On the Killing of Renee Good

As we barrel toward the first anniversary of President Donald Trump’s second term of office, we are in an accelerating downward maelstrom of lawless thuggery. Although one must pause and say that a full, competent, and impartial investigation into an ICE agent’s January 7^th shooting and killing of Renee Good in Minneapolis needs to be completed before accurate conclusions can be drawn, by this time all who care have seen video – which, crucially, as far as I am aware, no one is claiming has been doctored – strongly appearing to indicate that before the shooting, one masked ICE agent forcibly attempted to open Ms. Good’s car door while a second masked ICE agent (the shooter) first inappropriately positioned himself in front of Ms. Good’s vehicle, was then able to successfully move himself to the driver’s side of the vehicle away from any risk of being hit, and then fired at point blank range into Ms. Good through an open driver’s door window. At the time this is typed, the Trump Regime is spreading fabrications justifying the agents’ actions that are blatantly at odds with the video. (One can hardly blame them; since they have been able to convince their gullible supporters that the January 6^th insurrection at the nation’s Capitol was a patriotic lovefest, it’s clear that these vacuous citizens can be made to believe anything.) Homeland Secretary Kristi Noem, standing before cameras in her tight little jeans and a ridiculous cowboy hat, was spouting misinformation about the incident seemingly before they got Ms. Good’s body out of the car. Somebody had to wake Mr. Trump up so he could echo her lies in a social media post. I have seen reports from credible sources that Vice President J.D. Vance has vociferously defended ICE and criticized Ms. Good. (I admit that I haven’t heard Mr. Vance’s comments directly; I no longer have the internal fortitude for listening to lying lickspittles.) We have seen an example of the Trump Administration’s Nazi Sturmabteilung-like activities in full fly. ICE agents clearly feel unrestrained, empowered by the Regime’s lawless culture.

Ms. Good was a U.S. citizen. Something the networks we watch have been too politically correct to state directly: Ms. Good was blonde, white woman in the middle of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Not that it should matter, but these ICE agents had to recognize that demographically, the chances that she was an illegal alien were miniscule. It is not hard to conclude that Ms. Good panicked when she was aggressively approached by the masked ICE agents. Those reading these notes who know me are well aware that I am predominately of ethnic Irish descent and if provoked, my temper can sometimes accelerate … well … rapidly. If I had a goon trying to rip open my car door, I might well have done exactly what Ms. Good did – actively resist a masked man’s attempt to enter my vehicle. Even if prior to the confrontation she had been acting in a manner less than supportive of ICE activities, that should not have gotten her killed – not in America.

Based upon my legal training and high regard for our justice system, in less fraught times I would caution that we should await the outcome of the current investigation of the incident before forming firm conclusions. Given accounts that the Regime’s FBI has taken over the investigation and shut out local Minnesota investigators, it takes little prescience to predict that the findings rendered will be a complete whitewash of ICE. There will never be a full, competent, impartial investigation of this incident unless Democrats gain control of either House of Congress in 2026 and thereafter choose to hold hearings.

Ms. Good was an American citizen who didn’t have to die, killed by American federal officials sponsored by an American Regime that has glorified Ashli Babbitt, the insurrectionist rioter killed during the January 6, 2021, assault as she tried to break into a Congressional Chamber. That same Cabal is now in the process of canonizing the ICE agent who killed Ms. Good by what was at the very least a questionable use of lethal force — while simultaneously demonizing Ms. Good.

[An aside: it’s possible that the shooter agent, whom it has been claimed had recently suffered a physically and emotionally wrenching experience on the job (I believe nothing that the Regime says that cannot be confirmed by credible sources), also reflexively panicked as Ms. Good’s car moved toward him. If such is indeed the case, one can have personal sympathy for an individual who was perhaps placed back in the field too soon, and whose life – under normal circumstances – would now also be forfeit to the Administration’s propaganda designed, Sturmabteilung-like activities; but as severe as it sounds – we have a family member in law enforcement, and well recognize that in our sheltered lives we have no real understanding of the dangers members of law enforcement face regularly — cops (speaking generically) don’t get the luxury of panicking. It is part of their job not to panic.]

Despite the continuing reports of the Regime’s brutal immigration enforcement tactics, had you been feeling pretty safe as an upstanding, likely white, U.S citizen? Get over it, my friend. If they are willing to say black is white with regard to this shooting despite the clear videographic evidence, all camouflage of due process under law has been shed. What do you think they’re going to do if some ICE agent simply decides to shoot you in the face at point-blank range while you’re peacefully protesting in the future against ICE or other Trump activities?

I acknowledge that the occasional references to Nazi Germany in this and recent notes regarding the Trump Administration are provocative; I consider the Regime’s actions to warrant them. I would suggest – and indeed did so in these pages, at the time – that there were reflections of the mid-1930s Germany becoming ever more apparent in Mr. Trump’s and his minions’ inclinations during the last 18 months of his first term; I would submit that their actions during this go-around have turned those reflections into neon banners. Too harsh? Don’t take my word for it. Read The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, by William Shirer – which I believe is still considered, despite the hundreds of thousands of works completed on the Nazis over the last 80 years, to be the definitive work on Nazi Germany – and decide for yourself.

This is the point in a note where I would normally indicate that you should exercise your right as an American to peacefully protest. Today I would qualify that. Anyone who does elect to protest needs to remain peaceful; otherwise, all is lost practically as well as morally. But as to whether to protest: if you have children (or others depending on you) at home as Ms. Good did, and think any protest you might be considering attending will place you in close proximity to ICE or other federal agents, STAY HOME. Your responsibilities are there. Teach your children how American Constitutional democracy was intended to work. Leave the peaceful protesting to geezers like me whom we can afford to lose.

