Finally Friday Reads: We were Warned

“Every time he wears a tuxedo…” John Buss, @repeat1968

Good Day, Sky Dancers!

We’ve gone way past the notion of creeping authoritarianism. We’ve got an executive branch that’s forcing us into a Soviet-style Command and Control Economy.  We’ve also entered a deeper phase of attacks on the U.S. Constitution, which resemble the commands of Dear Leader in Korea to provide adequate adoration and no criticism. Our First Amendment Rights have never experienced such obvious frontal attacks. Meanwhile, the wannabe King was living it up in his usual white trash ways by embarrassing us in a State visit to the UK.  He’s the perfect example of “The Ugly American” as outlined in the book of the same name. It’s going to take years to retrieve our international standing and influence.

This analysis in the PBS article compares our current attacks on Freedom of the press to those of  Orbán’s Hungary and Putin’s Russia. I don’t have a working TV, and I have watched less of it over the years. I think the absurdity of “reality” TV finally did me in. However, it’s still an important source of information in this country as well as entertainment, and to see it be controlled by the current administration and its stupidity is beyond anything I’d ever expect. I grew up on the Smothers Brothers, Laugh-In, and other comedies that continually trolled Richard Nixon. I never thought we’d experience McCarthyism again, which was before my time, but taught repeatedly in American History as one of our darkest nights.

The defunding of PBS is just one nail in the coffin of  truth to “We the People.” This article is a compilation of reporting from the above-mentioned authoritarian governments, mostly from the AP. “Trump’s moves against media outlets mirror authoritarian approaches to silencing dissent.”

Since taking office in January, President Donald Trump has waged an aggressive campaign against the media unlike any in modern U.S. history, making moves similar to those of authoritarian leaders that he has often praised.

On Wednesday, Trump cheered ABC’s suspension of Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show after the comedian made remarks about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk that criticized the president’s MAGA movement: “Congratulations to ABC for finally having the courage to do what had to be done,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

It was the latest in a string of attacks against news outlets and media figures he believes are overly critical of him. Trump has filed lawsuits against outlets whose coverage he dislikes, threatened to revoke TV broadcast licenses and sought to bend news organizations and social media companies to his will.

The tactics are similar to those used by leaders in other countries who have chipped away at speech freedoms and independent media while consolidating political power, including Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, a close Trump ally whose leadership style is revered by many conservatives in the U.S.

“What we’re seeing is an unprecedented attempt to silence disfavored speech by the government,” said Brendan Nyhan, a political scientist at Dartmouth College. “Donald Trump is trying to dictate what Americans can say.”

The first thing that does peeve me about this and related articles is the consistent use of the word “conservatives” in all of the analysis I’ve read. Traditional Conservatives do not support the suppression of the Free Press. It’s generally some kind of Populist Uprising within their ranks that leads to this sort of nonsense. I’m not defending the spineless bunch of Republicans that are enabling this, but we need to recognize what this represents. The Bulwark represents the example of our strange bedfellows these days. I repeatedly provide perspectives by Bill Kristol because I may not agree with him on many things, but he does respect the Constitution and continually warns us about the threat presented by our fascist-loving Executive Branch. Yesterday, he wrote this at The Bulwark.  His analysis was presented along with that of Andrew Egger and Jim Swift under their daily heading. Yesterday it was “Yeah. It’s Fascism.”  Kristol’s analysis was entitled “We’re Gonna Call It What It Is.”

JD Vance is outraged. How dare some people use the term “fascist” to describe the man to whom he has pledged fealty? How dare they apply the term to the movement to which he has hitched his star?

Very few individuals have seen President Donald Trump as close-up as John F. Kelly, the retired Marine Corps general who served for nearly a year and a half as White House chief of staff during Trump’s first term.

Kelly was and is a staunch conservative. In an interview with the New York Times shortly before the 2024 election, he explained that, “In many cases, I would agree with some of his policies.”

