Of course, if the original Klansmen knew Miller was a Jew, that would have been a problem for him. In fact, it’s a problem for him today, he just doesn’t know it yet.
President Donald Trump is privately ramping up his focus on another target in the Western Hemisphere, increasingly complaining to aides in recent weeks about Canada’s vulnerability to U.S. adversaries in the Arctic, according to two U.S. officials, a senior administration official and three former senior U.S. officials familiar with the discussions.
As Trump’s advisers work toward his goal of acquiring Greenland, the president has privately grown more exercised about what he sees as Canada’s similar inability to defend its borders against any encroachment from Russia or China, specifically arguing Canada needs to spend more on defense, the officials said. They said his push has accelerated internal discussions about a broader Arctic strategy and potentially reaching an agreement with Canada this year to fortify its northern border.
“Trump is really worried about the U.S. continuing to drift in the Western Hemisphere and is focused on this,” one of the officials said.
They insist he isn’t talking about invading but merely forcing them to spend vast sums on arctic security to repel China and Russia.
His obsession with the Arctic is about oil and minerals and Canada has both so I don’t believe for a moment that his interest is in national security. Some people have put a bug in his ear and he’s focused on changing maps and running the world for the benefit of his family and his rich buddies.
If he was really concerned about Russia and China, he wouldn’t be sucking up to them the way he does. He’s just divvying up the spoils.
This declaration from Shadow President Stephen “Trump’s Brain” Miller, regarding Greenland: “Denmark is a tiny country with a tiny economy and a tiny military. They cannot defend Greenland… Under every understanding of law that has existed about territorial control for 500 years, to control a territory you have to be able to defend a territory…”
Jarlov: “I hope he’s kept away from young women, because that’s the mentality of a rapist. You can’t defend yourself, so I’m going to take you. That’s basically what he’s saying.”
A cute video from Minnesota protests that popped up this morning illustrates ongoing confusion among both protesters and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agents.
The context is a bit muddy. A line of agents has pushed back protesters off a public street. A protester videos his questioning agents. He’s asking for the Minnesota statute giving them authority to keep them off a public street. None answer. It is likely that the agents don’t know what law they are being asked to enforce. (It’s not a state law.) They are just following orders.
View on Threads
It appears that this protest is taking place outside the Whipple Federal Building outside Minneapolis where protesters have gathered regularly since their state was invaded by DHS forces and in the wake of the killing of Renee Good.
But like the mute federal agents, the videographer snarkily videoing his questioning of DHS agents likely also does not know about the federal rule change behind this action. We covered it last week:
A rule published in the Federal Register last June modified 41 CFR 102-74, the rule governing the Federal Protective Service, or FPS. Originally set to take effect on Jan. 1 of this year, the new rule’s effective date was moved up to Nov. 5. If you’ve wondered what allows DHS goons to step off federal property and cross streets to assault protesters on a public sidewalk, here it is.
It did not come from Congress and it did not come from a court. It arrived quietly, tucked into the Federal Register, written in the dry language of administrative housekeeping. Yet the practical effect is this: it expands where federal officers can detain you, and for what reasons, and it does so in a way that directly touches the right to protest and to document government action.
[…]
The new rule, codified at 6 CFR Part 139, rewrites the jurisdictional line. Instead of limiting enforcement to federal property, the rule now applies to areas outside federal property whenever the conduct in question affects federal property or the people on it. The text says that FPS jurisdiction extends to public areas whenever it is necessary to protect federal property or personnel. It also says that prohibited conduct now includes actions that occur off federal property if they affect, threaten, or endanger federal property or persons on the property.
A lot of us only half-know what we think we know. But so do the guys with the guns. It’s important to know your rights. It’s likely just as easy to know more about the laws in play than many of the goons sent out to enforce them. Look in particular at the irregularly clad masked men at the end of the video labeled HSI.
“We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there “is” such a thing as being too late. This is no time for apathy or complacency. This is a time for vigorous and positive action.”
― Martin Luther King Jr.
That oft-quoted excerpt is from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech, which he delivered to a crowd of 250,000 civil rights workers in Washington D.C. in the summer of 1963. He may have said “we are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today” 62 years ago, but his emphasis on the “urgency of now” rings truer than ever:
This is how far you have to scroll on the NYTimes homepage to get any coverage of what's going on day-to-day in an occupied American city where schools are closing because the government is checking the papers of all brown or Asian people then brutalizing, imprisoning or killing them.
During the 2020 protests ignited by George Floyd’s death,I wrote:
Yes, I live in a blue city chock full of Marxists and dirty Hippies. Few cities are “bluer” than Seattle. We have a weed shop on every corner. We have public statues of Jimi Hendrix and V.I. Lenin. We have a progressive, openly gay female mayor. We have a female African American police chief. We have a high-profile female city council member who is a Socialist Alternative. As Merlin once foretold-a dream for some…a nightmare for others:
Oh, dear. Let’s take a peek at the terrorist-fueled burning and pillaging that has been raging in Seattle’s Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone for the past week (sensitive viewers be warned):
The humanity. Not quite as harrowing as a Burning Man festival…but in the ballpark.