Stay well.

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.

I Was Actually …

Last night, I did something I almost never do now, to protect my sanity and psychological equilibrium: I actually watched President Donald Trump speak.

Notwithstanding my recent forbearance, I, as you, have seen him speak many times. Many times, I have been infuriated. Many times, I have been terrified. Many times, I have been both.

Last night was different.

As a political junkie, I have been watching Presidents speak for over 60 years. Some have been soaring orators; others, not so much. I have always rated Mr. Trump a compelling if offensive speaker. Even so, his speech last night was, without doubt, the worst Presidential Address I have ever seen. He was the quintessential crazy geezer spouting nonsense as everyone tries to edge away. (I get it; at least you didn’t have to tell me; but I’m not president. 😉) It was … awful.

His “I’m the best, Biden’s the worst, everything I’ve done is good, everything Biden and the radical left has done is bad, this is the greatest anyone has ever seen, this was the worst anyone has ever seen, nobody could believe how great I’ve done” schtick has, until now, been wildly annoying fabrication; this time, it seemed a pathetic careen between delusion and desperation.

I’m the only one either of us know who is enough of an idiot to admit that recently something I said has come back and resonated with me 😉, but it did. In a post about a month ago speculating on Mr. Trump’s ultimate intentions for his Administration, I indicated, “His 2024 campaign was about avoiding jail, making money, and retribution.” The significance of that observation, if true, didn’t strike me until later. All his 2024 campaign may have been about for him was avoiding jail, making money, and retribution. Winning was the thing – his goal would be accomplished the day he won — not governing. While winning undoubtedly is the primary thing – and worrying secondarily about what they’re going to do if they win – is probably true for all major party presidential candidates, I would suggest that for Mr. Trump, winning was the only thing. Granting that he has genuine feelings about a few policy issues – he hates immigrants of color, and loves tariffs, tax cuts, and low interest rates – inflation (now “affordability,” the new buzz word) – the key concern for the decisive segment of voters that put him over the top in 2024 — was just a talking point to him, and he neither knows nor cares what to do about it. Anyone who takes a high school economics class will tell you that tariffs and lower interest rates spur inflation, not squash it, and if our experience through Presidents Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush and Mr. Trump has proven anything, it’s that cutting tax rates the way they did helps the rich a lot, while the relative pennies that trickle to those of lesser means haven’t come close to counteracting the crippling economic disparity we have seen rise among our people over the last 45 years. When Mr. Trump won, those who voted for him for help on economic issues expected him to help them. For him, when he won, he was done.

An aside, regarding Mr. Trump’s announcement of a $1776 “Warrior Dividend” for, in the President’s words, “every soldier.” In the short time before I turned the TV off, I saw one liberal pundit applaud the move. On a substantive basis, I absolutely support the initiative. (An aside within an aside, from anyone who has taken a sixth grade civics class: “Doesn’t Congress have to approve this ‘Warrior Dividend?’ Answer: Yes; but will any politician from either party running for reelection vote against it? You take that one.) That said, Mr. Trump does nothing that he doesn’t think will benefit him. What I see is White House unease that given the wildly misguided, condescending session Mr. Trump and his moronic Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, recently had with our military’s top officers, and the Administration’s blowing up tiny boats in international waters that many military legal experts have called war crimes – potentially wantonly exposing soldiers who follow those and like orders to later prosecution – the military no longer trusts its the Commander-in-Chief and will not necessarily follow him down questionable paths. He’s trying to buy back its loyalty.

I expected to end last evening infuriated or terrified, perhaps both. There were instead instances at which I laughed out loud at the patent buffoonery, the rapid-fire, scatter-shot, oblivious carnival barker delivery. Not in any way discounting the fact that he remains the most powerful human on earth, or that he has and certainly will continue to try to subvert our democracy for his own gain, I was saddened for those financially stressed Americans who placed their faith in him. For him, I was actually … embarrassed.

On the National Guardsmen Shooting and Its Aftermath

[Note: “Guardsmen” is considered a gender-neutral term by the military, and will be so used here.]

With all of the recent controversy regarding the Trump Administration’s repeated striking of an allegedly drug-running boat in the South Caribbean Sea on September 2, the shootings of National Guardsmen U.S. Army Specialist Sarah Beckstrom, 20, and U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, in Washington, D.C. on the day before Thanksgiving have more or less dropped off the news feeds I see. All are aware that Specialist Beckstrom has died. As this is typed, Sgt. Wolfe is reportedly improving despite grievous wounds.

I haven’t forgotten. These shootings continue to resonate with me with a force that I now generally only feel as deeply – a sad reflection of the desensitization seeping into me in our violence-riven society — when hearing of school shootings.

But I’m not only heartbroken. I’m livid.

Because it was so unnecessary. Guardsmen Beckstrom and Wolfe didn’t have to be there. They could have been home celebrating Thanksgiving with their families.

I consider two men responsible for their deaths: Afghani Refugee Rahmanullah Lakanwal; and President Donald Trump.

