Skip to content

Month: August 2025

Have You Had Enough?

Judge Luttig has

J. Michael Luttig, the slow-talking, retired U.S. Court of Appeals judge of January 6 Committee testimony fame, has had all he can stands and he can’t stands no more.

President Donald Trump and AG Pam Bondi’s “reprehensible” attacks on the rule of law and on the courts have gotten under Luttig’s skin enough that he launched a Substack two months back.

He wrote on Tuesday:

The Honorable Thomas T. Cullen, the Federal District Court Judge from the Federal District Court in the Western District of Virginia, who had to be brought in to decide Donald Trump’s and Pam Bondi’s corrupt and unprecedented lawsuit against the entire Federal Court in Maryland, just destroyed Trump and Bondi under the Rule of Law and denounced their “concerted effort” to politicize and delegitimize the Federal Courts and the individual judges of the Federal Judiciary.

Footnote 2 from Judge Cullen’s blistering Memorandum Opinion in Civil Action No. 1:25-cv-02029:

“Indeed, over the past several months, principal officers of the Executive (and their spokespersons) have described federal district judges across the country as “left-wing,” “liberal,” “activists,” “radical,” “politically minded,” “rogue,” “unhinged,” “outrageous, overzealous, [and] unconstitutional,” “[c]rooked,” and worse. Although some tension between the coordinate branches of government is a hallmark of our constitutional system, this concerted effort by the Executive to smear and impugn individual judges who rule against it is both unprecedented and unfortunate.”

Oh, you’re so condescending
Your gall is never ending

— Twisted Sister, “We’re Not Gonna Take It”

Luttig is not gonna take it:

The very idea that the President and Attorney General of the United States of America were so contemptuous of the federal courts as to even bring this utterly frivolous lawsuit against a Federal Court of the United States for the sole purpose of threatening and intimidating the federal courts across the nation is reprehensible.

And to think that every day of the week, Pam Bondi (and Donald Trump) lecture millions upon millions of truly honorable, law-abiding Americans that they are not above the law and that she and the President will not hesitate to prosecute them for even daring to violate the law. That is, they will not hesitate to prosecute anyone who dares violate the law as they deem the law to be, not the law of the land as determined by the federal courts.

This is why we Americans live in fear today.

Luttig takes a swing at the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts as well:

The Supreme Court is never going to stop this intentional and deliberate corruption of the Federal Judiciary and Rule of Law by this President and his Attorney General.

Donald Trump’s and Pam Bondi’s corruption of the Rule of Law in America will continue apace until the American People stand up and cry out “No More. We’ve had enough. We are a nation of laws, not of men.”

Luttig appeared last night on MSNBC’s “The Last Word” [timestamp 23:17, audio only]. This lawsuit “slashed at the separation of powers” principle, Luttig explained. Trump has been attacking the coordinate branches of government, the Congress and the judiciary, ever since reassuming the powers of the presidency in January.

Trump means to concentrate all federal power in this own tiny hands.

“Americans have never seen anything like this in 250 years since the founding of this nation,” Luttig said. Our system of government will have to work through the unconstitutional damage he’s doing, Luttig adds, “if it survives.”

The only recourse, Luttig believes, is for people to rise up. He’s not directly calling for people to take to the streets, but that’s what it’s going to take. So far, it’s too few.

Expect Trump and Bondi to target Luttig now. It’s how they roll.

I’ve been out in the street twice this week at rush hour flipping around another of my two-sided signs. I’m out there again this afternoon with friends at a third location giving neighbors permission to get off their couches.

Amid the honks and thumbs-ups, two different passersby, men about 30, stopped and asked what “goose-step” meant. <sigh>

* * * * *

Have you fought dicktatorship today?

50501 – Labor Day events
May Day Strong Labor Day Events
No King’s One Million Rising movement
The Resistance Lab
Choose Democracy
Indivisible: A Guide to Democracy on the Brink – Search on Labor Day events near you
You Have Power
Chop Wood, Carry Water
Thirty lonely but beautiful actions
Attending a Protest Surveillance Self-Defense

Why So Many?

There are some new polls out today, one of which sent me into a depressive funk when I read it this morning. That would be this AP poll:

As armed National Guard troops patrol the nation’s capital as part of an unprecedented federal takeover of Washington’s police department, handling crime is now a relative strength for President Donald Trump, according to the latest AP-NORC poll.

