On Ms. Noem and Mr. Mullin

Let’s reflect just very briefly on the political demise of former Homeland Secretary Kristi Noem. The first reflection is one I’ve already made here, and with regard to Ms. Noem, to me the most important: I was genuinely sorry to see her go. She had become such a caricature for the Trump Regime’s Nazi-like immigration enforcement activities that I considered every day she remained at her post a day in which millions of moderate Americans would be reminded that they had to vote against Republicans in the upcoming November elections, thus strengthening the chances for American democracy to survive. I had never seen the $220 million ICE recruitment video starring Ms. Noem that was reportedly pivotal in getting her fired before the furor over it erupted during her recent Senate hearing; now that I have, my primary reaction was sympathy for Ms. Noem’s horse, who had to be both chagrined at being part of such an embarrassing spectacle and worried that Ms. Noem would shoot it when the video was completed, although at the same time being heartened that it wasn’t the biggest horse’s a– … er … behind … in the production.

On to U.S. OK Sen. Markwayne Mullin, whom President Donald Trump is nominating to replace Ms. Noem as Homeland Secretary. First, I truly wonder whether Mr. Mullin’s parents simply couldn’t decide whether he looked like a “Mark” or a “Wayne” when he was born. Based upon what we’ve seen of and learned about him since Mr. Trump put his name forth, it would appear that the Senator’s parents would have been closer to the mark (so to speak 😉) had they named him, “Rocco,” “Spike,” or “Hugger,” but all of us parents understand that no one can predict these things in advance. 😊

There are those who might rationally oppose Mr. Mullin’s confirmation as Homeland Secretary based upon his comments on Fox News about Alex Pretti the day after ICE Agents murdered Mr. Pretti in Minneapolis: “A deranged individual who came in to cause massive damage with a loaded pistol was shot and killed.” For Mr. Mullin to make such a declaration after there was sufficient video available to establish that such was false propaganda would, in a rational world, be sufficient to give any ethical Senator considering Mr. Mullin’s nomination concerns about Mr. Mullin’s judgement and veracity, but given the Trump Regime’s Rogue’s Gallery Cabinet, such a misrepresentation simply means that Mr. Mullin will fit right in. If I were a Senator, I’d vote to confirm Mr. Mullin. I still believe in the principle I first articulated in these pages years ago: any nominee of a President to a senior Administration post should be confirmed, subject to two criteria: whether the candidate is objectively qualified for the position; and the absence of any other objective disqualifying criteria (prior criminal conviction, demonstrable drug abuse problem, etc.). Although Mr. Mullin reportedly has no background in homeland security issues, it is seemingly likely that he is no less qualified than any other nominee that Mr. Trump might put forward, and he is arguably less abjectly ill-suited for Homeland Security than Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard are for their offices. Additionally, as we are all well aware, immigration policy is set by Mr. Trump and his (let’s be gentle) autocratically-inclined Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller; whomever they put in the Homeland Security seat is simply going to execute their bidding. The nominee’s subjective leanings – e.g., in this instance that he is arguably going to be too hardline on immigration policy – shouldn’t, in my view, be part of the assessment. I hope that Democrats don’t spend too much emotion trying to contest a confirmation which, given Republican control of the Senate and Mr. Mullin’s being a sitting Senator, is a done deal.

Two final impressions: the first – a parallel if not a repetition of the comment above regarding Ms. Noem — is that Mr. Mullin’s replacement of Ms. Noem, taken together with the Regime’s ICE’s recent withdrawal from “Blue Cities,” will almost certainly release some of the pent-up steam against the Regime’s thuggish immigration enforcement policies that has built up during the first part of this year. I consider this release, this far from November, to be an unfortunate outcome for our democracy.

Second, if I could make any recommendation to Mr. Mullin, it would be this: the Regime’s attack on Iran, no matter how one views it from a foreign policy perspective, has changed the fundamentals of your job. Spend less of your and your staff’s energy on chasing down illegal immigrants who haven’t committed crimes following their initial illegal entry, and immediately bring back any experts in Middle East terrorism that Elon Musk’s moronic DOGE purges may have terminated from the federal government. Start consulting Homeland Security veterans from the George W. Bush and Obama Administrations about how to best to detect and keep Americans safe from terrorist activities within the U.S. by Iranian sleeper cells. To anyone who doesn’t believe that such quiescent cells haven’t been here for years, awaiting instructions from the Iranian Regime: I envy you your life in CandyLand. Hopefully, Mr. Mullin recognizes that he doesn’t have that luxury.

We’ll see what happens.

Two Impressions on the Epstein Files

[It has occurred to me, given little NPR’s recent reports that the Trump Regime’s Justice Department has failed to release an Epstein victim’s witness statements allegedly describing that victim’s encounters with President Donald Trump, that the mighty New York Times had to be a bit disgruntled at being scooped. I share a bit of the Times’ chagrin. 😉 What follows was substantially completed before NPR’s recent publication, deferred for other posts. In entering it now, I’m supposing: Better late than never.]

You certainly don’t need a recitation of the facts surrounding the evil perpetrated by the late Jeffrey Epstein and those who collaborated with him. Nor do you need a rundown on the continuing rank hypocrisy and obstructionism – most glaring under the Trump Administration, but certainly not confined to the Trump Administration – of the various law enforcement agencies over many years who have professed sympathy for Epstein’s victims while mostly doing nothing to enable them to obtain justice. Only two impressions.

At the time this is typed, in excess of 3 million of what has been reported to be between 5 and 6 million records in the Trump Regime’s Department of Justice’s investigative files on Epstein have been released, and the Department has announced that it will not release the last 2 million. It’s hard to see how release of these last remaining records can be compelled; Congress could pass a law, but it’s already done that, and the Regime clearly couldn’t care less. I have also seen it reported that President Donald Trump’s name appears in the files over 1000 times. Although it is undisputed that he maintained a relationship with Epstein over quite a span of years, the President has vigorously denied that he ever engaged in any illicit activities with Epstein’s underage female victims (or, let’s call them what they were: girls). At the same time, it’s clear that Mr. Trump’s toadies at the Department of Justice will follow whatever he orders. The crux of it is that Mr. Trump – his own savviest media advisor – knows – he knows – that stonewalling on this issue is terribly politically damaging. If the President was confident that he would not be hurt too badly by the files’ full disclosure, one can tenably surmise based upon his past behavior that the last 2 million records would have been released by now. So I ponder: what is the one thing that a man might fear who has been able to maintain the rabid support of his base despite his audio-taped indication that he could “grab [women] by the p—y,” despite his negligently causing hundreds of thousands of unnecessary COVID-related American deaths, despite his inexplicably obsequious relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, despite his 34 felony convictions, and despite his incitement of an traitorous attack on our nation’s Capitol? What is the one revelation that a man, who has politically survived his undisputed commission of so many detestable actions with his core base intact, might fear would finally turn his rabid supporters against him?

I’ll leave that one to you.

As to the second impression: I never thought I’d say this; anyone who knows me or reads these notes may well understandably consider me oblivious, paranoid, senseless as a goose, or dumber than a rock – or all of the above, plus dozens of other similar apt descriptions — but neither you nor I have probably generally considered me to be … naïve. But I was. All these years, I scoffed at conspiracist groups who maintained that the world was being run by a global cabal of elite pedophiles. The Epstein files that have been released seemingly indicate that there does indeed exist an international group of wealthy business and government elites across the political spectrum who have and do indeed believe that they are entitled to abuse and destroy the lives of the vulnerable for their own pleasure. Although it is still uncertain which of the powerful men coming into Epstein’s orbit exploited the women trafficked by Epstein, it seems clear that given the number of men named and the number of Epstein victims that have come forward, that many, many men were involved. While these conspiracists were clearly wrong with regard to some vital particulars – the pedophilia cabal they warned against obviously does not include all of the globally politically and financial powerful, it is certainly not limited to left wing elites, and (wait for it) Donald Trump is most certainly not the man who is going to bring it to justice for the victims — arguably one must concede that this particular conspiracy theory was not entirely without a grain of reality.