Make no mistake: Mr. Lakanwal – given the apparently indisputable evidence that he was the perpetrator — pulled the trigger. It makes no difference that he may have saved American lives through his service in Afghanistan, or that he and some similarly-situated Afghanis may not have received as much federal assimilation assistance upon arrival here as might have been preferable, or that he fell prey to radicalization after arriving in this country, or noting any other explanation some rationalizer might attempt to dream up. He killed Specialist Beckstrom. He irrevocably altered Sgt. Wolfe’s life. Assuming that he is found guilty of the shootings after a fair trial according him all the rights to which he is entitled under the United States Constitution, Mr. Lakanwal deserves whatever sentence he receives; if the death penalty is legally rendered, I won’t lose any sleep over it.

That said, I was surprised to see Administration officials so quickly embrace the phrase, “targeted shooting,” to describe Mr. Lakanwal’s act – not because it wasn’t accurate, but because it so clearly was – and as such, a damning indictment of Mr. Trump. Under any reasonable assessment, National Guardsmen – tragically for them, in the persons of Ms. Beckstrom and Mr. Wolfe – were Mr. Lakanwal’s targets. Given the President’s ballyhooed deployment of National Guard to our nation’s capital, media reports of the areas they patrolled, and some simple reconnaissance, any unbalanced individual with much less than Mr. Lakanwal’s military background could easily project when and where Guardsmen would be. These two Guardsmen, walking at midday on a highly-traveled city street blocks from the White House with no indication of imminent danger, were no match for someone with Mr. Lakanwal’s training and experience.

Mr. Lakanwal simply shot the targets set up for him by Donald Trump.

Too harsh, you say? Consider the untaken alternatives: Mr. Lakanwal undoubtedly had hundreds of people in sight between the time he set out that day and the time he opened fire on the Guardsmen. One might surmise that at some point before the incident he had one or more D.C. police officers within easy range, who would have been no more prepared for his sudden assault than the Guardsmen were. He passed them all up to target members of the American military — who were only on that street because they were ordered to take part in what the Trump Administration has called “a crackdown on crime” – i.e., to participate in a quintessentially local law enforcement activity outside their traditional mission as part of an Administration public relations stunt which obviously has as its primary purposes the intimidation of its political opponents and scoring propaganda points with its gullible MAGA base.

So, what of this sacrifice of these two young people who had volunteered to serve their country?

Well, that’s Show Biz.

I would wager that in stationing Guardsmen in “Blue Cities” – largely against the wishes of local officials — Mr. Trump has been hoping for an incident in which cameras caught protestors behaving aggressively toward Guardsmen. I do not believe that he wanted or intended as tragic a result as has occurred – any more than a tavern patron who has had too many drinks wants or intends any automobile accident deaths that s/he ultimately causes – but anyone with the sense God gave a goose could anticipate that what did happen, might happen. In fact, on November 26^th,the New York Times quoted a California National Guardsman indicating, “he and his commanders worried that [their assignment to patrol Los Angeles] ‘increased our risk of us shooting civilians or civilians taking shots at us.’” In the same piece, the Times recorded that last August, Guard commanders involved in its Capital deployments issued communications “… warn[ng] that troops were in a ‘heightened threat environment’ … that ‘nefarious threat actors engaging in grievance based violence, and those inspired by foreign terrorist organizations’ might view the mission ‘as a target of opportunity’ … and that the mission ‘presents an opportunity for criminals, violent extremists, issue motivated groups and lone actors to advance their interests.’” The inherent risk was blatantly obvious. The President and his cohort just didn’t, and don’t, give a damn.

In the days after the incident, I saw reports indicating:

Item: Trump Administration claimed that Mr. Lakanwal was never vetted by the Biden Administration before being allowed to enter the country. This has now been debunked by so many sources – including sources that indicate that Mr. Lakanwal’s latest clearance came this spring, from the Trump Administration – that I don’t know if the Regime is still spouting this; of course, anything is possible from an organization that loudly continued to repeat a uniformly-debunked lie about Springfield, OH, Haitian immigrants eating cats and dogs.

Item: The Trump Administration has halted the processing of immigration requests from anyone from Afghanistan. It’s not unreasonable to assume that many of these applicants are seeking refuge after aiding our efforts against the Taliban. I have seen reports that since returning to power, the Taliban has brutally persecuted those Afghanis suspected of assisting us. The Trump Administration halt is a monstrous overreaction to the evil act of one radicalized Afghani, which could well have fatal consequences for thousands of our Afghani associates ultimately abandoned as an outcome of a wrongheaded withdrawal agreement negotiated by the first Trump Administration.

Item: The Trump administration vowed to conduct a sweeping re-examination of “every Green Card” held not only by all Afghanis already admitted to our country but also those held by nationals from almost a score of other Middle Eastern, African and South American countries which the Regime has subjected to a travel ban. I know – I’m wasting my typing and your eyesight to point out that there is no logical link between a tragically-radicalized Afghani and thousands of other immigrants from across the world legally here under other programs. Given the “Ready, Fire, Aim,” Nazi Sturmabteilung approach the Regime has taken to immigration enforcement, perhaps thousands of unquestionably innocent people will be caught up in this surge. To state the obvious: if it proceeds with such an examination, the Regime will simply have used this incident as a pretext for indulging its racial, religious, and political biases.

Item: That the Trump Administration is looking into the possibility of deporting Mr. Lakanwal’s family. (Any competent criminal investigation will certainly explore whether others were aware of or complicit in Mr. Lakanwal’s act. If there is evidence of others’ culpability, either within or outside Mr. Lakanwal’s family, those whose guilt can be established should be criminally tried and appropriately sentenced, not deported.) Absent sufficient evidence of culpability of specific members of Mr. Lakanwal’s family members, deporting the innocents as a consequence of this incident is every bit as conceptually constitutionally sound as, say … holding Mr. Trump’s wife and children liable for the $88 million he owes E. Jean Carroll for sexual assault and defamation.