Americans are generally not happy about the Republican president’s handling of issues like immigration and the economy but are more positive about his tough-on-crime approach, according to the survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Indeed, the vast majority of Americans, 81%, see crime as a “major problem” in large cities — a concern Trump has seized on as he has deployed the National Guard to the District of Columbia and threatened to expand that model to cities across the country. Despite that perception, data shows that violent crime in D.C. is at a 30-year low. But Trump’s approach appears to be helping him, at least for the moment: His overall approval rating has increased slightly, from 40% in July to 45% now.

[…]

About half of U.S. adults, 53%, say they approve of Trump’s handling of crime, the poll finds.

That’s higher than his approval rating on the economy, immigration and the conflict between Russia and Ukraine — which are in line with his overall approval rating.

Trump’s approach on crime is similarly popular among white and Hispanic adults, with roughly half in each group saying they approve of the way he’s handling the issue. Black adults, however, are substantially less likely to say they’re on board with Trump’s approach to crime, with just 27% in favor.

Trump also garners much stronger support from independents on crime than on other issues. Roughly half of independents approve of his handling of crime, compared with about 3 in 10 who approve of his handling of the economy, immigration and the Russia-Ukraine war.

It’s caravans and eggs all over again. Yes there is crime in America’s cities. Much less than there used to be but no it hasn’t been eradicated because it will never be eradicated in a free society. Not that many of our fellow Americans seem to want a free country anymore. They yearn for a police state that will punish their enemies — us.

Sending in the troops to make Trump and his MAGA cult get all tingly down there is just another way of creating “vibes” to justify his reality show. And, according to that poll, it’s working, even as they aren’t quite sure that sending in troops is the answer.

The Quinnipiac poll tells a slightly different story that isn’t quite so depressing. It doesn’t specifically ask if people think crime is a “major problem” but their numbers don’t indicate that Trump is gaining support because of it:

In the wake of President Donald Trump’s decision to send National Guard troops to Washington D.C. in an effort to reduce crime, voters 56 – 41 percent oppose the move, according to a Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pea-ack) University national poll of registered voters released today.

There are wide partisan and gender differences.

Republicans (86 – 12 percent) support the president’s decision to deploy the National Guard to the nation’s capital to reduce crime, while Democrats (93 – 5 percent) and independents (61 – 34 percent) oppose it.

Men are split about the president’s decision, with 50 percent supporting it and 47 percent opposing it, while women (63 – 33 percent) oppose it.

Thirty-seven percent of voters approve of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president, while 55 percent disapprove. In Quinnipiac University’s July 16 poll, 40 percent of voters approved and 54 percent disapproved.

In today’s poll, Republicans (84 – 9 percent) approve, while Democrats (98 – 1 percent) and independents (58 – 31 percent) disapprove.

They found that only 42% approve of Trump’s handling of crime which is more like it. And he only has a 37% approval rating which is a hell of lot better than 45%.

Let’s hope that AP poll is the outlier. We should know in the next few days as more polling comes in.

Affordability Is The Word

G. Elliott Morris writes about the Iowa race that flipped a red seat blue last night, opening the post with this little bit of positivity (which I needed after reading this earlier today.)

One of the things I promise paying members of this newsletter is day-after updates on key election outcomes. Although it is an off-year, there have been plenty of special elections to write about, all of them suggesting a pretty sizable leftward shift in the electoral environment since November 2024.

On average in 2025, Democratic candidates in special elections are running about 16 percentage points ahead of Kamala Harris’s margin versus Donald Trump in last year’s presidential election. That is 5-6 points higher than the average Democratic overperformance in 2017Here’s my interview with Paul Krugman and The Downballot’s David Nir about these specials in June.

This shift (firmly in the territory of a “blue wave”) was repeated on Tuesday, August 26, with a Democratic victory in Iowa’s 1st Senate District — a seat Trump won by 11 points in 2024, according to The Downballot’s special election big boardHere’s their coverage of the race. Democratic candidate Catelin Drey defeated Republican Christopher Prosch by a margin of 10 percentage points, flipping the seat to the Democratic column and breaking the supermajority that Iowa Republicans had in their state legislature.

The rest is behind the paywall but in a nutshell he says that Drey, like many of those who flipped a seat so far in these special elections, ran on “affordability.” To be more specific her platform was “funding for public schools, making housing and childcare more affordable, and decreasing prices in general.” Here’s the viral ad that illustrates it:

Morris says that this issue has been key in one way or another in most of these off-year elections so far and that it’s becoming even more salient as people sour on Trump’s economy.