I never believed it. One or two megarich and powerful monsters, sure; we have constant evidence of the evil in the world. But the kind of concerted and broad ring that Mr. Epstein appears to have developed and serviced? I never thought that such could actually exist. I was confident that these conspiracists were entirely wacked out, howling at the moon about global pedophilia rings while standing in a Los Angeles parking lot waiting to prove that the 1969 lunar landing was a hoax or scanning the sky for Italian lasers altering voting machines.

It would appear that their claims of the existence of an international pedophilia ring weren’t entirely wrong, after all.

The State of the Union I’m Hoping For

This post runs contrary to my general rule against writing and posting on the same day; it arises from an email exchange I had with a close friend earlier today.

President Donald J. Trump delivers his Presidential State of the Union Address to Congress this evening. All who care are aware that Mr. Trump’s conduct of the presidency during the first year of his second term has been so disreputable that his approval rating has plummeted among all voter segments save his hardest-core supporters, and in even that segment he has sustained erosion. I have heard commentators opine in recent days that because the speech will be watched by a wide swath of Americans across the political spectrum, the President’s advisors see this State of the Union Address as perhaps his last opportunity (think about that; he’s only been back in office a year) to right his sinking popularity and at the same time provide a campaign lifeline to Republican candidates representing swing areas (and possibly not-normally-swing areas) who seemingly currently face the prospect of a political bloodbath. To achieve the result that Mr. Trump’s advisors and his terrified Republican officeholder supplicants hope for, Mr. Trump will need to project a reasonable tone, acknowledge the majority of Americans’ fears about their economic circumstances and the country’s future while laying out specific proposals to address these Americans’ financial plight, express regret about the Supreme Court’s recent ruling vitiating his tariff policy without descending into vituperation, point out the way his administration has shut down the border while perhaps indicating that ICE will be adopting a lighter touch in its activities within our cities, etc., etc., etc.

I am confident that these Republican worthies (obviously using that term loosely) fervently hope he will avoid a harsh, combative tone of denial, or claim that America is in a golden age, or claim that America is loved around the world, or any declaration that affordability is a hoax, or any declaration that his administration intends to take steps to prevent widespread voter fraud in the 2026 elections, or personal attacks on Democrats, or racially-tinged attacks on immigrants, or above all, personal attacks on the Supreme Court – including the two Justices he appointed — that recently struck down his fairly unpopular tariff policy. (I admit that I felt perverse amusement when following the adverse decision, Mr. Trump referred to the three Republican-appointed Justices who rejected his claim to broad tariffing authority as “lapdogs”; I considered his comment an unwittingly indictment of the three Republican-appointed Justices who did vote to uphold his tariffing authority – Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh – who are, indeed, lapdogs.)

You and I are both sufficiently aware of my fallibility, but I am nonetheless going to make a straightforward pronouncement here: Mr. Trump is at this point congenitally incapable of performing in the manner his advisors wish and his Republican supplicants need to politically survive. He will claim that under his leadership, that our union is strong; that the economy is strong; that the world is more secure, and he alone has been able to bring peace in about 100 countries (none of which actually seem to be at peace 😉); that he does intend to take steps to avoid voter fraud in certain areas (all Democratic strongholds); that ICE has made the country safer; and that the Supreme Court has acted shamefully and hurt our country by its recent tariff ruling, and he intends to impose more tariffs. In short, he will adopt the combative tone and say all the things that his advisors and fellow Republicans want him to avoid.

Although I have continued with my recent months’ habit of not watching or listening to Mr. Trump’s lies and loathsome diatribes – my heart is not that strong – I intend to watch the address tonight, hoping for the best – the best being that Mr. Trump will indeed perform as I have predicted. Although one is heartsick at the hardship, the lost and ruined lives, the irreparable damage to innocent children’s psyches that this Regime has cruelly wrought, it is seemingly clear that each report of a new despicable outrage by the Regime – from its ICE’s Nazi-like activities and the murders of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, to its continued refusal to even acknowledge let alone address many Americans’ economic plight, to its continued refusal to provide impoverished Americans with healthcare financial assistance, to its refusal to follow the Epstein law and provide justice to the Epstein victims, to its threats to invade Greenland, to its attacks on its own Supreme Court (which must make even some semi-perceptive MAGAs wonder if he’s acting legally), to its plastering Mr. Trump’s name on and flying banners with Mr. Trump’s picture from various federal buildings, to … you get it (I apologize if I have left out any of the Regime’s shameless activities you find the most offensive) – has, at one level, become means to an end. As British Prime Minister Winston Churchill told the House of Commons in June, 1940 – and I make this analogy intentionally, and not lightly – “We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering.” At this point, I don’t want to see Attorney General Pam Bondi, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., or Epstein-implicated Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick fired; they serve the same emotive rallying point for Regime opponents as MAGAs used to point to former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. If Mr. Trump was savvy enough to jettison some of these subordinates, it would take some of the steam out of the Regime’s opposition.

Returning to a theme you have heard me repeat here endlessly: given the majority of American voters’ selection of Donald Trump in November of 2024, I – like our European allies — have lost and will probably never regain confidence in the good sense of the majority of American citizens. It is clear that in order to get the pivotal segment of our citizens who inexplicably thought Mr. Trump was the solution to their difficulties to continue to see reality, they must be regularly confronted with Regime outrages. Ironically – and at the same time unfortunately and happily — Mr. Trump seems willing to accommodate this need.

I would suggest that we must face the fact that at this point there is no chance – zero — that we as a nation are in a position to face the myriad of pressing substantive problems we should be addressing – the economic insecurity of a large percentage of our people, what meaningful work can be developed for our citizens whose skill sets may be less well suited to the automated future, our federal debt, climate change, artificial intelligence, progress in the health sciences, the improvement and broadening of our education systems, a coherent immigration policy, our proper role in world affairs, you name it – until we manage to stifle the Regime of ignorance, denial and autocracy now governing our country. We need to put our substantive concerns aside, and for the present absorb the future Regime outrages that seem likely to further distress the pivotal middle segment of our citizens as setbacks that might ultimately enable us to preserve our democracy. Let the President continue to blithely deny that many Americans are suffering economically. Let him idiotically withhold vaccines, moronically declare Tylenol unsafe for pregnant women. Let him impose more illegal tariffs. Let him withhold the last 2 million Epstein documents. Let him fly his picture from every building in Washington. Indeed, let him bulldoze the West Wing, erect a castle, and paint his face on it. These are arguably means to an end.

There are, of course, two exceptions to this rule. The first is that we don’t want any more people’s lives sacrificed to Regime violence. The second involves the measures that the Regime is almost certainly going to attempt to subvert free and fair 2026 federal elections. These must be contested by all legal and peaceful means available. I’ll venture that the culmination is likely to arrive this summer when Mr. Trump knows — when it absolutely sinks in – that a fair election will be a tidal wave against him; that he will be facing circumstances, unlike his loss in 2020 — which, although clear, was undeniably close in states such as Georgia and Wisconsin – where most citizens will intuitively know from their own feelings that despite Regime claims, Republican defeats weren’t “rigged,” weren’t due to “voter fraud.”

That will be our most dangerous period. At the start of the Regime’s term, I thought the struggle might be coming in 2028; as I’ve indicated more recently, I think that it will be upon us in 2026. (Get ready to attend your next local NO KINGS rally on March 28. 😊) In a positive statement in which I wholeheartedly believe: if we can get through it, we are still the United States of America, the most democratic nation in the history of the earth, which despite its faults has through its goodwill, industry, and initiative done more good for more people than any other nation in history and solved the greatest number of the greatest problems humankind has faced. The substantive and political challenges we now confront can be addressed – if not entirely during my generation’s lifetime, during the lifetimes of our children and grandchildren — if we manage to secure our democracy.

We’ll see what happens tonight.