These measures, if carried out, smack of fascism – demonizing “others” for political gain with literally no factual foundation.

Are we done? Not quite yet. Let’s consider a potentially even more dire consequence of the assault upon Guardsmen Beckstrom and Wolfe: that patrolling Guardsmen begin to view those walking around them as potential enemies – an approach necessary in foreign war zones, but frighteningly fraught on American soil (while at the same time seemingly becoming understandable). (If you were a Guardsman, wouldn’t this incident make you view those moving around you with greater suspicion?) Recall that the Times piece cited above quoted a Guardsman observing that the deployments increased the “risk of us shooting civilians.”

Let’s end this overly-long rant with the most idiotic irony: Mr. Trump’s announcement that given the shooting, he intends to deploy an additional 500 National Guardsmen to D.C. One just has to sit back, pause, and blink before continuing. As noted above, the pretext for this Administration grandstand is a “crackdown” on what let’s call, for purposes of this note, “commonplace” crime in D.C. If the shooting of Guardsmen Beckstrom and Wolfe was indeed a shooting targeted at U.S. military – a rare point of agreement between the Noise and the Regime – it wasn’t even the type of “crime” that the deployment was intended to address. Not only that: I have seen reports that prior to embarking on his mission, Mr. Lakanwal was living in Washington state, not D.C. – so he could not conceivably even have been among the D.C. criminal element that Mr. Trump was intending to confront through the deployment. If Guardsmen hadn’t been in D.C., there certainly wouldn’t have been as many or arguably as vulnerable military targets in the city as Mr. Trump’s order provided to Mr. Lakanwal. Because of the President’s order, Guardsmen Beckstrom and Wolfe were in place to be shot while taking part in maneuvers beyond the proper military purview by a malign operator who wasn’t covered by the Regime’s expressed mission. So, explain to me the logic of adding 500 additional targets to an already target-rich environment for deranged individuals in our gun-obsessed environment because of a heinous incident that wasn’t within the mission’s scope committed by somebody who wasn’t from D.C.

On the day they were shot, Ms. Beckstrom and Mr. Wolfe’s ages averaged to 22 – which, in turn, is only half of the average age of our three children. These two young victims enlisted to serve their country – something I never did. They had their whole lives in front of them. They deserved a Commander in Chief worthy of them. Theirs, and perhaps the lives of thousands of innocent immigrants, have been irrevocably altered — in sacrifice to a propaganda stunt.

There is an episode of The West Wing in which Martin Sheen’s fictional President Bartlet makes a wrong decision, and a number of U.S. service members are killed as a result. The episode – among the most poignant in a series that all who read these notes know that I consider the best television program in history – ends with Mr. Sheen’s Bartlet standing on the tarmac at the military airport where the deceased service members’ bodies have been flown back to the states. Mr. Sheen is a great actor, and even without seeing the episode one can imagine the agony he shows as Bartlet as the caskets, draped in flags, are solemnly marched, one by one, by pristinely-uniformed, white-gloved honor guards, from the aircraft to where the President stands, with a brief pause in front of him, and then moved to a waiting inner chamber.

Mr. Trump is a father. I wonder: Does he ever think about the damage and destruction he has done to so many lives and careers with his deranged, malicious, shock-jock, made-for-TV machinations? In what is probably the most awful suggestion I have ever made about Mr. Trump in all the years I have been posting in these pages: He doesn’t.

I pray that Specialist Beckstrom can rest in peace.

On Blowing Up Boats

What with Holiday preparations, general affairs (we’ve had A LOT of snow early in the winter in Madison), and working on another, still-unfinished post, I haven’t previously expounded – perhaps “ranted” would be a more apt description — on President Donald Trump’s Administration’s blowing up of allegedly drug-running boats in international waters. What has caused me to take your time here is an observation that seems to me to be the most critical facet – and potentially the most supportive aspect for the preservation of our democracy – of the possible ramifications of the Regime’s launching of four strikes on a boat on September 2, 2025. (I believe that it is undisputed that two occupants of the boat survived the first strike, but were killed in the second. Two subsequent strikes – apparently to completely obliterate the vessel itself – followed.) I feel it is appropriate to note that potentially supportive aspect here because it occurred to me before I saw any media commentator make it.

However, let’s first – as a client of mine used to say decades ago when reviewing the progress of an ongoing negotiation – review the bidding regarding these operations.

The Administration claims that its actions are justified because we are at “war” with “narco-terrorists.” Note how skillfully Mr. Trump and his minions have moved the goal posts: it seems that the majority of commentators feel obligated to start their commentaries regarding these actions with the proviso, “assuming we are at war.” These talking heads might as well say, “Well, assuming Siamese cats are tigers …” The Administration’s whole premise is absurd. [The justification for the last two strikes on the boat on September 2 makes one blink: “We had to make sure that the boat could no longer be used [as an instrument of war] against us.” What? Relative to our U.S. Naval strength, the boat was a canoe. This is akin to calling a contest between the Los Angeles Dodgers and a West Madison Little League team, “a baseball game.” We are not at war.