He points out that this is a non-partisan “throw the bums out whoever they are” issue that will likely benefit Dems in 26 and 28 just as it allowed the criminal tyrant to win in 2024.

I happen to think that Democrats can talk about a lot of things over the next year and have an obligation to call out Trump’s despotism along with everything else. People may care the most about their own stretched bottom line but it’s incumbent upon leaders to educate and lead on the bigger issues that confront us as a country. People won’t be able to afford much of anything if we continue to sink into banana republic politics where billionaires and tech utopians hoover up most of the nation’s wealth while the rest of us spend our time trying to evade goons who are tasked with keeping us all on line.

As this person said on BlueSky:

"What issue tests best?" is only part of the equation; when you're out of power the basic message is always that the President is screwing things up. Creating the impression he is screwing up lots of things has value. 2/2

Jeff Liszt (@liszt.bsky.social) 2025-08-27T15:19:48.676Z

He further points out that in 2021, Republicans were charging Biden with screwing up Afghanistan, screwing up COVID and screwing up inflation among other things. Nobody knew then which would be the most salient issue in 2024 but they were out there making the case for all of them. In the end, it was inflation that got him (and being old) because affordability was at the top of people’s minds. But all those attacks on Biden for screwing everything up added to the impression that he — and Harris — couldn’t fix anything.

His Big Beautiful Face

What an image (J. Scott Applewhite, AP)

Don Moynihan (@donmoyn.bsky.social) 2025-08-27T14:31:46.477Z

Yeah…

Proud to be an American where at least I know I’m free.

The Message

If you did not see it, I urge you to watch JB Pritzker’s speech earlier this week.

Brian Beutler writes:

Pritzker’s remarks came in response to reporting about Trump’s plan to send military service members to occupy Chicago, but pre-empted any deployment. You should watch the whole speech, just under 15 minutes, but he saved the most relevant passages for his peroration.

Each paragraph serves a distinct purpose—either to unify Illinoians and other Americans against Trump’s threats, or to seed doubt and division among Trump officials.

Let’s take them one by one, in order:

Let me speak to all Illinoisans and to all Chicagoans right now. Hopefully the president will reconsider this dangerous and misguided encroachment upon our state and our city’s sovereignty. Hopefully rational voices, if there are any left inside the White House or the Pentagon, will prevail in the coming days. If not, we are going to face an unprecedented and difficult time ahead.

If this happens, it’s the fault of the depraved president and the lackeys who staff his administration.

But I know you Chicago, and I know you are up to it. When you protest, do it peacefully. Be sure to continue Chicago’s long tradition of nonviolent resistance. Remember that the members of the military and the National Guard who will be asked to walk these streets are, for the most part, here unwillingly. And remember that they can be court-martialed and their lives ruined if they resist deployment. Look to the members of the faith community standing behind me today for guidance on how to mobilize.

Don’t take your anger out on the people Trump is using as pawns, and if you’re unsure how to resist peacefully, we’ll be working with your churches, mosques, and synagogues to provide answers.

To my fellow governors across the nation who would consider pulling your National Guards from their duties at home to come into my state against the wishes of its elected representatives and its people, you would be failing your constituents and your country. Cooperation and coordination between our states is vital to the fabric of our nation and it benefits us all. Any action undercutting that and violating the sacred sovereignty of our state to cater to the ego of a dictator will be responded to.

Republican governors: We have leverage over you and we will use it if you participate in the oppression of our people

The State of Illinois is ready to stand against this military deployment with every peaceful tool we have. We will see the Trump administration in court. We will use every lever at our disposal to protect the people of Illinois and their rights.

We will sue, and take whatever legal steps we can to block or shorten any deployment.

Finally, to the Trump administration officials who are complicit in this scheme, to the public servants who have forsaken their oath to the Constitution to serve the petty whims of an arrogant little man, to any federal official who would come to Chicago and try to incite my people into violence as a pretext for something darker and more dangerous: we are watching and we are taking names. This country has survived darker periods than the one that we are going through right now, and eventually the pendulum will swing back, maybe even next year. Donald Trump has already shown himself to have little regard for the many acolytes that he has encouraged to commit crimes on his behalf. You can delay justice for a time, but history shows you cannot prevent it from finding you eventually. If you hurt my people, nothing will stop me, not time or political circumstance, from making sure that you face justice under our constitutional rule of law.

These are the real money lines, in my opinion. Our memories are long. I will make it my mission in life to imprison anyone and everyone who commits a crime in furtherance of Trump’s illegal ambitions here.