On Puerto Rico

For my own psychological wellbeing, I cling to the thought that I share very little in common with Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Mike Johnson, but I must admit that like him, I had never heard of Bad Bunny before Mr. … er … Bunny was named as the halftime headliner at the just-concluded Super Bowl. (I have since learned that Mr. Bunny’s actual name is Benito Antonio Martínez Ocasio. 😉) As will come as no surprise to anyone who read a recent post in which I indicated in passing that my musical tastes are mostly confined to soft rock, Sinatra-type pop and jazz, I am not a particular fan of Latino music any more than I am of opera, classical, country, or rap. At the same time, the political hullaballoo that had arisen over Mr. Martínez Ocasio’s selection and appearance made us tune in to watch his show (neither of us had any interest in the game; I haven’t watched a Super Bowl since the last Packers’ championship). I admit that given reports of Mr. Martínez Ocasio’s clear denunciation of Trump Regime practices toward Latin Americans in his speech at the recent Grammy Awards, I had become a fan without having ever heard him, and was intrigued as to what approach he might take when performing during the world’s most-watched music performance segment.

[An aside: although there haven’t been too many, it’s always fun to see an entity with more influence than the Trump Regime thumb its nose at the Regime. The NFL doesn’t give a damn what the Regime thinks, because it can afford not to; its numbers keep growing. As I recall, Costco continues its DEI program despite Regime pressure because its MAGA members continue to patronize the chain; Costco’s deals are too good (Costo is, of course, doing more to keep Americans’ costs down than the Regime). Although Mr. Trump is now suing JPMorgan Chase & Co, the bank certainly has the resources to defend (with almost certainly more talented lawyers) what is arguably another Trump spite claim, and its CEO, Jamie Dimon, our nation’s most powerful banker, has made it clear tacitly if not explicitly that he is confident that after Mr. Trump passes from the scene, JPMorgan Chase – and he — will still be here.]

But back to the show, before getting into what this note is actually about. Mr. Martínez Ocasio, obviously, did the entire show in Spanish. I, of course – despite four college semesters of Spanish a thousand years ago – understand no Spanish beyond “gracias,” “agua,” and “aqui.” I accordingly spent most of the performance — particularly at the points at which Mr. Martínez Ocasio was gesturing … er … downward – observing to TLOML, “I wonder whether he’s talking about unity or telling Trump to [well, you can fill in the rest 😉].”

Apparently, it was the former. Certainly wiser 😊.

That said, the emotion I felt most strongly after the show was … shame. Shame at the way we have ignored Puerto Rico, turned our back on it, let it down. These are our people.

Two aspects of Mr. Martínez Ocasio’s show particularly caught my attention. The first was the extras scaling power polls to remind us of the devastation and prolonged loss of electrical power that the island suffered following Hurricane Maria in 2017, the first year of the first Trump Administration. Our response to our fellow citizens’ hardship was, by all accounts, pitiful. (Most will recall that at one point Mr. Trump himself went down there and tossed rolls of paper towel or some such at Puerto Ricans, and then left.) President George W. Bush’s clearly inadequate response to the damage caused by Hurricane Katrina in 2005 put a dent in his popularity – not only in New Orleans, or in Louisiana, or in the South, but across the nation — from which he never fully recovered. Granting that COVID, George Floyd’s murder, and Mr. Trump’s already-evident autocratic inclinations dominated the 2020 presidential race, I don’t remember the Trump Administration’s inadequate response to Hurricane Maria even being mentioned by any candidate during the campaign. It certainly didn’t occur to me, nor, after a certain period following Maria’s assault, do I recall it being regularly addressed in the news outlets we employ. (It’s a quick reminder that unless a situation or issue is personal to one, one moves on when the outlets one utilizes moves on.)

One point I did consider in the weeks after Maria hit the island: as reporters intoned that Puerto Rico’s terrain was making recovery efforts more difficult, it occurred to me that since we undoubtedly have Pentagon war plans to cover every conceivable scenario, if Cuba, Columbia, or Venezuela – all closer to Puerto Rico than Miami – had hypothetically invaded Puerto Rico, there would be no doubt that as we airlifted thousands of soldiers in to defend the island in a matter of hours, the difficult terrain would suddenly be a minor hurdle to establishing power and communications for a military that did so in South Pacific and Southeast Asian jungles and Middle Eastern deserts. (To boot, those of MAGA tendencies – the ones seemingly most loudly offended by Mr. Martínez Ocasio’s Super Bowl appearance — would have been the first to vociferously seek to defend “our” island against the invasion.)

There was no invasion, only a hurricane. So we ignored it. We didn’t care.

The second aspect of Mr. Martínez Ocasio’s show catching my eye was his hoisting of a Puerto Rican flag with its star depicted on a light blue field, which I had learned before the performance is a symbol of a claim not for Puerto Rican statehood, but for Puerto Rican independence. It has made me reflect. I have long favored statehood for Puerto Rico; it is closer to the so-called mainland United States than either Hawaii or the main bulk of Alaska, and with a population exceeding 3 million, it has more people than 18 of our states [the majority “red” (including Alaska) but a significant number “blue” (including Hawaii), and the District of Columbia]. Admitting the island as our 51^st state has for years seemed to be a no-brainer held up only by politics. Mr. Martínez Ocasio’s clear preference for Puerto Rican independence made me ponder my own parochialism. I have always assumed – without doing any research – that the majority of Puerto Ricans wanted Puerto Rico to become a state. (Until very recently, I literally knew more about Scots’ preferences toward their nation’s independence from the United Kingdom than I knew about my fellow American citizens’ view toward the sovereignty of their island.) According to the now ever-present “AI Overview,” it does appear that close to 60% of Puerto Ricans do indeed favor Puerto Rico becoming a U.S. state over other alternatives, but a growing minority favors independence. A dwindling minority favors retaining the island’s current “colonial” status.

It is clear from the outcry in MAGA quarters about Mr. Martínez Ocasio’s performance that MAGA’s opposition to Puerto Rican statehood amounts is more than pure numbers (i.e., opposition to admittance of a state whose liberal-leaning citizens would select 2 U.S. Senators and approximately 4 U.S. House Representatives who would help thwart its retrogressive agenda). It is racism. Puerto Ricans are too brown, too Latin.

Since the majority of Puerto Ricans still favor a status of U.S. statehood over independence, I do as well. But now – I will watch. If the majority ever joins Mr. Martínez Ocasio in a preference for island independence, I’ll heartily support that position, and will expect every citizen of New Hampshire – one of our original 13, with currently less than half of Puerto Rico’s population, boasting the state motto, “Live Free or Die,” its citizens no longer satisfied 250 years ago to be a colony – to join me. (Maybe MAGAs will favor Puerto Rican independence as well, since they clearly don’t consider Puerto Ricans “American” enough to be … Americans.)

But in the meantime — given the MAGA outrage that accompanied Mr. Martínez Ocasio’s performance, and its pathetic need for a “counterprogramming” “American” show – let us relish that in appearing before over 130 million people … the Bunny got their goat. 😊

Mr. Warhol Predicted our Government’s Failure

This is simply a plaint, nothing you haven’t already realized yourself, indeed something I think I may have already noted here at some time in the past, but one of the perks of having a site like this is the opportunity to state the obvious when you wish to. Although one could decry the injustice inherent in a couple of the observations made below about the complexion and standing of our early members of Congress, I don’t think anyone can dispute their accuracy.

This also the rare post that I think any American of any political persuasion across our entire spectrum would agree with.

A large share of our people are currently bemoaning the fact that our toothless Congress – some would instead characterize the members of Congress as lacking other body parts than teeth – are refusing to stand up to President Donald Trump although they – Republicans as well as Democrats – are well aware that his excesses are dangerous for our country and do little or nothing to address the issues of greatest concern to their constituents. Instead, they cower in corners and whisper. Why? We’ve brought it upon ourselves with our descent into the social media snippet, reality TV, hyperbole, glitz, and Let No Complex Thought Be Left Unthought Culture. The trouble with our Congress today is not that it is filled with people who fundamentally believe in MAGAism or Democratic Socialism, or in White Christian America or Black Lives Matter, or in Regulation or Deregulation, or in Abortion or Choice, or in Guns or No Guns, or in anything else.