In that same interview, Kelly was asked whether he thought Trump was a fascist. Kelly answered by reading aloud a definition of fascism that he’d found online.

Well, looking at the definition of fascism: It’s a far-right authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy.

Kelly then commented:

Certainly the former president is in the far-right area, he’s certainly an authoritarian, admires people who are dictators — he has said that. So he certainly falls into the general definition of fascist, for sure. . . . He certainly prefers the dictator approach to government.

Unlike Vance, who saw in Trump a wagon to which to hitch his star, Kelly was at the end of a distinguished career when he joined the Trump administration. He meant to serve his country, not himself. He found that he was working for a fascist.

As for the movement which Vance aspires to lead once Trump leaves the scene, it too has many features of fascism.

In 1995, the Italian novelist and critic Umberto Eco perceived a “ghost stalking Europe (not to speak of other parts of the world).” That ghost was fascism.

Eco explained that “fascism was a fuzzy totalitarianism, a collage of different philosophical and political ideas.” Nonetheless he argued that “in spite of this fuzziness, I think it is possible to outline a list of features that are typical of what I would like to call Ur-Fascism, or Eternal Fascism.”

Among the elements of Ur-Fascism:

  • “The first feature of Ur-Fascism is the cult of tradition,” he writes, which implies “the rejection of the modern world.”
  • “Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”
  • “For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason.”
  • “Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks for consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders.”
  • “Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration.”
  • “At the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”
  • “The Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters. This is the origin of machismo. . . . Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons—doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.”
  • “Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”

Sound familiar?

I still have the old family habit of watching NBC News. I stream it now on my small laptop, and it’s about the only old-school TV thing I do watch besides The Weather Channel during Hurricane Season. It’s the source of this article. “Trump suggests FCC could revoke licenses of TV broadcasters that give him too much ‘bad publicity’. Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr told Fox News on Thursday afternoon that ABC’s decision to suspend Jimmy Kimmel’s show indefinitely may not be “the last shoe to drop.”

President Donald Trump on Thursday floated the possibility that TV broadcasters could lose their federal licenses over what he perceives as negative coverage of him, a day after Disney’s ABC yanked “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” off the air.

Speaking to reporters, Trump suggested that the Federal Communications Commission should revoke broadcasters’ licenses, arguing that many late-night hosts appearing on those networks are “against me” and that “they give me only bad publicity, press.”

“I mean, they’re getting a license. I would think maybe their license should be taken away. It will be up to Brendan Carr,” Trump said on Air Force One, referring to the FCC chairman. “I think Brendan Carr is outstanding. He’s a patriot. He loves our country, and he’s a tough guy, so we’ll have to see.”

Trump also said of evening shows on network TV: “All they do is hit Trump. They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that. They’re an arm of the Democrat Party.”

A day earlier, Trump praised ABC for indefinitely pulling “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” after on-air comments its host made about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. “Congratulations to ABC for finally having the courage to do what had to be done,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

For shits and giggles, here’s Nixon on Laugh-In with his Sock It to Me moment. I need some levity.

There’s more fascism afoot than just suppression of the press. The New York Times has this headline today. “Draft Bill Would Authorize Trump to Kill People He Deems Narco-Terrorists. Potential legislation circulating in the executive branch and Congress would grant President Trump sweeping military powers.” Only Congress has the power to declare war.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 11:

[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; . . .

I can only imagine what’s in Yam Tit’s dotard mind about Venezuela and their tossed-out piece of trash dictator. We can learn a lot from his petty attacks on Venezuela.

Draft legislation is circulating at the White House and on Capitol Hill that would hand President Trump sweeping power to wage war against drug cartels he deems to be “terrorists,” as well as against any nation he says has harbored or aided them, according to people familiar with the matter.

A wide range of legal specialists have said that U.S. military attacks this month on two boats suspected of smuggling drugs in the Caribbean Sea were illegal. But Mr. Trump has claimed that the Constitution gave him the power he needed to authorize them.