That’s the “tough-on-crime” message I’m yearning to hear. I’m not entirely sure the rest of the country agrees but I know it’s one that needs to be said. If all they hear is Donald Trump and his henchmen bleating about “crime in the cities” they will believe that it’s the biggest problem we face when the truth is that our greatest threat is the criminal Trump and his henchmen.

Pritzker is very good. Newsom’s doing a great job. Tim Walz has been out there with his patented “it’s none of their damn business” schtick which is still fresh. Others are starting to do the same thing. With the DC Democratic leadership seemingly paralyzed (there are some individual congressional reps doing this work) the last institutions with any real political clout are the states. We need these Blue State governors to lead the way.

Grok This

I missed this one yesterday.

Newsom clapped back:

Gov. Gavin Newsom of California poured cold water on Donald Trump’s Cabinet meeting on Tuesday by implying that the 79-year-old president is suffering from dementia. Newsom reposted a clip on X of Trump’s diatribe and responded with a barb of his own: a screenshot of an interaction with Grok, the platform’s built-in AI chatbot:

Lol. You really do have to wonder….

(I assume everyone who reads this knows that what Trump says on this subject — over and over again — is just batshit crazy. )

“The Presidential Id Is Now Unchained”

On Monday night, President Donald Trump announced he was seeking to fire Lisa Cook, the first Black woman to serve on the Federal Reserve’s board of governors, after days of escalating hints and speculation. In moving to dismiss Cook, who was confirmed by the Senate to her seat in 2022, Trump sought to legally justify his position by pointing to “sufficient cause” — unproven allegations that she had committed mortgage fraud. 

Through a spokesperson, Cook was unequivocal in her response and suggested she was ready to do battle. “President Trump purported to fire me ‘for cause’ when no cause exists under the law, and he has no authority to do so. I will continue to carry out my duties to help the American economy as I have been doing since 2022.” Her attorney, Abbe Lowell, pledged to “take whatever actions are needed to prevent his attempted illegal action.”

Like all things Trump, there’s more to his action than meets the eye. Cook’s firing comes against the backdrop of the president exerting extraordinary pressure to bend the nation’s central bank to his will and lower interest rates. He has often mused about firing Fed Chair Jerome Powell in a bid to assume greater control of U.S. economic policy. 

And make no mistake: This is about control, and it goes far beyond the Federal Reserve. 

As Charlie Savage of the New York Times pointed out, in its May decision that allowed Trump to oust Democratic-appointed members of independent agencies, including the National Labor Relations Board and the Merit Systems Protection Board, before their terms were finished, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority “pointedly said the Federal Reserve would be different” and “directly stated that it did not want the Fed to be so subject to presidential caprice.”

The justices should have known their instructions would fall on intentionally occluded ears, because this president is full of caprice, among other things. 

To reasonable people who have been paying attention, recent events have shown that only seven months into his second term, Donald Trump is ruling with a rod of iron. 

On Aug. 22, the FBI searched the home and office of the president’s former national security advisor John Bolton, who became one of Trump’s foremost critics and most hated enemies. Reports have said the agents were looking for classified documents pertaining to national security.

The list of the president’s enemies is very long, but Bolton sits at the top — mainly because he’s a Republican and a former staff member who left the first Trump administration in 2019 and, in a scathing memoir, spilled the beans about what it was like to work for a president who is incapable of separating fact from fiction. 

Trump has openly vowed to wreak vengeance on people he believes wronged him, and he has had his Justice Department open investigations on numerous former officials, such as former special prosecutor Jack Smith and former FBI Director James Comey, among others. Bolton, though, has long been one of Trump’s primary targets. The former national security advisor not only wrote a book in which he claimed Trump didn’t know what he was doing, he has continued to relentlessly criticize him on television for the past five years — and particularly in the last few weeks ahead of the president’s summit in Alaska with Russian President Vladimir Putin over Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. 

In interviews on CNN and posts on X, Bolton portrayed Trump as incompetent, out of his depth and being had by the canny Putin. “In Alaska,” Bolton posted, “President Trump did not lose, but Putin clearly won. Vladimir has his old friend Donald back.” (Even after the raid, Bolton continued his verbal assault on Trump, lambasting the president’s “utterly incoherent Ukraine strategy” in a Washington Examiner op-ed published on Monday.) Although Trump has denied it, these statements likely pushed him over the edge. 

What Bolton has said about him is important, and it’s perhaps best summarized by something he explained to CNN’s Kaitlan Collins last year following one of Trump’s rambling press conferences: “Trump can’t tell the difference between what’s true and what’s false.”