They believe in Andy Warhol.

Mr. Warhol, as virtually all are aware – at least of his imputed observation, if not that it is attributed to him – was quoted by Time Magazine in 1967 as saying, “In the future, everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes.” It doesn’t matter that it is now disputed that Mr. Warhol actually ever uttered his most famous statement, or if he did, that he was the first to say it; it will forever be attributed to him.

What matters is the observation’s continuing resonance – much truer today than when the quote appeared in Time almost 60 years ago. Our members of Congress need – apparently, lust for – fame. They need everybody to know that they’re somebody. Apparently, simply being a member of Congress makes them somebody. That’s why we have no functioning federal legislative branch.

I will assert that the situation we have today was unfathomable for the Founding Fathers. In a time when only white men could vote and, practically speaking, only rich white men could literally afford to donate their time – that is indeed what they were doing — to participating in the federal government, the notion that these proud landowners would totally obsequiously surrender the prerogatives of their Congressional offices to the President of the United States, or change their views to stoop to pander their constituents – the vast, vast majority of whom were incredibly poorer and incredibly less versed in the matters of the country and the world than they were — was inconceivable to them. In the Declaration of Independence, a number had literally pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to the founding of a new national enterprise. They didn’t enter Congress to become somebody; each of them already was somebody. Their sentiments upon entering Congress may be best expressed in the words of another politician in another nation at almost the same time — Irish-Anglo Edmund Burke, considered the founder of modern Conservativism (you know, the real kind), who once told his Parliament constituents that a representative’s “ … unbiased opinion, his mature judgement, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgement; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”

Now, we have a bunch of gutless lickspittles who pander to the basest tastes of their constituents so they can keep their tender tushies in warm cushy Congressional seats. It is clear that the lust to keep these seats isn’t about the actual political power or purpose they provide; they have entirely ceded these to the President of their party (startlingly true right now with the particularly unscrupulous and ruthless Mr. Trump, but just as true on the other side of the political aisle when the president is a popular Democrat). At this point, it seemingly isn’t always even about a normal citizen – one of us — being able to make him/herself a somebody by entering Congress, because it seems that more and more members of Congress already are “somebody” in the traditional sense – i.e., wealthy; so the office cannot be for the financial advantages or societal entrée it might thereafter provide. (Actually, for our really wealthy members of Congress, it seems that the choice came down to running for Congress or buying a professional sports team, and buying a Congressional seat was cheaper and easier than buying a professional franchise.)

No, it’s as Mr. Warhol (apocryphally, at least) said: it’s about the Fame. “Look, look at me. I not only need to be somebody; I need you to know I’m somebody!” Mr. Trump is of course the most shameless example of it, but virtually all of them suffer from it. (Oh, for the good old days when Robber Barons like John D. Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan, and Henry Ford, who were already confident that they were somebody, were satisfied to run their businesses and exploit the vast majority of Americans from behind the scenes without feeling the need to foist their views upon our citizens in public. 😉)

You want evidence? (Although I don’t think you need it.) It’s said today that Republican members of Congress fear Mr. Trump. Actually, they don’t. What they fear is his influence with their constituents – not the same. Let’s assume for a moment that we do have free and fair elections in 2026, that current projections of a dramatic Democratic capture of the House of Representatives come to fruition, and that credible polls thereafter attribute the Republican electoral debacle to the unpopularity of the Trump Regime. In such event, what do you want to bet that the most dangerous place to be the day after the election will be at the door of the Republican Congressional cloakroom as those Republicans who did survive rush out to find a camera to distance themselves from Mr. Trump and all that his Regime has done during its first two years?

I know. You won’t take the bet.

I have to admit that I used to be firmly in favor of term limits for members of Congress. I guess I still am; but I consider it a much lesser priority than I used to. What these people lust for isn’t power, it’s fame. To get their seats, they all pander to whatever constituency or TV camera or media outlet that will get and keep them there. If one leaves Congress, s/he will simply be replaced by another with the same yearning.

I don’t know how we recover a Congress with [you fill in whatever body part you consider most symbolic of inner strength]. Because in fact, our Congress is simply a reflection of what we’ve become.

Our Congress is us.

A Greenland Checkmate – If NATO Nations Stand Fast: a Postscript and Correction

Yesterday, it appeared that President Donald Trump and the NATO nations aligned against him over his attempts to extort Denmark, Greenland, and NATO into transferring control of Greenland to the United States were taking steps to move back from the brink of war. Mr. Trump at one point apparently indicated that he would not attempt to use force to take control of Greenland. Whether our Manchild President stepped back from the brink because the NATO nations found a way to placate Mr. Trump, as he claimed, or because somebody woke him up sufficiently to the possibility, as suggested in this post, that the conflict that would ensue if he ordered a military invasion of Greenland could effectively spell the end of his presidency, it does not appear – at least as this is typed – that the United States and its putative NATO allies are headed for any immediate armed conflict.

But who knows what the case will be by the time you read this? We’ll have to see what happens today. And then tomorrow. And then the next day.

Meanwhile, the New York Times is reporting that the Regime’s ICE has started new operations in the state of Maine, targeting immigrants from Somalia. Here we go again.

On a different note, I observed here recently that I very much enjoy receiving comments – even ones pointing out that I have erred in a post. 😊 I was informed yesterday by an unimpeachable source that I had erred in this original note when I casually referred to Greenland as a “colony” of Denmark. Greenland is not a Danish colony; it is actually a self-governing territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, although Denmark handles Greenland’s foreign policy and defense, and Greenland relies heavily on Denmark’s financial support, education and health care.

The record – at least on Greenland’s legal status, and at least in these pages – is now clear. 😊

Now, let’s brace for today’s rollercoaster ride.

A Greenland Checkmate – If NATO Nations Stand Fast

Clearly, a blizzard of impressions arise regarding the United States’ recent incursion into Venezuela, its capture and extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, and what might come next. This note isn’t about that. (Some day, there may be a lengthy post on Venezuela that that tries your resolve and eyesight.) That said, there is one point to be made here about the Venezuelan raid that is relevant to what follows: President Donald Trump’s comment not long after the raid, reported by multiple credible sources, that “many” Cubans were killed in the process of capturing Mr. Maduro. (The Cuban government later indicated that 32 Cuban military personnel were killed.)

So much for the Cubans. From both domestic political and geopolitical perspectives, nobody in America cares about dead Cuban soldiers.

This is about Greenland, the world’s largest island, sitting in the Western Hemisphere mostly within the Arctic Circle, a colony of Denmark – a member of NATO — since before the United States declared its independence from Great Britain. As all who care are aware, given the Trump Regime’s repeated threats in recent weeks to capture Greenland by force if the Danes, Greenlanders, and other NATO nations are unwilling to voluntarily accede to the United States’ usurpation, some eight members of NATO have responded by stationing troops in Greenland on the professed pretext of assuring Mr. Trump that the island is safe from Mr. Trump’s expressed fears of a Russian or Chinese invasion (a completely fabricated concern; Vladimir Putin has his hands full in Ukraine and Xi Jinping is eyeing Taiwan; neither has imminent plans to invade a NATO territory now significantly less strategic to him), while clearly signaling their intent to militarily resist any assault on Greenland by American troops. Today, Mr. Trump will be in Davos, Switzerland, at the world’s most renowned annual meeting of political and financial bigwigs. If credible reporting is accurate, Mr. Trump plans to pressure NATO leaders to enable him to assume control of Greenland.