It was not clear who wrote the draft congressional authorization or whether it could pass the Republican-led Congress, but the White House has been passing it around the executive branch.

The broadly worded proposal, which would legally authorize the president to kill people he deems narco-terrorists and attack countries he says helped them, has set off alarm bells in some quarters of the executive branch and on Capitol Hill, according to people who spoke on the condition of anonymity about sensitive internal deliberations.

Three people familiar with the matter said that Representative Cory Mills, a Florida Republican and combat veteran who sits on the Armed Services Committee, was involved in developing the draft. Mr. Mills, a staunch Trump ally, declined to comment on the potential legislation or his role. Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, declined to comment, citing a policy against discussing “drafts that may or may not be circulating.”

An administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters, said the draft originated with a member of Congress who had asked for technical assistance in improving it. The official portrayed its circulation for input by executive branch agencies as a routine courtesy that should not be interpreted as support for the idea.

The measure has emerged amid an escalating debate in Washington over the president’s war-making power and Congress’s role in authorizing the use of American military force, after the Trump administration opened a deadly campaign against the boaters.

The two boat attacks — killing what Mr. Trump has said were 14 people he accused of smuggling drugs toward the United States — were the latest in a series of military operations the president has taken without congressional authorization, raising constitutional concerns among some lawmakers in both parties, who say their branch should play a greater role in such decisions.

Critics have also said that Mr. Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have given illegal orders, causing Special Operations troops to target civilians — even if they are suspected of crimes — in apparent violation of laws against murder.

Meanwhile, RFK Jr. is trying to kill us all.  I have a 3-week-old grandson and 2 four-year-old granddaughters. The granddaughters are fortunate to have two doctors for parents. My conversations with my youngest these days are unusual. I just keep asking, can Aiden get all the vaccines he needs? Are you keeping up with them? That’s the milestone these days. Are we vaccinating our children, and will they have to go to school with unvaccinated kids?  This article actually comes under the title of “Good Grief”.  It’s from Arstechnica.com. It’s written by Beth Mole. RFK Jr.’s anti-vaccine panel realizes it has no idea what it’s doing, skips vote. With a lack of data and confusing language, the panel tabled the vote indefinitely.”

The second day of a two-day meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices—a panel currently made up of federal vaccine advisors hand-selected by anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.—is off to a dramatic start, with the advisors seemingly realizing they have no idea what they’re doing.

The inexperienced, questionably qualified group that has espoused anti-vaccine rhetoric started its second day of deliberations by reversing a vote taken the previous day on federal coverage for the measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella (MMRV) vaccine. Yesterday, the group voted to restrict access to MMRV, stripping recommendations for its use in children under age 4. While that decision was based on no new data, it passed with majority support of 8–3 (with one abstention). (For an explanation of that, see our coverage of yesterday’s part of the meeting here.)

But puzzlingly, they then voted to uphold access and coverage of MMRV vaccines for children under age 4 if they receive free vaccines through the federal Vaccines for Children program, which covers about half of American children, mostly low-income. The discrepancy projected the idea that the alleged safety concerns that led the panel to rescind the recommendation for MMRV generally, somehow did not apply to low-income, vulnerable children. The vote also created significant confusion for VFC coverage, which typically aligns with recommendations made by the panel.

Today, Kennedy’s ACIP retook the vote, deciding 9-0 (with three abstentions) to align VFC coverage with their vote yesterday to strip the recommendation for MMRV in young children.

That’s the deal in the executive branch today. Nobody knows what they’re doing, but they sure have a lot of conspiracy theories and paranoia to act on. I had those diseases up there listed under MMRV. I wouldn’t wish the cases I got on anyone, and I survived them. The Wall Street Journals headline was even more disturbing.  “RFK Jr.-Backed Panel Advises Against MMRV Combo Vaccine for Young Children. New members of key committee tweak routine childhood vaccine guidance as some states and insurers go their own way.” Thank goodness my kids live in Denver and Seattle!’