Bolton went on to say that although Trump “consistently told falsehoods” during the briefing, “it was not deliberate lying, rather that [he] espoused what he believes in his mind.” 

“In his mind,” Bolton explained to Collins, “the truth is whatever he wants it to be and that’s what you heard today.”

With the administration’s action against Bolton, Trump seems to be sending a very loud shot across the bow of any would-be apostates in his orbit who might want to take a public stand against him. Betrayal will be dealt with harshly. But it’s worth considering that Trump is especially antagonistic toward Bolton, not just because of his disloyalty but because of the specific criticisms he routinely makes against the president. Bolton hasn’t accused Trump of lying so much as he has accused the president of actually believing the nonsense he says most of the time. That distinction is important — and it’s quite different from the usual accusation lobbed against Trump, that he manipulates the truth to make himself look better.

In recent weeks, Trump has begun to fire anyone who presents facts that contradict his version of reality. He fired Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner Erika McEntarfer for releasing a revised jobs report belying his public assurances that the U.S. job market is better than ever. Last week, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired Lt. Gen. Jeffrey A. Kruse, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, which assessed that the bombing of the Iran nuclear facilities had not “obliterated” the facilities as Trump insisted had been done. These are people who were simply doing their jobs, which involved releasing data and analysis that might conflict with whatever Trump has chosen to believe is true. Now, the word has gone forth: This will no longer be tolerated.

It’s hard to know where the lines between lying, exaggeration and delusion are with Donald Trump. So much of what he says is hype, which has long been accepted as just part of his bizarre personality. But in this second term, something seems to have shifted. Where it used to be apparent that Trump usually knew the truth and was just deflecting or defending — either taking credit for something he didn’t do, or blaming others for something he did — he now seems to be living in a bubble of misinformation, excessive flattery and delusion. And it is all being fed by sycophants and henchmen who have created a self-reinforcing feedback loop.

Some of them have abandoned their own judgment and critical thinking to see Trump as having almost supernatural abilities due to the fact that he survived two impeachments, several criminal trials, sex scandals, an assassination attempt and even encouraged an attack on the Capitol — and yet he was returned by voters to the White House. And there are others, notably those with pre-existing agendas like deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller and Director of the Office of Management and Budget Russell Vought, who see the utility of an easily manipulated president who is distracted by the fact that he can indulge his every whim, from tearing up Jackie Kennedy’s beloved Rose Garden to ordering the National Guard and other federal agents onto the streets of Washington, D.C, because one of his minions nicknamed “Big Balls” was apparently assaulted.

Trump clearly believes he is omnipotent now. He’s drunk with power, beyond all restraint. Even Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal announced “the presidential id is now unchained” in an editorial on the Bolton raid. 

But Trump has also become extremely insular, relying only on his close coterie of loyal aides — and apparently believing whatever he wants to believe. His bold pronouncements bear no relationship to reality anymore. On Sunday, he bragged on Truth Social about “now [having] the highest poll numbers I’ve ever had, some in the 60’s and even the 70’s.” In reality, his polls are sinking. Yet his fawning followers continue to reinforce their Dear Leader’s fantasy.

Did someone give Trump a fake poll and he believes it, or is he so far gone that he now just throws out ridiculous numbers he knowingly makes up to fool his followers? I suspect a lot of this is fed to him by his loyal disciples — and probably some not-so-loyal adversaries. As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said, “President Trump…unfortunately lives in this disinformation space. Around Trump there is a disinformation bubble.” That could be the Russian FSB, Fox News or Laura Loomer, the extremist gadfly who has Trump’s attention and wields great influence on personnel throughout the government.

Last week, Trump appeared in the Oval Office wearing one of his trademark red caps. But this one didn’t say “Make America Great Again.” It said “Trump Has Always Been Right About Everything.” In the MAGA bubble in which he now lives full time, that may be true. For the rest of us, it’s a dire warning that the man who wears it no longer lives in the real world.

Salon

Pacifying D.C.

Do Beltway Democrats have any relief pitchers?

Brian Beutler is unhappy, as well he should be. National Guard troops and federal officers Donald Trump dispatched to pacify Washington, D.C. (let’s be blunt) occupy his city. The District neither needs nor wants pacifying. Trump the Insecure has a need to pacify it. First, to show who’s boss for the cameras. Second, to road test his plans to pacify blue-state cities run by Democrats. He’s hoping to provoke a violent response that will give him cover for declaring martial law. (He’ll spell it “marshal.”)