Make no mistake. I remain a foreign policy disciple of Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, and there is a lot to be said about securing Greenland’s strategic position for all of NATO as well for the United States in areas such as missile paths, emerging commercial waterways, and rare earth minerals, most of which you already know, much and perhaps all of which could be achieved through deft diplomacy. There is also a lot to say about Mr. Trump’s increasing erraticism and seeming detachment from reality as he completes the first year of his second term (there does seem to be something that’s changed in the President’s behavior in the last several months – even by the standards we judge him — beyond his aging reversion), but perhaps we’ll get back to that in a future post. The focus here is on the impending – and extraordinarily silly, if the matter wasn’t so serious — military crisis brought about by the Regime’s thuggish, blatantly illegal approach to wrest control of Greenland from Denmark. I was initially frustrated by the NATO nations’ response to the Regime’s bellicose overtures – to the effect that aggressive action by the Regime “would mean the end of NATO” – because such tepid responses seemed to indicate an obliviousness to the reality that Mr. Trump wants to destroy NATO, and to invite a Greenland assault would provide him a way to do so. I have since been incredibly encouraged by the NATO nations’ stationing of troops in Greenland. The question now is whether the NATO leaders have the internal fortitude to stand up to Mr. Trump’s formidable personal pressure. If they do, I would submit that no matter how outraged Mr. Trump may be – unless he is now truly delusional, which one can no longer rule out – he will see that he has been checkmated.

The bulk of this note addresses somewhat antiseptically the domestic political ramifications Mr. Trump may face if he orders a military assault on Greenland – how such an order might affect him, which is all he cares about. What can’t be ignored at the outset are the moral, legal, and potentially tragic personal consequences of what would be a deranged order to invade the island: Denmark and Greenland control Greenland. They have for centuries. We don’t. We’ve offered to take control of the island. (If they were willing, I’d support it.) They’ve said no. There is no legal or moral gray area. In a civilized world, that is the end of the story. As to the potential personal consequences: As the NATO nations with troops in Greenland make clear their readiness to confront any offensive American assault, I am outraged and terrified for the American troops and for the NATO troops — who have each sworn to serve their nations and NATO as a whole – whose lives may be forfeit, as was National Guardsman U.S. Army Specialist Sarah Beckstrom’s to a Trump Regime publicity stunt, to Mr. Trump’s attempt to fulfill a totalitarian vision of hemispheric conquest which can no longer be distinguished from the Nazis’ 1930s claims of their need for Lebensraum (“Living Space”). (Don’t forget the President’s ongoing references to Canada, and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s current spirited defense of Greenland. Mr. Carney clearly recognizes that if Greenland falls – I deliberately use a wartime battle reference – Canada is next.)

Credible polls indicate that an overwhelming majority of Americans – including an unusually notable segment of Mr. Trump’s hardcore base — think his designs on Greenland are completely unwarranted. Although many of these Americans may not have cared about dead Cubans, and may not understand the importance of preserving NATO for America’s security, I would submit that they will care about dead Danes, dead Canadians, dead Brits, dead French, dead Germans, dead Swedes, dead Finns, and dead Norwegians (I may be leaving a nation out; if so, I apologize) if we launch a military assault against an ally when we are so clearly in the wrong.

And much more than that: they will most certainly will care about dead Americans. NATO troops know how to shoot. I suspect that in the Greenland meetings taking place this week, one or more of the NATO leaders will make it clear to Mr. Trump — make it, as they say, crystal: If the United States makes an aggressive incursion into Greenland, there will be dead Americans.

A second factor with which Mr. Trump should be considering when pondering his malign invasion: that Congressional Democrats’ recent video reminding American military personnel about their obligation to disregard illegal orders, taken together with the Regime’s vitriolic counterattacks against those members, have made every U.S. service member acutely aware of his/her oath to disregard illegal orders. Any order to invade Greenland – an ally — will place all American troops, from commander to grunt, in a grotesquely unjust ethical quandary. If Mr. Trump orders the invasion, how many will demur? Aside from the troops’ dilemma, Mr. Trump should realize from his own self-interest – again, all he cares about — that if he loses command of the military, his presidency is effectively emasculated.

The first dead American in Greenland – and perhaps even the first dead NATO soldier – will not only mean the end of NATO; I will venture that it will mean the end of Mr. Trump’s presidency (although it may be the beginning of his dictatorship). Some Americans will reflexively jump to an “America, Right or Wrong” stance; I submit that the a vast majority will not. The domestic paroxysm resulting from a Greenland invasion added to the continuing protests related to Renee Good’s killing and ICE’s brutal immigration enforcement activities will inflame protests and violent skirmishes across this country.

Unless Mr. Trump is willing to go the final mile – declare Martial Law, and declare himself a de facto dictator (again, assuming that the American military will even follow him) — a united NATO front in Davos will effectively checkmate his designs in Greenland. I understand the NATO leaders’ continuous coddling of this President Manchild; they have seen it as their best approach to ensure that he continues to provide his lukewarm assistance to their efforts to support Ukraine. That said – and I suspect that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy would agree – no amount of appeasement will deter Mr. Trump from abandoning NATO and Ukraine if he gets it in his head to do so, and NATO leaders’ obsequiousness regarding Greenland is at least as likely to encourage Mr. Trump’s arbitrary abandonment of Ukraine as deter it. I would further venture that Mr. Trump’s tariff threats against these NATO nations are strategically toothless. He can tariff these NATO nations all he wants; but for a very brief respite in the 1990s through the early 2000s, they have lived under the threat of Nazi and then Soviet/Russian aggression since 1933. Given principles of sovereignty and democracy as fundamental as exist here, tariffs are not going to cow them. (Any Supreme Court decision hereafter holding that Mr. Trump cannot use tariffs to effect his whimsical non-economic initiatives will obviously sharpen an impending Constitutional crisis.) Politically, these democratic NATO leaders can blame America for their citizens’ ensuing economic hardships, and their citizens will support them.

In the last months, I have obviously made a number of provocative comparisons between the designs and actions of the Trump Regime and past autocratic regimes, mostly in reference to the Regime’s ICE forces’ immigration enforcement measures. It is clear that the Regime’s autocratic inclinations do not stop within our borders. Although I could cite a dozen of Mr. Trump’s own comments to make the point, instead I’ll quote comments about Greenland made by Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller a couple of weeks ago. As all who care are already aware, Mr. Miller, who wields tremendous influence in the White House, said the following in an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper:

“Nobody’s going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland. … We live in a world, in the real world, Jake, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world since the beginning of time.”

Compare that to the following:

“In this case we must not let political boundaries obscure for us the boundaries of eternal justice. … [L]et us be given the soil we need for our livelihood. True, [the nations possessing the land we covet] will not willing do this. But then the law of self-preservation goes into effect; and what is refused to amicable methods, it is up to the fist to take.”

Who do you think said that? (I know; I made it too easy.)

Adolf Hitler; Mein Kampf, Vol I, Ch. IV

In an earlier note, I commented that there was a lot to unpack in the Greenland situation; I was referring to the various substantive geopolitical issues related to the island. In the context in which we are now speaking, there is very little to unpack: there is right, and there is wrong. My use of the checkmate analogy in this note is also arguably inapposite: chess is an intellectual, antiseptic exercise; a player readily sacrifices pawns to win the game. What we are facing here is not antiseptic. It is about sovereignty and the rule of law. It is about the potential sacrifice of innocent lives. If Mr. Trump comes to understand this week that forces are resolutely arrayed against him, may he have enough remaining sense of reason – I have no illusions that he has any sense of humanity – to stand down.

We’ll see what happens.

They Ignored Samuel

I have mentioned here several times since President Donald Trump was reelected that I assumed that Mr. Trump and his cohort recognized that on their best day, they only had the support of half of the American public, and understood that they would need to employ the Nazi model of the 1930s to quickly consolidate their control of our country if they were going to be able to reshape it to their vision. More recently, I offered that through its deployment of National Guard and active military troops to “Blue Cities” and its intimidating immigration tactics, the Trump Regime might initially have been attempting to subdue the citizens who oppose it by employing the war strategy of ancient Chinese General and Philosopher Sun Tzu, “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” Yet more recently and a bit whimsically, I suggested that the then-seemingly-mixed signals from the Regime perhaps offered a dark silver-lining hope that Mr. Trump wasn’t going to use the powers of the presidency to impose a dictatorship but to merely achieve the goal of the fictional Professor Harold Hill in The Music Man of Broadway and Hollywood – i.e., enrich himself and his family at the expense of the gullible who believed in him before departing the scene, but leaving our democracy intact if battered.