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s handpicked slate of vaccine advisers voted to no longer recommend a combined shot for measles, mumps, rubella and varicella for children under age 4.

The move came as some states, insurers, public health leaders and a U.S. senator called into question whether Americans should rely on the committee’s decisions.

Here’s what to know:

The details

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, a key panel under the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, voted 8-3, with one abstention, to no longer recommend MMRV, a combined shot immunizing against measles, mumps, rubella and varicella, also known as chickenpox, for children under 4. Parents would instead be recommended to get their young children one vaccine for varicella and a second known as the MMR vaccine that inoculates against the other three diseases, under the committee’s new guidance.

Here’s some craziness from Mint. The mainstream media hasn’t decided what to do with it yet, even though it’s almost a day old.  I can probably list at least one million historical figures more in need of a holiday than the prince of hate speech.  “Charlie Kirk Day: US Senate passes resolution to create National Day of Remembrance for slain far-right activist. The US Senate has unanimously backed a resolution to establish a National Day of Remembrance for Charlie Kirk on October 14. The measure now heads to the House for a crucial vote.”  I have him slated for the dance and piss on his grave kind of tribute. No one should be shot and killed, but we do not have to make saints of political extremists.

One last one from ABC News. I guess one of his appointments refused to take bogus, trumped-up charges to court. “Trump poised to fire US attorney for resisting effort to charge NY AG Letitia James: Sources. Trump officials had pushed Erik Siebert to bring criminal charges against James.” 

President Donald Trump is expected to fire the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia after investigators were unable to find incriminating evidence of mortgage fraud against New York Attorney General Letitia James, according to sources.

Federal prosecutors in Virginia had uncovered no clear evidence to prove that James had knowingly committed mortgage fraud when she purchased a home in the state in 2023, ABC News first reported earlier this week, but Trump officials pushed U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert to nevertheless bring criminal charges against her, according to sources.

While sources caution that plans could still change, Siebert was notified on Thursday of Trump’s intention to fire him, sources told ABC News, and was told that Friday would be his final day on the job.

Since this is my day off, I’m going to pick up one of my guitars and play some David Gilmour licks.  Take care of yourselves!

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


Lazy Caturday Reads: The Heat Is On

Happy Caturday!!

Sadly, I’m unable to post cat art today because WordPress has made it very difficult to resize images to manageable dimensions. Dakinikat seems to have figured out how to do it, but I’m still confused. I’m hoping I’ll be able to master the technique or learn to use one of WordPress’s other god-awful methods of posting. Today I’m reposting Tweets from Lorenzo the Cat.

(Dakinikat note:  testing the images thing, so there are a few popping up here now.)

 

We haven’t talked much about the awful wildfires in Hawaii. Here’s the latest news.

Washington Post Live Updates: Maui death toll reaches 80 amid questions over emergency response.

The death toll from the Hawaii wildfires has risen to 80, Maui county officials said in an update late Friday, as firefighters continued work to contain fires on the island. Government officials are launching a review of the state’s emergency response, as residents criticized relief efforts as insufficient and records indicated that emergency sirens weren’t activated at the state or county level during the wildfires, though alerts were sent to cellphones and broadcast networks.

Here’s what to know

  • Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez (D) said her department would begin a “comprehensive review of critical decision-making and standing policies leading up to, during, and after the wildfires.” Gov. Josh Green (D) told CNN that officials would investigate why sirens reportedly failed to warn residents in Maui, adding that the telecommunications lines that those sirens relied upon were “destroyed very rapidly” by the fast-moving flames.
  • The scale of the damage is becoming clearer, with an assessment from the Pacific Disaster Center estimating that more than 2,207 structures were damaged, and that the vast majority of buildings exposed to the fire were residential.
  • Authorities on Maui say more than 1,400 people are in emergency shelters, and urged residents to text rather than call as cell service resumes in affected areas, to ensure limited resources are shared.
  • Local officials also advised residents to exclusively drink bottled water, saying that local water systems could contain harmful contaminants. Structures in the Upper Kula and Lahaina water systems were destroyed by the fire, which may have caused benzene — a carcinogen — to enter the water system, they said.
  • The Lahaina fire that has surged through Hawaii is already one of the deadliest in U.S. history, and officials warn the toll is likely to rise. It is the second-deadliest fire in the last 100 years, after the 2018 Camp Fire in Northern California that killed 85 people and consumed the town of Paradise.