The District is not a state. There is no illusion of sovereignty. Mayor Muriel Bowser has little leverage for pushing back that won’t backfire against her citizens and make the crackdown worse. Congressional Democrats have no such excuse, Beutler explains. “And yet they have provided little comfort, exhibited little leadership, essentially left us to fend for ourselves.”

I posted the transcript and video of Illinois Gov. JB Pritsker’s defiant speech in Chicago yesterday against Trump’s police-state action. Beutler this morning summarizes key paragraphs, their messages and purpose.

“A speech is just a speech, but Chicagoans who heard their governor will sleep better than Washingtonians, if and when the shock troops arrive. Someone who possesses and is willing to use real power has their backs,” Beutler writes ruefully. Bowser is hamstrung. No one has D.C. residents’ backs. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, for godsakes, “has effectively opened the city to Trump-loyal militants, Beutler adds,” and per Fox News “will no longer slap people with felony charges for possession of rifles or shotguns in the nation’s capital.”

As someone once shot three times in a failed D.C. mugging, Beutler retains muscle memory on how badly that decision could go.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s Mike Luckovich on Tuesday lampooned the tepid responses of Democratic House and Senate leaders Rep. Hakeem Jeffries and Sen. Chuck Schumer. It’s spot on (at top). Their legislative skills are as useless as buggy whips in the MAGA occupation of D.C. Lawsuits and floor maneuvers to slow the MAGA agenda that garner no attention win no hearts and minds in the 21st-century attention economy. Meaning the pair are well past their “best by” dates. Their vaunted congressional positions do not make them effective resistance leaders. They display no awareness of that fact.

They might like Pritzker “balance their calls for peaceful resistance with promises of accountability,” Beutler suggests. They might also “warn the red states that glommed on to the occupation to expect consequences.” But no.

Beutler laments:

And they could join Pritzker in demanding more of the mainstream media.

To the members of the press who are assembled here today, and listening across the country, I am asking for your courage to tell it like it is.

This is not a time to pretend here that there are two sides to this story. This is not a time to fall back into the reflexive crouch that I so often see, where the authoritarian creep by this administration is ignored in favor of some horse race piece on who will be helped politically by the president’s actions.

But they can’t do any of this and deploy consultant-crafted evasive maneuvers simultaneously. The question for Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer in some sense is: What do you think and feel when you watch Pritzker’s remarks? Are you inspired, like millions of Democratic Party voters? Or do you think he’s a fool for not pivoting to tariffs?

Those were rhetorical questions.

It’s why an exasperated Anand Giridharadas exclaimed, “I feel so fucking undefended by these people. Like what are they doing, any of them?” That was February. JB Pritzker and Gavin Newsom have stepped into that “void of federal leadership.” Do congressional Democrats have any relief pitchers?

* * * * *

Have you fought dicktatorship today?

50501 – Labor Day events
May Day Strong Labor Day Events
No King’s One Million Rising movement
The Resistance Lab
Choose Democracy
Indivisible: A Guide to Democracy on the Brink – Search on Labor Day events near you
You Have Power
Chop Wood, Carry Water
Thirty lonely but beautiful actions
Attending a Protest Surveillance Self-Defense

Butt Snorkeling

No Self-Respect Anonymous

Needy god-emperor Donald Trump held another of his regular suck-up sessions on Tuesday in the White House Cabinet Room. In front of cameras, naturally, so the public gets the full intended effect. My God, the grovelling is humiliating to watch even from hundreds of miles away. Trump Cabinet members must need to return to their offices afterwards and dress down their staffs just to compensate. Viewers might need a shower.

From Wikipedia:

kowtow /ˈkaʊtaʊ/ (simplified Chinese: 叩头; traditional Chinese: 叩頭) is the act of deep respect shown by prostration, that is, kneeling and bowing so low as to have one’s head touching the ground. In Sinospheric culture, the kowtow is the highest sign of reverence. It was widely used to show reverence for one’s elders, superiors, and especially the Emperor of China, as well as for religious and cultural objects of worship. [1]

These members of No Self-Respect Anonymous haven’t even reached Step 1.

30th U.S. Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer of Oregon started out as the mayor of Happy Valley. She’s just happy to be here:

See that banner here.