The Regime’s actions since the killing of Renee Good have made clear: that Mr. Trump and his acolytes recognize that their best day is past. And that the strategy urged by Sun Tzu is not achievable.

And that he’s not the Music Man.

The Regime has intensified its brutal immigration enforcement tactics in Minneapolis, and ICE agents have felt emboldened by the Regime’s aggressive defense of the killer’s actions. The Regime’s Department of Justice has announced that it will not initiate an investigation into whether Ms. Good’s civil rights were violated. Six Minneapolis-based federal prosecutors have resigned over an expressed Justice Department intent to investigate Ms. Good’s widow and the department’s unwillingness to investigate the shooter. On January 14, there was a second ICE shooting in Minneapolis. Credible outlets are reporting that there are now 3,000 ICE agents in Minneapolis, as contrasted with 600 police officers who are generally available to provide public safety for the area. Unrest in Minneapolis has been increasing as state and city officials plead for calm; even so, credible sources also report that the Justice Department is planning to issue subpoenas to MN Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey in a criminal probe alleging that they are obstructing federal law enforcement.

You don’t need me to draw a better picture for you.

I haven’t seen any federal officials pleading for calm. They want this. They want to assert their power against those whom they consider their enemies – their fellow citizens.

At the time this is typed, the President of the United States is threatening to invoke the federal Insurrection Act, which, among other provisions, authorizes the president to deploy U.S. active military against American citizens, “Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings.” Let it be stated plainly: Anyone suggesting that such an extensive ICE presence in Minneapolis is required to enforce our immigration laws is either a fool or a knave. If Mr. Trump invokes the Insurrection Act, he will, through the unnecessary deployment of ICE agents to Minneapolis and their Nazi Sturmabteilung-like activities, have incited the very unrest that he will cite under the Act as enabling him to deploy our military forces against American citizens. Such an invocation under the circumstances he has created will be none other than a fascist exertion of power.

Neither Adolf Hitler nor Vladimir Putin could be orchestrating this any more effectively.

[Since I think that immigration has actually become a pretext – a means for the Regime to force a confrontation with those it perceives as its enemies, rather than an end – this is admittedly an aside, but one expressed here just as aptly as in any other post, regarding the far right’s so-called “Replacement Theory”: You show me a white, male, English-speaking, sexually-straight Christian American citizen who isn’t savvy enough to realize that being a white, male, English-speaking, sexually-straight Christian American citizen is still the demographically best thing to be in America, and I’ll show you a gullible, aggrieved, excuse-ridden, white, male, English-speaking, sexually-straight Christian American citizen who wouldn’t be successful in America even if this nation consisted entirely of white, English-speaking, sexually-straight Christian American citizens. The suspicion lurks that many of the Regime’s ICE agents now roaming Minneapolis fit into this category, and that these men, given a meaning and an “other” to hate, provide the Regime with an informal paramilitary force that can be readily deployed against anyone that the Regime perceives as its enemy.

And … as long as we’re clearing the decks. After listening to Trump supporters at Trump rallies wearing MAGA hats, T-shirts bearing Mr. Trump’s picture, and American flag pants covering their behinds, loudly proclaim for a decade that Mr. Trump “Tells the Truth – Tells It Like It Is,” … let’s … for once … Tell the Truth, Tell It Like It Is: Unless you’ve already got a million bucks in the bank, Mr. Trump has done nothing for you. He’s conned you. You think that because he hates those you hate, he respects you. He doesn’t. He has nothing but contempt for you. He thinks you’re suckers. He doesn’t give a damn about you. Those of you whom he has pardoned for January 6^th crimes may think he did so out of kinship, or perhaps due a shred of guilt because you went to jail and he didn’t for an insurrection he incited, but I would submit that he did so because he wants you free to be riot fodder the next time he stages an unconstitutional coup to stay in power.]

We need not list other recent Regime violations of our democratic order. If you’re reading this note, you can name a dozen or more such activities – those more recent seemingly even more aggravated than those earlier – that I could list here. [I deliberately defer to a future post the Regime’s bellicose (a word derived from the Latin bellum, meaning “war”) statements regarding its intent to usurp Greenland. There’s a lot to unpack there.]

I admit to extreme exasperation with media commentators’ continued somber descriptions of the Regime’s autocratic actions while they simultaneously intone about how the Regime’s actions are going to result in a Democratic takeover of at least one House of Congress in 2027. I find their nonsequitous observations almost as aggravating as I find the Regime’s autocratic policies terrifying. I would submit that the Regime’s actions have made clear that when pushed to the wall, it will not allow for free and fair elections, or nor willingly relinquish power. Not in 2026; not in 2028; not ever.

Mr. Trump and his minions are no fools. Credible reporting indicates that they are well aware that his approval ratings are plummeting. Given their seemingly unalterable course, no bettor would wager that his approval ratings will substantially rise between now and November. As I’ve mentioned here before, when in a contest always assume that the other guy (in a genderless sense) is at least as bright as you are, and knows at least as much about the given circumstances as you do. In this case, add another factor: the other guy is completely unscrupulous. I mentioned in a recent post a number of the tactics that the Regime might take to ward off a Democratic takeover of a House of Congress, including purging of Democratic-leaning voter rolls and voter (particularly Latino voter) intimidation, perhaps culminating – if polling near the election projects truly dire electoral results for the Regime – in consideration of a declaration of Martial Law to suspend elections. (Indeed, earlier this week, when asked about his falling poll numbers, Mr. Trump told Reuters, “When you think of it, we shouldn’t even have an election,” – a statement quickly taken back by the White House Communications Team.) But I ignorantly left one out, which was in effect also recently suggested by Mr. Trump himself in a New York Times interview: seizing voting machines after the election in swing Congressional districts (which Republicans now seem destined to lose) — presumably based upon what will be, if past is prologue, bogus claims of voter fraud.

I recently had a friend tell me that it’s an embarrassment to be an American. What does one say?

My exasperation with media commentators’ seemingly (at least, on-air) obliviousness to the authoritarian threat that Mr. Trump poses to our election and democracy is, I admit, exceeded by my frustration with the marginal Trump voters who put him in the White House despite the fact – I realize I am obsessing – that he told us what he was going to do. In a note posted here not long after Mr. Trump reassumed the presidency, I ventured, “Although we will never know … it would seem worthy of betting a dollar that each of the following will occur: the impoverished mother, who voted for Mr. Trump because of the price of eggs, who loses her SNAP payments; the elderly farmer, who voted for Mr. Trump because he hates the Woke, who has a family member die because the hospital formerly nearest to him closed for lack of Medicaid revenue; the Latino male, who wouldn’t vote for a woman, who watches undocumented family members deported, never to be seen again; and the black male, who voted for Mr. Trump because he was so manly, who is gunned down somewhere by some police officer emboldened by Trump rhetoric.” [I now realize that I could have added, but didn’t: and the Wall Street trader, so obsessed with tax cuts, further Trump deregulation and short term market performance, who didn’t see that the foundation of American financial economic credibility and stability would be damaged by Mr. Trump’s stated intent to (and/or the blatantly obvious likelihood that he would) extend the 2017 Trump tax cut (thereby unnecessarily exponentially increasing the federal debt), and impose idiotic tariffs, bully the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates, and intimidate federal financial analysts into manipulating economic data (thereby accelerating inflation and undermining business and investor confidence)].