Read more recent updates at the WaPo.

Pre-Raphaelite Cats, Susan Herbert

From The New York Times, an opinion piece by writer and editor Lawrence Downes, who grew up in Hawaii: After the Shock and Grief, Hawaii Will Reinvent Itself Again.

The disaster that erased the beloved West Maui town of Lahaina this week comes with the bitter taste of bewilderment. Brush fires met high winds whipped by a far-off hurricane, and overnight a historic town was gone, a pile of smoke and ashes. A lush watercolor landscape is redrawn in gray and black. At least 55 people are dead, and many more are missing.

A hurricane just burned down a town. It’s all so weird and horrifying.

Living in Hawaii long enough gives you a familiarity with sudden catastrophes, the kind that can obliterate a community in a week, a day or an instant. To live in my home state or to love it from a distance is to know the continual threat of hurricanes, tsunamis, earthquakes and volcanoes.

But a lethal wildfire? That was new for Hawaii. And everything is changed.

We may not get a definitive verdict on whether Lahaina died for humanity’s environmental sins, but we know that climate change is making Hawaii hotter and drier and that invasive grasses have been allowed to run rampant. Drought on Maui turned the grass into ready fuel and heightened the risk of wildfires, and then a hurricane brushed by.

The planetary crisis is hardly Hawaii’s fault, but like other island areas in our rising oceans, it is unusually imperiled, and it has to do something. And when wildfires swept over Maui and the Big Island, it was a brutal reminder that Hawaii needs to be a serious climate leader, to nurture and spread the environmental consciousness that too many other states lack.

Hawaii will surely find ways to lower the risk of wildfires and get better at fighting them. Lahaina will rebuild, and residents will return. But climate resiliency is a far bigger challenge than adding fire trucks and subduing invasive grasses. It’s an expensive mess of problems across the state.

Will the communities on Oahu’s North Shore be able to retreat from the rising ocean before they are washed away? How will flower and fruit growers on Maui and the Big Island cope with extended drought? What happens if or when the coral reefs die, the native trees and forest birds are gone, weather patterns shift and the cooling trade winds disappear?

All good questions, and we all must “do something.” Climate change is happening. We can see it all around us.

JJ passed along this article about the extreme heat affecting so many people this year. 

TechTimes: How Much Heat Can Your Body Take? Scientists Reveal the Maximum Limit.

According to AFP, new research shows the limit, known as the “wet bulb temperature,” representing the maximum combination of heat and humidity before sweat no longer evaporates from the skin, leading to heatstroke, organ failure, and death. 

While this threshold occurs at around 35 degrees Celsius (95 Fahrenheit), recent research suggests it could be even lower.

Colin Raymond from NASA‘s Jet Propulsion Laboratory said the wet bulb limit of human survival has been breached only around a dozen times, primarily in South Asia and the Persian Gulf.

Although none of these occurrences extended beyond two hours, they effectively averted widespread mortality events associated with this critical threshold.

Nonetheless, specialists stress that fatalities resulting from intense heat are feasible even at less severe levels. Factors such as age, health, and socio-economic circumstances play a role in determining an individual’s susceptibility. 

In Europe last summer, for instance, more than 61,000 fatalities were linked to heat, even in regions where the perilous wet bulb temperature range is seldom attained.