Next. The United States certainly has the right to use legitimate means to limit illicit drug smuggling into our country. These Regime activities glaringly fail the legitimacy test. First, as far as I know, no satisfactory evidence has been given that any specific struck boat was actually carrying drugs. One of the primary premises of this nation is the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Where did that go? U.S. KY Sen. Rand Paul has noted statistics indicating that over the years our U.S. Coast Guard interceptions of suspected trafficking vessels have failed to discover drugs 25% of the time – from which one could infer that perhaps 20 of the 80 killed in these strikes have been innocent. [I heard one pundit suggest a particularly sad nuance: that cartels may be requiring otherwise law-abiding individuals to undertake drug runs upon threat that their loved ones will otherwise be tortured or killed. (Such a scenario seems increasingly credible given the cartels’ now-understandable concern about the risk that the Regime’s actions pose to their personnel.) Although these coerced individuals would, if apprehended, be guilty of drug smuggling, under such pressure either you or I would undertake these missions.] Second, subject to your correction, I do not believe that drug trafficking offenses are generally characterized as capital crimes under U.S. law. Mr. Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth are bullies who clearly just enjoy beating up on the weak and pandering their manhood to the gullible MAGA base. Whether those operating these struck boats have been guilty or innocent, with every strike the Regime is arguably in violation of international law.

Let’s step back a minute. I can’t resist.

As all who care are aware, in November six Congressional Democrats with military or national security backgrounds released a video in which they advised our current members of the military that they had the right to disobey “unlawful orders.” Mr. Trump quickly fired back with posts on his social network proclaiming that the members’ behavior was “seditious behavior, punishable by death,” indicated that these members should be arrested and tried, and forwarded a post asserting that the members should be hanged. Aside from the fact that Mr. Trump’s accusations were wholly baseless, the depth of irony of such declarations, coming from a man who lied about losing an election and incited a seditious attack on our nation’s Capitol, is literally nauseating.

As this is typed, Messrs. Trump and Hegseth are in the process of shifting all of the responsibility for the second strike on the boat in the September 2 incident — the strike that killed the two individuals who survived the first strike – to Adm. Frank Bradley (who is currently reported to have ordered the second strike after Mr. Hegseth, apparently undisputedly, had given the order to “Kill Them All” before the first strike) – while disingenuously appearing to support the Admiral’s action. Such is obviously a despicable abdication of responsibility. Former President Harry Truman – who coined our most pithy, well-known description of presidential responsibility, “The Buck Stops Here” – must be rolling over in his grave. (Of course, Mr. Truman, a man of rectitude, has probably already figuratively drilled at least halfway to China beneath his gravestone throughout the Trump presidencies; this latest outrage has probably just made him spin a little faster.)

I haven’t done any research on Adm. Bradley; I have no idea whether he was by nature a willing participant in this operation or merely acting as a reluctantly-obedient subordinate when he ordered the second strike (if he indeed did). If there is any substance to the opinions being voiced by military legal experts seemingly across the political media spectrum – and even accepting the baseless premise that we are at war with drug cartels (see; even I’m doing it 😉) – there may well be grounds warranting the Admiral’s placement under court martial for a war crime (as well as the personnel who actually executed the strike). A vital reminder: all the evidence is almost certainly not yet in, and the Admiral is scheduled to meet with members of Congress today in confidential sessions. That said, if he and his involved subordinates do suffer severe consequences for the actions they took on September 2 – while at the same time the Trump Administration seeks to exonerate Mr. Hegseth and distance Mr. Trump from the incident – I would submit that the incident potentially provides a silver – nay, gold – lining for the preservation of our democracy: by their unscrupulous, gutless behavior, Messrs. Trump and Hegseth will have alienated the entire American military.

If in the future Mr. Trump or Mr. Hegseth orders military personnel to move against peaceful American protestors – recall that Mark Esper, the last Secretary of Defense in the first Trump Administration, related in his memoir, A Sacred Oath, that when demonstrators protested in Washington, D.C., after the murder of George Floyd, Mr. Trump asked authorities, “Can’t you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something?” — do you think they’ll obey the order? Would you?

The most instructive aspect of this incident will be how Mr. Trump reacts. It was clear from the day Mr. Trump nominated Mr. Hegseth that he was an atrociously stupid choice as Secretary of Defense. However, when challenged, the President ALWAYS doubles down, considers admission of mistake an indication of weakness, pushes through – and with his core supporters, it has worked for the last decade. I wonder how such an approach will work with the military, which has maintained a fiercely nonpartisan tradition – while being acutely aware of its own position and prerogatives –throughout this country’s existence. I was never in the military, so anything I venture is obviously the broadest speculation; but one can question how much support Mr. Trump will retain with the military if he reflexively clings to and protects Mr. Hegseth.

You can’t be a dictator without controlling your citizenry. You can’t control your citizenry without a military that obeys you.

I am well aware that my notes of optimism in recent posts are no more than slivers of reassurance in an era of tragedy. Still, they’re better than nothing.

Stay well – and for those in the north, stay warm. 😊

On the Passing of Vice President Richard Cheney

The funeral of former Vice President Dick Cheney is taking place today in the National Cathedral.

Lawyers are loath to say, “Never” or “Always,” but if you would have asked me in early 2009 whether I would declare what follows here, I would have given you 99 – 1 against.

On the most important national challenge of Mr. Cheney’s life, he got it right.

May he Rest in Peace.

Will He Be a Dictator or Music Man?

“That [i.e., President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Great Gatsby-themed party on Halloween as food assistance benefits were cut off for millions, including millions of children] once and for all shows that Donald Trump doesn’t give a f—k about even looking like he gives a f—k. He doesn’t give a f—k – at all.”

Jon Stewart; Comedy Central’s The Daily Show with Jon Stewart; Emphasis provided by Mr. Stewart’s tone.