“In the Army we called this ‘Butt-snorkeling’….” tweets retired Gen. Ben Hodges in response to billionaire real estate developer Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East. One supposes Trump wants Witkoff in place for overseeing Trump resort development in Gaza once it’s “cleansed”:

33rd U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins of Texas, Wikipedia notes, once served Texas governor Rick Perry as deputy general counsel, ethics advisor, and one other post he can’t remember. (Oops.) You’ll have to ask Google AI what “1863 or so” revolution she’s referring to because it can’t be the Emancipation Proclamation that freed Texans’ slaves:

Rollins: “I do believe we're in a revolution. 1776 was the first one. 1863 or so, with Abraham Lincoln, was the second. This is the third with Donald Trump leading the way.”

The Bulwark (@thebulwark.com) 2025-08-26T19:40:24.065Z

From Websters:

kowtow 1 of 2 verb
kow·​tow ˈkau̇-ˌtau̇ (ˌ)kau̇-ˈtau̇
kowtowed; kowtowing; kowtows

intransitive verb

1 : to show obsequious deference : fawn
kowtows to the boss
2 : to kneel and touch the forehead to the ground in token of homage, worship, or deep respect

Synonyms include toady and bootlick.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi once held regular conference calls with Democrat-allied nonprofits (and a few bloggers). Reports on their groups’ field efforts routinely began with a bit of obsequious praising of “the Speaker” for her wonderful leadership. But these Trump Cabinet meetings are next-level.

Funny / not funny:

The only reason Trump doesn’t have supplicants literally get down on their knees is it would take them out of the camera shot: bad TV.

Update: Had not caught that Hodges is a retired lieutenant general. Amended.

* * * * *

Have you fought dicktatorship today?

50501 – Labor Day events
May Day Strong Labor Day Events
No King’s One Million Rising movement
The Resistance Lab
Choose Democracy
Indivisible: A Guide to Democracy on the Brink – Search on Labor Day events near you
You Have Power
Chop Wood, Carry Water
Thirty lonely but beautiful actions
Attending a Protest Surveillance Self-Defense

Wholesale Destruction

Krugman has more on the firing of Lisa Cook:

Cook has said that she will not resign. So at this point the immediate onus is on Jerome Powell, the Fed chairman. He has the right — I would say the obligation — to say, “Show me the legal basis for this action.” If Trump’s officials can’t provide that basis, he should declare that as far as he is concerned, Cook is still a Fed governor.

If Powell caves, or the Supreme Court acts supine again and validates Trump’s illegal declaration, the implications will be profound and disastrous. The United States will be well on its way to becoming Turkey, where an authoritarian ruler imposed his crackpot economics on the central bank, sending inflation soaring to 80 percent

Look at that graph above.

And the damage will be felt far beyond the Fed. This will mark the destruction of professionalism and independent thinking throughout the federal government.

So, about the legal authority. The Supreme Court, shamefully, has said that Trump has the authority to fire officials at will throughout the federal government, effectively eviscerating the principle of a professional civil service. But even the Court specifically carved out protections for Fed governors, saying that they can only be removed “for cause.”

Normally “for cause” means neglect of one’s job or malfeasance on the job. Yet even Trump’s people have made no claims that Lisa Cook has failed to fulfil her duties at the Fed or done anything wrong in her role as governor.

So what is the complaint about Cook? Trump says that she committed mortgage fraud by taking out two mortgages, claiming both properties as her primary residence, back when she was a professor at Michigan State, before joining the Fed.

Even if true, this accusation wouldn’t meet the standard for immediate dismissal from the Fed.

Furthermore, there’s no reason to believe Trump’s assertions that she committed fraud. So far, the Justice Department hasn’t even made any formal charges, let alone won a conviction. And we have no clear evidence of wrongdoing. As far as I can tell, the only evidence seen by outsiders shows that she took out mortgages on two properties, and the security instruments associated with these mortgages say that both properties are “principal residences.”

But as Adam Levitin at Credit Slips, says, “principal” isn’t the same as “primary”: someone who has a home in the city and a second place in the country might well consider both “principal” residences. Furthermore, there is no evidence that Cook even knew what the security instruments said — she may have done nothing more than promise to make her mortgage payments.

And a claim of mortgage fraud requires both that the borrower make a deliberate misrepresentation — as opposed to making a mistake on a complicated process — and that this misrepresentation caused financial harm to the lender. We’ve seen no evidence at all for either proposition.

[…]

The immediate test here is how the Fed itself responds. Cook is doing the right thing by refusing to resign. Jerome Powell now faces a moment of truth: Will he back her up, until or unless Trump demonstrates that he has the legal authority to fire her?