In a note posted here not long before the election, I observed: “[If Mr. Trump wins the election], [a]t some point [thereafter], some of the citizens who vote for Mr. Trump this November will say, ‘This is wrong. This is too much. I never intended this.’ By that time, it will be too late. In this context, the shame will be on them, not on him; he has made his designs perfectly plain [Emphasis in Original].”

What Trump voters wanted was a king to rule them, to fight their battles; a Messiah, to make it all better.

As many are aware, Catholic Masses are said around the world every day of the year. Each parish employs exactly the same Scriptural passages in that day’s Masses, translated into the native language of the given congregation. This is the first reading for yesterday’s Masses, from the First Book of Samuel:

“All the elders of Israel came in a body to Samuel at Ramah
and said to him, ‘Now that you are old,
and your sons do not follow your example,
appoint a king over us, as other nations have, to judge us.’

Samuel was displeased when they asked for a king to judge them.
He prayed to the LORD, however, who said in answer:

‘Grant the people’s every request.
It is not you they reject, they are rejecting me as their king.’

Samuel delivered the message of the LORD in full
to those who were asking him for a king.

He told them:

‘The rights of the king who will rule you will be as follows:
He will take your sons and assign them to his chariots and horses,
and they will run before his chariot.
He will also appoint from among them his commanders of groups
of a thousand and of a hundred soldiers.
He will set them to do his plowing and his harvesting,
and to make his implements of war and the equipment of his chariots.
He will use your daughters as ointment makers, as cooks, and as bakers.
He will take the best of your fields, vineyards, and olive groves,
and give them to his officials.
He will tithe your crops and your vineyards,
and give the revenue to his eunuchs and his slaves.
He will take your male and female servants,
as well as your best oxen and your asses,
and use them to do his work.
He will tithe your flocks and you yourselves will become his slaves.
When this takes place,
you will complain against the king whom you have chosen,
but on that day the LORD will not answer you.’

The people, however, refused to listen to Samuel’s warning and said,

‘Not so! There must be a king over us.
We too must be like other nations,
with a king to rule us and to lead us in warfare
and fight our battles.’

When Samuel had listened to all the people had to say,
he repeated it to the LORD, who then said to him,

‘Grant their request and appoint a king to rule them.’

1 Samuel 8:47, 10 – 22a

Of course, by this time you have realized that this post is titled misleadingly 😉. Samuel was only the Messenger. It wasn’t Samuel’s warning they ignored.

At this moment, all Americans, no matter whom they voted for, and the many millions across the globe whose lives are affected by the American election but didn’t get to choose, are — as did the Elders’ sons, daughters, and servants, not only the Elders themselves – reaping the whirlwind of a gross miscalculation by the decisive segment of tragically deluded American voters last November.

I would submit – at least as of today; events in Minneapolis, or the high likelihood of provocative clashes between Trump forces and protestors during the upcoming summer months, could quickly alter this calculus — that there is still a decent distance for those who believe in American democracy to save it. It may not be a question of how far the Trump Regime is willing to go, but for how long and how far our professional armed forces will follow it. However, if citizens who believe in American democracy don’t recognize and lay plans to contest Mr. Trump’s telegraphed intent to intrude upon our voting processes to maintain control of the government, we have significantly less hope of avoiding its execution.

Let’s hope that we can still find our way – but it is imperative that we remain peaceful.

The Year of Decision Ahead

No, this will not be our year of decision. We had our year of decision in 2024, and it appears tenable to maintain, based upon recent credible polls setting forth our citizens’ collective assessment of President Donald Trump’s performance in what has essentially been the first full year of his second term, that a solid majority of us — including a notable segment of lukewarm Trump voters who believed that he would improve their financial circumstances and be judicious in his immigration enforcement – is currently of the persuasion that we fu… er … fouled up. Knowing what we as a people know today, if a presidential election was held tomorrow, I’m not sure that former Vice President Kamala Harris would beat Mr. Trump – I fear that the prejudices of some against a female candidate of color might, despite everything, still be too strong – but I’d wager that former President Joe Biden would win — that faced with the stark choice of selecting a president either unnervingly infirm or capriciously malevolent, a majority of Americans in the swing states would prefer a grandfather figurehead to what we’ve wrought. But let’s start with the image I consider the best depiction of what I consider Mr. Trump and his regime to have done to America’s democracy at home and standing around the world during 2025; we’ll talk about what 2026 might hold on the other side.

Batman (1989): Joker Museum Scene

So … on to 2026. I am not going to try your eyesight by repeating a litany of pontifications I have made before; let’s just look at the record. Suffice it to say that if, as I believe, it is beyond Mr. Trump’s capacity to radically change his direction in the coming year, we will see more untoward monarchial ostentatiousness and self-aggrandizement, continued blatant disregard for and failure to address the financial stresses of about 80% of Americans (including millions of Trump supporters) (as overall American economic indicators and the financial markets rise, and the fortunes of the top financially secure 20% of Americans continue to multiply), continued brutally-indiscriminate immigration enforcement, continued blatant failure to meaningfully address healthcare access and healthcare cost concerns for millions of Americans (the majority of whom are Trump supporters), continued claims that Americans’ troubles are caused by something President Barack Obama did in 2009 or Mr. Biden did in 2021, continued rigid adherence to unpopular tariff policies and pressure for lower interest rates (which will seemingly collectively increase inflationary pressures on the 80% who are most adversely affected by it), continued purging of federal expertise and resources that it took us over a century to build, continued denial of scientific realities such as vaccine therapies and climate change (leading to outbreaks of diseases seemingly vanquished decades ago and once-in-a-century environmental disasters now occurring annually 😉), increased efforts to manipulate federal statistics that reflect badly on the Administration, increased deployment of National Guard and active U.S. military to locations of increased demonstrations against Administration policies, continued concessions to Middle East nations whose leaders ensure that the Trump Family’s personal financial coffers are enriched, continued erratic foreign policy forays (offending at the same time those Americans who believe in a strategic American foreign policy, and his isolationist MAGA supporters), continued transparent attempts to abandon NATO and Ukraine to Russia (at the same time thereby emboldening acquisitive dictators, offending allies upon whom we rely to aid our defense, those of us at home who believe in a strategic American world presence, and – wait for it – even his isolationist MAGA supporters, whom polls show nonetheless overwhelmingly hate Vladimir Putin), continued pursuit of criminal prosecutions against those he considers his political enemies, continued demonization of those he perceives as his opponents and/or unacceptably unclean (i.e., anybody not white, Christian, and sexually straight) and merciless retribution on those, no matter how previously slavishly supportive of him, whom the President of the United States perceives as being becoming insufficiently loyal.

I know, I know. Did I really have to remind you? Didn’t many of us just get done singing, “Silent Night”?

By this time, I’m sure you’ve already thought of several I’ve overlooked.

At one level, you’ve got to give the Bugger credit. He’s accomplished a lot in a year, hasn’t he?

Let’s look forward.

In response to my inquiry, the now ever-present “AI Overview” indicates that since 1980, a sitting president’s party has lost an average of 20 seats in the House of Representatives in the midterm elections following his inauguration. In 2010, the first midterm after Mr. Obama’s inauguration, Democrats lost over 50; in 2018, the first midterm after Mr. Trump’s first inauguration, Republicans lost over 40. In our increasingly gerrymandered and hyper-toxic political climate – and because I believe that Mr. Trump’s popularity won’t sink much lower; it’s already about down to its unshakeable, rock-hard foundation — it is hard to believe that Republicans will lose as many House seats as they did in 2018. I have seen credible commentators indicate that House Republicans themselves currently – a huge qualifier – consider 15 to 25 of their members at serious risk of defeat. At least under the way American democracy has traditionally worked, if Democrats do grasp firm command of the House in 2027, for the last two years of the President’s term they will have the opportunity to politically neutralize him and his minions by passing populist measures that the Administration will reject; if Mr. Trump comes to be seen both as a lame duck generally and a political albatross for Congressional Republicans, they will magically transform from figurative lemmings (who in reality have more sense than they’re given credit for) to rats (who are indeed savvy survivors) fleeing a sinking ship. (Of course, this is assuming that Congressional Democrats have the political skill to effectively exploit any leverage they acquire. You can take that one.)