You and I know: I will never achieve that level of insight or eloquence.

After over a year of consistently pessimistic notes, let me put forward at least a ray of optimism – at least of a type – at the end of this note.

The chances that our democracy will survive exist in a two-word paradox: Donald Trump.

While those of us who are sufficiently economically secure have been pondering the dangers that the MAGA movement presents to our republic, the vast majority of our fellow citizens continue to confront daily financial pressures. The political ramifications arising from the challenges they face are perhaps best captured in the axiom famously expressed over thirty years ago by former President Bill Clinton’s legendary campaign advisor, James Carville: It’s the Economy, Stupid. For too long, I didn’t viscerally appreciate how the decisive segment of 2024 Trump voters, who had no autocratic sympathies or dominant prejudices while seemingly having an inkling of the danger that Mr. Trump presented to our democracy, could vote for him over “the price of eggs.” Now, belatedly, I get it. (I know – it frequently takes me a while to catch on.) (At the same time, I have noted that the progressive media that was stressing the overall strength of the American economy while President Joe Biden was in office is now focused exclusively on the economic plight of the American majority. 😉)

The painful irony for the current MAGA Administration – of which its cohort is undoubtedly privately well aware — is that the economy is, practically speaking, in exactly the same place as it was during the last half of the Biden Administration: Inflation about 3%; the most-advantaged 20% of Americans ever richer; the other 80% of Americans ever poorer; a “real” unemployment rate that I’ve seen one economist place closer to 25% (due to millions receiving inadequate compensation for less-than-full-time work) than to the federal-government-reported 4% (the latter figure derived from decades-old, arguably no-longer-relevant methodologies); and generally rising stock market indices, driven by a few stocks whose core – the advance of Artificial Intelligence – seems poised to deprive as wide a swath of Americans of jobs as did manufacturing outsourcing during the last half-century. During its first ten months in office, the Trump Administration has done nothing to improve the American majority’s economic struggles. Since it is still relatively early in the term, I would guess that if the Administration had thus far positioned itself differently, a significant segment of our citizens would have been willing to provide Mr. Trump a longer runway on affordability issues, but as Mr. Stewart has noted, the President hasn’t even tried to look like he’s doing anything about the majority’s financial difficulties.

From a purely political handicapping perspective, I have frankly been shocked by the scope and breadth of Mr. Trump’s political blunders during his second term (here let’s put aside the more important perspectives, such as humanity, morality, and the rule of law). While his ICE agents’ Nazi Sturmabteilung-like activities, his stationing National Guard and active duty military in American cities whose local officials didn’t want them, his aggressive tariff policies, and his blowing up small boats in international waters without due process might sit equably with his most ardent and ill-informed supporters, they have clearly offended a larger swath of Americans; and it certainly appears that he has touched nerves across the political spectrum by literally ripping down part of the White House to build what wags are aptly calling a “Marie Antoinette” ballroom, staging a Great Gatsby party as his Administration was denying food assistance to millions of children and adults (including Trump supporters); ramrodding through the law extending tax breaks for the wealthy while cutting health care assistance to millions (including Trump supporters); and aiding a right-wing Argentinian government to the detriment of overwhelmingly Trump-supporting western cattle ranchers. These are the kinds of oblivious botches that a first-time Town Council candidate would know enough to avoid. The President’s missteps have been particularly stunning given his heretofore impeccable political instincts. It has seemed as if he wants to antagonize as many Americans as he can.

The resoundingly anti-Trump voting results occurring in early November – buttressed by many Trump Latino voters’ evident recognition and repudiation of the Regime’s fascist designs – indicate that the majority of Americans are deeply distressed by one or more Trump actions. I recall a report on Americans’ political preferences from not so long ago that our citizens now currently divide themselves into thirds: about 33% Democrat, 33% Republican, and 34% Independent. There has been a widely reported recent poll that placed Mr. Trump’s approval rating around 37%. If those respective reports are reasonably accurate, even I can do the math: as of right now – a key qualifier — Mr. Trump has lost the support of roughly 90% of independents. I will venture further: as election analysts decided in retrospect that they underestimated Mr. Trump’s popularity in 2016 because many poll respondents were embarrassed to admit that they were going to vote for him, I sense that a percentage of those respondents who today tell pollsters that they approve of Mr. Trump’s presidency are unwilling to admit publicly that their support is wavering. The President is arguably teetering on becoming a lame duck – at least under the patterns of traditional American democracy — less than a year into his term. The issue is how Mr. Trump proceeds from here – both tactically and substantively.

This is where the paradoxes begin. If Mr. Trump still cares what his supporters (if not the majority of Americans) think, he may want to do something to satisfy them – and given his past political track record, one cannot count him out — but I would submit that it is not within his compass to actually help them. All along, his rank-and-file MAGA supporters have believed that because Mr. Trump hates the same people and movements they hate, that he cares about them. He doesn’t. This may — finally – be starting to dawn on them.

The Administration is accordingly attempting to run plays from the old play book – falsehood, distraction, and denial.

“It was a con job. It was a con job – affordability they call it – was a con job by the Democrats. … The reason I don’t wat to talk about affordability is because everybody knows that it’s far less expensive under Trump than it was under Sleepy Joe Biden. And the prices are way down.”

Mr. Trump; November 7, 2025

They’re not.