What if Trump uses some kind of force — deployment of U.S. Marshals? — to block Cook from continuing to work? Good. That will demonstrate to everyone the grotesqueness of this power grab.

And one way or another, this will end up in the courts, where we will find out whether our judicial system has any integrity left.

I can easily see him sending in the federal marshalls to physically remove her. And unfortunately I can easily see it being a two day story after which the press will move on to the next atrocity. That’s how this stuff works.

He doesn’t seem sure the financial markets will react and so far, that seems to be the case. But eventually something very bad is going to happen. Just look at that graph up top.

I would also like to ask what the hell this flunky at the Federal Housing Finance Agency is doing? It appears that he is targeting the private records of Trump enemies — Leticia James, Adam Schiff and now Cook for the purpose of finding some kind of irregularity that Trump can use to harass them and in the case of Cook, fire them. It’s not an audit, which would turn up people of all political persuasions, I’m sure. This is the definition of weaponization and I’m shocked it’s not illegal. (Not that it matters.)

The man’s name is Bill Pulte, an heir to his grandfather’s construction fortune and a dyed in the wool Trumper. He will almost certainly be named to some much higher post as thanks for his service. I think they’re looking for a new head of Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. Maybe the ATF director. Hell, why not Director of the Office of Government Ethics? He certainly has experience in breaking them.

This is all wrong and as Krugman points out, along with all other economic experts who are appalled at what Trump is doing — and what his minions are letting him get away with. Either they are all as delusional as he is or they’re stupid.

Update —

Michael Hiltzik of the LA Times has some other information on all this:

The accusations against all three targets involve occupancy misrepresentations — occupancy fraud, if you like. Specifically, Cook, Schiff and James are accused of falsely telling mortgage lenders that the loans in question were for their primary residences.

The idea is that they may have received a break on the loan terms — a lower down payment required, or a lower interest rate charge — because lenders think kindlier of borrowers for primary residences.

But none of the public accusations from the FHFA specify what, if any, financial advantages were received by the targets.

Occupancy fraud is a fairly low-level problem for mortgage lenders, which tend to judge the creditworthiness of borrowers more on such factors as the borrowers’ income and the value of the property versus the loan amount, and on the borrowers’ credit history. Moreover, the specifics of each case are amazingly weak.

And it’s unlikely that they’re the result of random audits of FHFA loans, as Levitin observed in relation to the Cook case.

“No one ever goes back and examines loan applications on performing loans for occupancy fraud; that would entail expenses for no benefit,” he wrote. “Instead, the only way anyone would have noticed a problem with Cook’s loan application is that Pulte, as head of FHFA, directed Fannie or Freddie to pull her application. That is unheard of.”

His reference was to the quasi-governmental firms Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which buy and re-market mortgages originated by banks and other lenders. Pulte is the chairman of both firms.

It was a memo purportedly from Fannie Mae’s criminal investigators to Pulte that generated the accusation against Schiff. As my colleagues Kevin Rector and Laura J. Nelson reported, the one-page memo made no allegation of fraud.

The memo notes that all five of the mortgage loans that were its subject already had been paid off before July 14, the memo’s date. There’s no indication in the memo or otherwise that the loans were ever in arrears or in default, or otherwise impaired in any way.

The Fannie Mae memo says that the FHFA inspector general demanded “the loan file and any related investigative or quality control documentation, as well as all other loans associated with…Adam B. Schiff.” (The ellipsis signifies a redacted portion of the memo.) Since there was no prior indication of wrongdoing in relation to Schiff’s loans — a 2023 CNN article on his ownership of two homes concluded that he was “likely not in any legal jeopardy” — where did the initiative for this demand come from?

As the request from FHFA was specifically directed at Schiff’s mortgages, it obviously couldn’t have resulted from a random screening of Fannie Mae loans. That lends strength to Schiff’s contention that the accusation “is just Donald Trump’s latest attempt at political retaliation against his perceived enemies. So it is not a surprise, only how weak this false allegation turns out to be.”

I asked FHFA who at the inspector general’s office demanded the files, what was the reason for the demand, and whether Pulte played a role in the demand. I received no response.

I’m pretty sure we know who did it and at whose behest.

He goes into the details of the three cases and it’s clear that this is likely a minor paperwork error at worst. And who knows? These people are such liars that we don’t even know if any of it is true?

The fact that this is coming from the man who was found to have overvalued his assets by $812 million to $2.2 billion between 2014 to 2021 on his loan documents is stunning. They have no limits.