Scientists warn that dangerous wet bulb events will become more frequent as global temperatures continue to rise. The frequency of such events has doubled over the last four decades, driven by human-caused climate change

According to Raymond’s research, wet bulb temperatures exceeding 35 degrees Celsius could become common worldwide if global temperatures rise by 2.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

To test the wet bulb limit, researchers at Pennsylvania State University evaluated young, healthy participants in a heat chamber. They found that the “critical environmental limit,” where the body can’t prevent further core temperature increase, was reached at 30.6 degrees Celsius wet bulb temperature, lower than previously theorized.

Read the rest at TechTimes.

In other news, here’s a shocking small-town example of the assault on the First Amendment that is happening in red states.

Kansas Reflector: Police stage ‘chilling’ raid on Marion County newspaper, seizing computers, records and cellphones.

MARION — In an unprecedented raid Friday, local law enforcement seized computers, cellphones and reporting materials from the Marion County Record office, the newspaper’s reporters, and the publisher’s home.

Eric Meyer, owner and publisher of the newspaper, said police were motivated by a confidential source who leaked sensitive documents to the newspaper, and the message was clear: “Mind your own business or we’re going to step on you.”

The city’s entire five-officer police force and two sheriff’s deputies took “everything we have,” Meyer said, and it wasn’t clear how the newspaper staff would take the weekly publication to press Tuesday night.

The raid followed news stories about a restaurant owner who kicked reporters out of a meeting last week with U.S. Rep. Jake LaTurner, and revelations about the restaurant owner’s lack of a driver’s license and conviction for drunken driving.

Meyer said he had never heard of police raiding a newspaper office during his 20 years at the Milwaukee Journal or 26 years teaching journalism at the University of Illinois.

“It’s going to have a chilling effect on us even tackling issues,” Meyer said, as well as “a chilling effect on people giving us information.”

The search warrant, signed by Marion County District Court Magistrate Judge Laura Viar, appears to violate federal law that provides protections against searching and seizing materials from journalists. The law requires law enforcement to subpoena materials instead. Viar didn’t respond to a request to comment for this story or explain why she would authorize a potentially illegal raid.

A bit more:

Emily Bradbury, executive director of the Kansas Press Association, said the police raid is unprecedented in Kansas.

“An attack on a newspaper office through an illegal search is not just an infringement on the rights of journalists but an assault on the very foundation of democracy and the public’s right to know,” Bradbury said. “This cannot be allowed to stand.”

Meyer reported last week that Marion restaurant owner Kari Newell had kicked newspaper staff out of a public forum with LaTurner, whose staff was apologetic. Newell responded to Meyer’s reporting with hostile comments on her personal Facebook page.

A confidential source contacted the newspaper, Meyer said, and provided evidence that Newell had been convicted of drunken driving and continued to use her vehicle without a driver’s license. The criminal record could jeopardize her efforts to obtain a liquor license for her catering business.

A reporter with the Marion Record used a state website to verify the information provided by the source. But Meyer suspected the source was relaying information from Newell’s husband, who had filed for divorce. Meyer decided not to publish a story about the information, and he alerted police to the situation.

“We thought we were being set up,” Meyer said.

Police notified Newell, who then complained at a city council meeting that the newspaper had illegally obtained and disseminated sensitive documents, which isn’t true. Her public comments prompted the newspaper to set the record straight in a story published Thursday.

Sometime before 11 a.m. Friday, officers showed up simultaneously at Meyer’s home and the newspaper office. They presented a search warrant that alleges identity theft and unlawful use of a computer.

The paper didn’t even publish the information, but a magistrate judge approved a search warrant! This is the kind of behavior by law enforcement that Trump would promote if he gets back into a position of power.

Speaking of Trump, here are some reports on the hearing yesterday in the January 6 case.

CNN: Judge Chutkan says Trump’s right to free speech in January 6 case is ‘not absolute.’

US District Judge Tanya Chutkan set the tone for how she would preside over the election subversion against Donald Trump in a hearing Friday focused on what limits would be placed on how the former president can handle the evidence prosecutors will be turning over to him.