I understand that Vice President J.D. Vance has recently blamed rising real estate prices on illegal immigrants, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has blamed rising beef prices on mass migration. Mr. Trump has ordered his Justice Department to investigate Mr. Clinton’s ties to Child Sex Trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

I don’t think it’s going to fly. When you’re in charge, and your supporters are still struggling, trying to satisfy them by inciting old prejudices will only work on the most gullible. Mr. Clinton has been out of office 25 years, and I seriously doubt that the vast majority of Americans care what any DOJ investigation uncovers about him. They will certainly not be deterred by any revelations regarding Mr. Clinton from thoroughly exploring Mr. Epstein’s ties to Mr. Trump, who’s still here.

In a couple of posts over the last year, I have noted TLOML’s observation, based upon her years providing therapy to seniors, that one’s core characteristics do not soften with age, but instead become more evident while one’s capacity to temper regrettable tendencies diminishes. This will be even more pronounced in Mr. Trump, who has arguably never attempted to temper his distasteful characteristics. Throughout his life, he has been obsessed with appearance, prestige, and riches. He’s going to be 80. He’s reverting to his unvarnished core – the gilded Oval Office, his love as a builder of ostentatious renovation (the ballroom, posting pictures of the gold fixtures in the Lincoln Bedroom), grand parties with himself as the guest of honor. Our experience over the last 45 years seemingly indicates that he cannot improve the economic fortunes of struggling Americans without significantly altering the current American economic and tax structure favoring our well off. He won’t.

If Mr. Trump’s apparent current unpopularity continues and/or increases, he will perhaps soon be left with one of two choices: to become a Dictator, or a Music Man. Either fits within his visceral profile.

The first option is obvious, and has been described here in numbing detail in past posts: The President clearly believes that everyone who opposes him, no matter how loyal in the past, is his enemy; he declared at the memorial service of MAGA Activist Charlie Kirk that he hates his opponents; he strikes back at, and seeks to destroy, his enemies. Under this scenario, Mr. Trump will seek to install a de facto autocracy by fabricating an emergency and usurping greater power to himself than he already has, manipulate election laws and procedures, put more military on the streets of “Blue Cities,” intimidate opponents, limit his adversaries’ access to the ballot box in the upcoming midterm elections, perhaps invoke Martial Law and/or suspend elections.

My response to anyone who considers this option unthinkable: You’ve been asleep for the last decade.

On the other hand, there is a rosier scenario, which I would submit is also in keeping with Mr. Trump’s psyche: that in the last analysis, he was simply the Music Man.

All will well recall Professor Harold Hill, made immortal by the late Robert Preston (and if you don’t, your time will be better spent watching the film, The Music Man, than reading this note 😊), who enters River City, Iowa (of course, “Eye-oh-way”) and persuades its worthy citizens that its pool hall will lead its youth astray – that the pool hall means Trouble — right there in River City – Trouble with a capital “T” and that rhymes with “P” and that stands for “Pool.” Prof. Hill persuades the River City residents to pay for instruments and uniforms to start a youth band, which will keep them on the straight and narrow. He declares that the youth will learn to play their instruments through his revolutionary “Think Method.” His plan – without giving away the plot for the one person continuing to read this who doesn’t know the story – is to leave town on the last train after he collects the money for the uniforms and instruments before the River City citizens realize … that the kids can’t play.

Mr. Stewart’s observation brought me back to what I believed about Mr. Trump back in 2015 and early 2016: that he launched his presidential campaign as a branding exercise; that his campaign was a con all along; that he neither expected nor wanted to win. His 2020 campaign was about fragile ego; he mustn’t lose. His 2024 campaign was about avoiding jail, making money, and retribution. Maybe he doesn’t want to be a dictator. Under this interpretation, although Mr. Trump shares the sentiments of true MAGA believers like Stephen Bannon, he doesn’t care about policy, or about the tens of millions he has scammed into believing in him, or about the Republican officeholders and officials whose party he has hijacked and careers he has ruined, or about what happens when he’s departed to his rabid disciples such as White House Deputy Chief of Staff (and de facto Anti-Brown-Immigration Czar) Stephen Miller, Attorney General Pam Bondi, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, or to the truly hapless lickspittles he’s kept around for amusement such as Mr. Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. His Supreme Court has rendered him almost immune from any action he takes while in office. His first two impeachment proceedings have proven that there will never be 67 Senate votes to remove him from office no matter what he does. When he takes Marine One out of Washington, D.C. in January, 2029, he’ll have Secret Service protection and health care for the rest of his life, a taxpayer-funded bunkerlike Mar-a Lago to live in, friends from Saudi Arabia to Moscow, and the riches he has always claimed but didn’t have.

Not a bad result for a branding exercise.

This is my Rosy Scenario, you say? Really?

I do. I am terribly concerned about what Mr. Trump and his cohort have already wrought for the generations of our children and grandchildren – irretrievable loss to American global standing and influence, a majority of our people remaining terribly economically challenged, a worsening environment, the AI challenge, lost intellectual capital, a spiraling deficit, the enhanced danger to democracies across the world, etc., etc., etc. Even if Mr. Trump doesn’t attempt to install an autocracy, another three years of his generally retrogressive policies will place our future in even greater peril than it already is. That said, if we emerge from this nightmare with our democracy intact, perhaps with the most strident segments of our citizenry on both ends of the political spectrum a bit chastened, focusing on issues of equality and economic prosperity for our citizens, we’ll still be the United States of America, and we’ll still have a better chance of righting ourselves than any nation in the history of the world. We can always scrape the garish gilt off the walls of the Oval Office.