[An aside: in a note a while back on the most recent NO KINGS rallies, I indicated that Republican U.S. WI Rep. Brian Steil, who represents the Wisconsin First Congressional District, won his 2024 race by 2 points, and suggested that Mr. Steil was clearly politically endangered if there was indeed a “Democratic Wave” in 2026. When looking at the statistics from Mr. Steil’s race, I clearly read the wrong column; he won by 12 points in 2024. One has to assume that the Democratic Wave would have to be a tsunami for him to lose his seat. On the other hand, his Republican colleague, U.S. WI Rep. Derrick Van Orden representing the Wisconsin Third Congressional District, did, as I indicated in that same note, win his seat by about 3 points in 2024, and must be feeling a little uneasy at present.]

All that said, we’re back to the First Negotiation Strategy Commandment: Always assume that the other guy (in a genderless sense) is at least as bright as you are, and knows at least as much about the given circumstances as you do.

Mr. Trump and his people can read polls. That’s why at least the initial pivotal decisions next year will be theirs, not ours. The President’s advisors could attempt to correct course — try to get Mr. Trump to act less … Trump-like. (There is an eon of time before the midterms, as the late Marquette University Basketball Coach Al McGuire might say; President George H. W. Bush’s popularity was over 50% exactly one year before the 1992 election, and he still lost. Popularity can just as readily go up as down.) I am pretty sure that they are too smart for that. Although Mr. Trump could be saved from his ways in spite of himself – e.g., the economy could inexplicably improve for the financially stressed 80%, or he could get credit for reducing Americans healthcare concerns because enough House Republicans, to save their own political skins and despite Mr. Trump, work with House Democrats to restore Affordable Care Act subsidies — it is blatantly obvious to all with the IQ of a rock that Mr. Trump is viscerally incapable of changing his ways. So unless Mr. Trump receives unexpected political gifts that he doesn’t himself earn, one can seemingly confidently assume that the President’s advisors recognize that if they hope to stave off a Democratic House takeover in 2027, they will need to go on the offensive with division, distraction, intimidation, and lies:

Assume that there will be fears expressed in each of the districts currently represented by politically imperiled Congressional Republicans that a male highschooler transitioning to female is considering joining their girls high school basketball team. It won’t matter that the young person may have no more interest in hitting nor ability to hit a free throw than I do.

Assume that the Haitians in Springfield, OH, will be claimed to be resuming their diet of cats and dogs, joined by Somalis in Minneapolis.

Assume that mountains of federal largesse will suddenly be voted by the Republican Congress for these imperiled Republicans’ districts.

Assume that every murder in a “Blue City” will be reported endlessly in alt-right media following the event – the more heinous the act, the longer the coverage. They’ll get bonus points if the murder is committed by an immigrant or a person of color.

Assume that unprecedented amounts of campaign contributions will shower upon these 25 districts.

Assume an exponential increase of baseless claims of potential voter fraud.

Assume an aggressive effort to purge certain liberal-profile voters from critical districts’ registered rolls.

Assume unprecedented voter intimidation tactics; specifically, assume that ICE will make clear its intent to be in as close a proximity to polling places of heavily Latino swing districts as the law will allow – and that ICE will be stopping all of Latin descent to check their identifications as they attempt to enter and/or exit the polling place perimeter.

Assume lawsuits seeking to limit the times and places that voters can cast their ballots.

Assume that those who follow alt-right media will continue to live in their own alternate reality. We have Fox News Channel on our cable package. Although I can’t stomach it, TLOML will occasionally switch over when CNN is broadcasting an event or major story which tends to reflect badly on the Regime. Fox is NEVER covering it, at least while she is tuned in.

If as of the beginning of October, 2026, credible polls indicate that the above and like efforts seem unlikely to prevent a Democratic takeover of the House of Representatives, expect:

An October surprise. It could involve foreign policy, but more likely a bribe like a $250 “Trump 250^Th Bonus” to every American.

That the Regime will at least consider establishing a pretext to declare Martial Law and suspend elections.

Expecting a more comforting message as we begin the New Year? In what I hope is one of the few areas I share with Mr. Trump, you can’t say that I didn’t let you know what I was thinking. 😉 The religious days of the Holidays are over. The maxim, “Forewarned is forearmed,” is so common that it isn’t even attributed to anybody. (I actually checked.) While I have faith that the Almighty has provided many ways to achieve tranquility in the next life, I would submit that He (using a male pronoun for a genderless being) leaves it up to us to maintain – always peacefully — our tranquility in this one (although I do have faith that He’ll give us a little help if we ask for it 😊). Fortunately, as citizens of the United States of America, we still retain peaceful means to maintain the rights that the Founding Fathers envisioned for us a quarter of a millennium ago. I do believe that Americans who embrace the message of Thomas Jefferson – that all of us of every persuasion should have an equal opportunity to have a say in our nation’s future, and contribute to and be part of the promise of America – can make a comeback this year. So be ready for anything, and make your voice heard throughout the coming year. I do believe that such will make a difference – if in no other way, through the reinforcement of others. There is strength in numbers.

So maybe we do have decisions to make about what we do this year, after all. There is comfort in that.

Happy New Year.

Ketchup on Vichyssoise

May the Chair grant me a moment of personal privilege?

You know, I’d like to like exotic fish dishes and French cuisine; I really would. (Doesn’t it make you feel classy to say words like, “Vichyssoise”?) I just don’t. I like hot dogs with ketchup, steak, pizza, Wisconsin fish fries, and scrambled eggs with bacon (crispy) and hash browns (well done). I just do.

In fact, I seemingly mostly like the food that President Donald Trump is reported to like.

That said, I don’t see a need to rename New York City’s Le Bernardin, “IHOP Bernardin,” or Chicago’s Le Bouchon, “McDonald’s Bouchon.”

You know, I’d like to have a broader taste in music. I’d like to like opera. I just don’t – they’re literally not speaking my language. I’d like to like classical music – I even put it on for a while, while I exercised, thinking it would grow on me – but it didn’t and I don’t. I know millions of Americans like country music; I don’t like twang, and don’t get excited about the fact that you hankered to be a cowboy, your woman left you, your truck broke down, and your dog died. I don’t like rap music, and am pretty sure that I wouldn’t be that moved by your message even if I could make out a single word of you’re saying. I’m a Beatles Baby Boomer. I like soft rock, Muzak, and now in my later years – wait for it – Frank and Tony Bennett. I just do.

That doesn’t mean that I see a need to rename the Metropolitan Opera House, “The Metropolitan Easy Listenin’ Opera House,” or The Grand Ole Opry, “The Deuter Grand Ole Opry,” or Rapper Jay-Z’s 40/40 Club – I bet you’re impressed I have even heard of Jay-Z – “Sinatra’s 40/40.”

You know where I’m going with this. Although there are occasions for formal dress and for cargo pants, they don’t belong together. “The Donald Trump and The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts”? Putting aside the fact that there are too many “The’s” there, you’ve got to know your place, man. Even I know that you don’t dump ketchup on fine French cuisine.

Mr. Trump continues to revert. He has spent his entire adult life putting his name on buildings, seemingly thinking it will bring him immortality — that it’ll mean that we’ll have to remember him when he’s gone — that he won’t simply … disappear. This fear, this preservation instinct, is arguably becoming more acute as he manifestly physically degrades and his popularity plummets.

I’ve obviously just taken your time not with a matter of personal privilege, but rather of personal pique, clearly not even remotely related to the areas in which the President poses a true threat to our democracy and those around the world. Even so, Mr. Trump either doesn’t realize – or more likely, refuses to admit to himself – that if our American way of life survives his presidency, before the end of the next President’s first month in office, his name will be stricken from all federal buildings, as were those of the discredited Pharaohs of ancient Egypt.