Chutkan kicked off the hearing – the first in the case before her and one that took place in her courtroom at DC federal court house – noting that while Trump’s rights as a criminal defendant would be protected, his First Amendment right to free speech was “not absolute.”

“In a criminal case such as this one, the defendant’s free speech is subject to the rules,” she said.

The judge closed the hearing with a promise that the case would advance like any normal proceeding in the criminal justice system, but warned that the more “inflammatory” statements were made by a party, the quicker she would need to move toward a trial to preserve a fair jury.

“It is a bedrock principle of the judicial process in this country,” she said, while quoting precedent, “that legal trials are not like elections, to be won through the use of the meeting hall, the radio and the newspaper.”

“This case is no exception,” she said.

Kyle Cheney at Politico: Judge warns Trump: ‘Inflammatory’ statements about election case could speed trial.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan warned Donald Trump and his attorney Friday that repeated “inflammatory” statements about his latest criminal prosecution would force her to speed his trial on charges related to his bid to subvert the 2020 election.

“I caution you and your client to take special care in your public statements about this case,” Chutkan told Trump lawyer John Lauro during a hearing. “I will take whatever measures are necessary to safeguard the integrity of these proceedings.”

Chutkan’s stark admonition came at the conclusion of her first courtroom session in the newest criminal case against the former president. The aim of the hearing was for special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecutors and Trump’s attorneys to hash out disputes about the handling of evidence in the case. Once Chutkan enters a so-called “protective order” governing evidence, prosecutors say they’re prepared to share millions of pages of documents with Trump’s team, jumpstarting the case and setting it on a path to trial.

But Chutkan, aware of the national spotlight on her oversight of the explosive case, repeatedly emphasized that she intended to keep politics out of the courtroom and treat Trump like any other criminal defendant. That included potential consequences if he makes statements that could be construed as harassing or threatening witnesses.

“The fact that he’s running a political campaign has to yield to the orderly administration of justice,” Chutkan said. “If that means he can’t say exactly what he wants to say about witnesses in this case, that’s how it has to be.”

“Even arguably ambiguous statements from parties or their counsel, if they can be reasonably interpreted to intimidate witnesses or to prejudice potential jurors, can threaten the process,” Chutkan added later. “The more a party makes inflammatory statements about this case which could taint the jury pool … the greater the urgency will be that we proceed to trial quickly.”

Judge Chutkan has obviously grokked that a speedy trial would be Trump’s worst nightmare.

Glenn Thrush and Alan Feuer at The New York Times: Judge Limits Trump’s Ability to Share Jan. 6 Evidence.

The federal judge overseeing former President Donald J. Trump’s prosecution on charges of seeking to overturn the 2020 election rejected his request on Friday to be able to speak broadly about evidence and witnesses — and warned Mr. Trump she would take necessary “measures” to keep him from intimidating witnesses or tainting potential jurors.

The caution from the judge, Tanya S. Chutkan, came during a 90-minute hearing in Federal District Court in Washington to discuss the scope of a protective order over the discovery evidence in Mr. Trump’s case, a typically routine step in criminal matters. Later Friday, Judge Chutkan imposed the order but agreed to a modification requested by the Trump legal team that it apply only to “sensitive” materials and not all evidence turned over to the defense.

She concluded the hearing with a blunt warning to Mr. Trump, and an unmistakable reference to a recent social media post in which he warned, “If you go after me, I’m coming after you!” — a statement his spokesman later said was aimed at political opponents and not at people involved in the case.

“I do want to issue a general word of caution — I intend to ensure the orderly administration of justice in this case as I would in any other case, and even arguably ambiguous statements by the parties or their counsel,” she said, could be considered an attempt to “intimidate witnesses or prejudice potential jurors,” triggering the court to take action.

“I caution you and your client to take special care in your public statements in this case,” she added. “I will take whatever measures are necessary to protect the integrity of these proceedings.”

Have a great weekend, everyone!!