I concede that you may well have concluded that I have succumbed to Prof. Hill’s Think Method 😉. Even if so, the notion that Mr. Trump might simply take the money and run provides me with some solace. In any event, perhaps this note’s reference to a classic American film has brought you a smile – and made you register a mental note to enjoy it again in the near future. 😊

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words

I know; a hardly original post title. Also, that you’ve heard plenty from me lately. Even so, a short one I can’t resist.

Earlier today, I saw a picture of the destruction of part of the outside edifice of the White House, apparently part of President Donald Trump’s plan to alter the structure. I had been vaguely aware that Mr. Trump had announced White House remodeling plans, but have been so focused on his authoritarian actions that although the notion of his refashioning the structure rankled – in the same manner in which I’m offended that he’s turned the Oval Office into a gold-trinketed stage – it hadn’t really registered with me. (As to the Oval Office, every new president decorates it a bit differently; I had expected Mr. Trump’s successor – if there was one – to simply get rid of the inappropriate, garish gold).

A picture of the President’s ripping at the outside of the White House – literally, destroying part of the structure – was viscerally jarring to me. I would submit that it will be instinctively repulsive to a wide swath of Americans, even striking a chord with part of the MAGA base.

If Democrats don’t start running ads displaying pictures of the destruction of the White House edifice with captions such as, “Look at What He’s Doing,” using those as the symbol of authoritarian takeover now being undertaken by Mr. Trump and his minions, they’re even more politically inept than I thought.

NO KINGS DAY: Signs and Omens

We attended the NO KINGS Capitol rally in downtown Madison, WI, this past Saturday. It was a large, enthusiastic crowd; media estimates place its participants at around 15,000. With attendant rallies across outlying Madison areas – a close friend at a rally in nearby Stoughton, WI (population 13,000), estimated the crowd there at 500 – the total turnout in our environs probably approximated 20,000. Probably not enough in our Congressional district to shake the White House, but we’ll get back to that.

There were almost as many clever signs as there were marchers. A favorite: a picture of President Donald Trump on a placard bearing the inscription, “Does this ass make my sign look big?” Another sign with a complementary theme, more poignant: a picture of Mr. Trump on a placard bearing the inscription, “Does this ass make my country look small?”

There were a number of signs mocking MAGA’s fear and loathing of “Antifa.” I’m aware that there is a debate as to whether there is or is not an actual “Antifa” organization – Mr. Trump says there is, and has sought to declare it a terrorist organization, while I understand that former FBI Director Christopher Wray has formerly characterized it as more an ideology than an organization – but I believe that the word, “Antifa,” itself, is simply shorthand for “anti-fascist.” Although no one on any part of the political spectrum should ever resort to violence, or be part of any group that is willing to resort to violence, since the arguably most evil regime in the history of the modern world – responsible for the murder of millions, including millions of Jews – was proudly fascist, these signs seemed to be asking: What is wrong with being anti-fascist? Call me dense, but aren’t we still free because Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill led their nations in a world war against the fascist creed? (Clearly, I’m not consuming enough alt-right media to understand the MAGA angst.)

On to the omens. A sign I saw during the march that I considered particularly telling and potentially counterproductive (clearly unintended by the wielder): “Too Many Issues; Not Enough Signs.” If you’ve read many of these pages, you realize that in the context in which we’re speaking, I’m a one-issue guy: preservation of our democracy. I consider all other policy issues we face, no matter how important, subordinate to protecting our way of life. We heard several speakers and chants yesterday whose point I – and I suspect other moderates — might under other circumstances question or seek to qualify. I consider NO KINGS to be brilliant branding because it brings all of those who oppose the autocratic inclinations of the Trump Regime under one roof. To save our way of life they must stay together. They cannot allow themselves to be divided or distracted by “too many issues.”

Finally, an encouraging omen that I would consider dangerously ominous if I were a MAGA: the reported 1,000 NO KINGS marchers reported to have demonstrated in Janesville, WI. Janesville has about 66,000 residents, meaning that about a percent and a half of its people stopped what they were doing on a beautiful Wisconsin autumn Saturday to demonstrate. I pick Janesville for two reasons: TLOML and I know it – we lived there for three years when early married – and because it is former U.S. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan’s hometown and in the WI First Congressional District he represented in Congress. There were reportedly other significant NO KINGS demonstrations in other Wisconsin First cities. The Wisconsin First is now represented by Republican U.S. WI Rep. Brian Steil, also from Janesville. Mr. Steil held his seat by 2 points in 2024. There were also reportedly notable NO KINGS marches in the Wisconsin Third, currently represented by Republican U.S. WI Rep. Derrick Van Orden, who won his seat in 2024 by 3 points.

Referring back to my observation above, I truly doubt that the Regime cares about the Madison NO KINGS turnout; if there were only 50 Democratic seats remaining in the U.S. House of Representatives, Madison’s would be one. At the same time, I am confident that the Regime does care about holding the Wisconsin First and Third Districts in 2026. I don’t know whether political voter science has yet evolved to the point that analysts can project a candidate’s or issue’s overall popularity – or unpopularity – based upon the numbers of citizens who turn out at a rally, but clearly for every demonstrator who turns out at a rally, there are “X” more who don’t turn out but agree with – and will vote in accord with — the demonstrator. If I were Mr. Steil or Mr. Van Orden – or any other MAGA member of the House of Representatives across the country who won his/her office in 2024 by less than 5 points in a district where there were notable NO KINGS rallies last Saturday – I’d be feeling a wee bit insecure in my seat today.

On we march (figuratively as well as literally 😊).