many of Trump’s nominees are remarkably unqualified for the jobs, and they are — from the DNI pick with Tulsi Gabbard to the DHS with Kristi Noem to Hegseth at DOD and now Kash Patel. But the lack of competence is not my chief concern anymore.
My chief concern is this single characteristic that seems to run through these nominees — blind allegiance to Donald Trump. Yes, there are national security issues with someone like Gabbard or Hegseth — I say national security with Hegseth, particularly, because similar to the concerns about Matt Gaetz, we don’t know what we don’t know. Is there more coming with Hegseth? Is it extortion and blackmail?
He’s already written a check to a woman in California. What else do we not know about? According to the latest reporting, he appears to have an alcohol problem. He’s had to physically be carried out of events he attended because he was drunk. That’s not good with someone who’s running things at the Pentagon. Are there more women and incidents out there? According to the New Yorker, he also yells “kill all the Muslims” when he gets drunk.
Out of all of the nominees, Kash Patel lacks the capacity to have his own independent thoughts and ideology. His record is replete with nothing but kissing Trump’s ass. That’s it. You don’t have to take my word for it. Look at his public statements about persecuting the “deep state,” prosecutors, the media, for christ’s sake. Combine that with Pam Bondi’s almost identical comments, and we’ve now got a Trump hijacking of the entire national security structure.
Thor Benson
So where does that take us?
Frank Figliuzzi
Well, we could be heading toward tremendous abuses of power, with the FBI going after Trump’s political enemies.
So, my hair is on fire again, although it never really goes out, to be honest. There are warning signs all over the place, and only a small segment of the American populace appears to be aware of all of this. You can read Figliuzzi’s discussion of Nixon’s tricks at the link. The other headline grabber today is how a set of unelected and affirmed idiot billionaires will be going after our Social Security. This is from Truth Out. “DOGE Heads Musk and Ramaswamy Signal Social Security Cuts Are Coming. Trump vowed to “not cut one penny” from Social Security, but his other statements and actions suggest that he plans to.” Chris Walker has the lede and the story.
On Sunday, president-elect Donald Trump sought to assuage concerns that he will make cuts to Social Security and other safety net programs after Republicans signaled last week that Social Security could be targeted by Trump’s “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE) initiative, managed by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy.
Asked by host Kristen Welker on NBC’s “Meet the Press” program whether the DOGE initiative would include cuts to Social Security, Trump said “no,” other than perhaps cuts related to allegations of “abuse” or “fraud” associated with the program.
Notably, such fraud happens at extremely low rates — by one estimate, fraud equals around just $0.40 out of every $100 in benefits Social Security doles out yearly.
“We’re not touching Social Security, other than — we might make it more efficient,” Trump said about the national insurance program that helps retirees, disabled people, widowers and children of deceased parents. “But the people are going to get what they get.”
“We’re not raising ages or any of that stuff,” he added.
Trump’s comments echo talking points from his “Agenda 47” platform during his presidential campaign, which stated that he would “not cut one penny from Medicare or Social Security.” However, he and his allies have repeatedly suggested that cuts to both programs are possible.
Musk and Ramaswamy have made it evident that cuts to Social Security will be considered. After the two met with Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill last week about the DOGE initiative, House Majority Leader Rep. Steve Scalise (R-Louisiana) said they had expressed sentiments that contradicted Trump’s comments on Sunday.
“Nothing is sacrosanct. Nothing. They’re going to put everything on the table,” Scalise told reporters after the meeting, with Fox Business elaborating that cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid would be discussed.
In September, when the idea of DOGE was first being discussed, vice president-elect J.D. Vance also indicated that there could be cuts to Social Security. A DOGE-type commission is “going to look much different in, say, the Department of Defense versus Social Security,” Vance said during a podcast interview, insinuating that cuts were going to be considered for the latter agency.
In March, Trump himself said that cuts to the program were a possibility.
“There is a lot you can do in terms of entitlements — in terms of cutting — and in terms of also the theft and the bad management of entitlements,” Trump said in a statement starkly different from his comments over the past weekend.
Perhaps most importantly, Trump attempted to make drastic cuts to Social Security and other programs in his first term as president. In one of his later proposed budgets (which didn’t go on to pass in the then-Democratic-controlled Congress), the president-elect sought to cut Social Security by $25 billion — despite promising in the 2016 presidential campaign that he wouldn’t make any cuts to the agency, just as he promised this last election cycle.
Nothing is Sacred in Trumplandia except Trump and his money. You can read more about the proposed cuts at these links.
And, in the latest from Corruption and Kleptocracy Central, we have this headline inPolitico. “Lara Trump leaves RNC amid Senate chatter. In announcing her resignation the president-elect’s daughter-in-law said “the job I came to do is now complete.” I wonder if she can Senator better than she can sing?
Lara Trump is stepping down as co-chair of the Republican National Committee, a role she has held since March, as some of Donald Trump’s allies continue to push for her to replace Florida Sen. Marco Rubio on Capitol Hill.
In announcing her resignation on X, Lara Trump, who is the president-elect’s daughter-in-law, said “the job I came to do is now complete,” touting the RNC’s fundraising records, election integrity efforts and voter turnout.
She’s expressed openness to replacing Rubio, the president-elect’s pick to be secretary of State, in the Senate, telling The Associated Press it’s a role she “would seriously consider.”
“If I’m being completely transparent, I don’t know exactly what that would look like,” she told the AP in an article published Sunday. “And I certainly want to get all of the information possible if that is something that’s real for me. But yeah, I would 100% consider it.”
Among those supporting her as a potential Rubio replacement is billionaire Elon Musk, a close ally of the incoming president, and his mother, Maye Musk.
When did all these tacky people get a say in stuff like this? The Trump Boys will be in charge of the Merch and Grift Wing of the White House while the Kushners milk what they can from the State Department and foreign nations. We are definitely headed to a Nepocracy. Just watch out for that Douche Commission headed by First Lady Elonia and DIE hire Vivek.
What’s on your reading and blogging list?
peej
Carissa
bostonboomer
dakinikat
ecocatwoman
mablue2
Mama Lopez
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Memeorandum Crooks and Liars Democracy NOW The UK Guardian
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.
Sky Dancing 
Recent Comments