My insufferable facetiousness aside, there is in fact a “revolution” happening in Seattle right now; and on streets all over America. “Revolution” doesn’t always equate “burning and pillaging”. Granted, some of that did occur when the protests started two weeks ago.
There’s something happening here What it is ain’t exactly clear There’s a man with a gun over there Telling me I got to beware I think it’s time we stop, children, what’s that sound Everybody look what’s going down
— The Buffalo Springfield, “For What It’s Worth”
But there is something happening here; something percolating worldwide that goes deeper than that initial visceral expression of outrage over the injustice of George Floyd’s senseless death; it feels like change may be in the offing. It will still take some…nudging. And I fear some feathers may get ruffled.
It isn’t nice to block the doorway, It isn’t nice to go to jail, There are nicer ways to do it But the nice ways always fail.
— Malvina Reynolds, “It Isn’t Nice”
*sigh* I was such a silly Polyanna. Digby posted this a couple days ago:
In case you were wondering what MAGA is saying about Minnesota:
MAGA influencer Steve Bannon suggested that President Donald Trump should invoke the Insurrection Act in Minnesota because “they hate white people” in the state.
After Trump threatened to use the law to send troops to Minnesota, Bannon opened his Thursday War Room show with a full-throated endorsement of the idea.
“We demand mass deportations!” Bannon exclaimed. “Not the onesies, twosies you’re seen in Minnesota. You haven’t seen anything yet. We’re the biggest advocate of invoking the Insurrection Act and going in and cleaning out the mess.”
“And what you see in Minnesota is an act of — they hate America, they hate American citizens, dare I say they hate white people?” he continued. “We have said for a long time, this is where the rubber meets the road, this is where the fight’s going to be. Bring it.”
“And that scum in the streets, bring it. Let’s invoke the Insurrection Act and let’s do it today. Let’s get up there and clean out that mess.”
Yeah, Minnesota hates white people. Can he hear himself? Minnesota? Has he seen who is protesting there?
Minnesota has a predominantly White population around 75-78%, Black around 7%, Asian around 5%, Hispanic/Latino around 6-7%, and Two or More Races around 4-5%.
It’s so idiotic I don’t know what to say.
Bannon and his ilk are promoting a race war which is pretty much where we’ve been headed since Trump came down that escalator 10 years ago.
Plus ca change…
And now there’s this:
I took that screenshot directly from the official government National Parks website today. Do you notice anything…missing this year? Here’s another clue for you all:
National park goers will not get free admission on Martin Luther King Jr. Day – a change from years past.
When the National Park Service announced free-entrance days for 2026, both Martin Luther King Jr. Day and Juneteenth were left off the list. They were replaced by other days, including Flag Day on June 14, which is also President Trump’s birthday.
The shift to remove the days tied to Black history was condemned by Derrick Johnson, the president and CEO of NAACP.
“Removing MLK Day and Juneteenth from the national parks calendar is more than petty politics — it’s an attack on the truth of this nation’s history,” Johnson said in a statement.
The National Park Service started free entry days in 2009. The selection and number of days have varied, but Martin Luther King Jr. Day has been on the list ever since 2011.
To Omar Montgomery, the president of the NAACP Rocky Mountain state conference for Colorado, Montana and Wyoming, the day’s removal felt like an effort by the Trump Administration to undermine and erase the contributions of Black people in the United States.
“If the federal government is sending the message that the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is a day that we don’t have special accommodations for people to get into national parks for free,” he said, “then what you’re saying is, this day is also not important for our schools to be able to talk about the holiday.”
NAACP said the removal of free entry days followed other actions by the Trump Administration to suppress Black history. According to reporting by The Washington Post, National Park Service officials last year ordered the removal of interpretive materials related to slavery.
The National Park Service did not respond to a request for comment on this story. The changes to free entrance days coincided with other policy shifts, including special fees for international visitors.
Somebody’s white slip is showing.
The fierce urgency of now. In honor of Martin Luther King Day, I’ve combed my review archives and curated 10 films that reflect on race relations in America; some that look back at where we’ve been, some that give us a reality check on where we’re at now and maybe even one or two that offer hope for the future. We still may not have quite reached that “promised land” of colorblind equality, but each of us doing whatever we can in our own small way to help keep Dr. King’s legacy alive will surely help light the way-especially in these dark times.
BlackKkKlansman (2018)– So what do you get if you cross Cyrano de Bergerac with Blazing Saddles? You might get Spike Lee’s BlackKkKlansman. That is not to say that Lee’s film is a knee-slapping comedy; far from it. Lee takes the true story of Ron Stallworth (John David Washington), an African-American undercover cop who managed to infiltrate the KKK in Colorado in the early 70s and runs with it, in his inimitable fashion.
I think this is Lee’s most affecting and hard-hitting film since Do the Right Thing (1989). The screenplay (adapted by Charlie Wachtel, David Rabinowitz, Kevin Willmott and Lee from Stallworth’s eponymous memoir) is equal parts biopic, docudrama, police procedural and social commentary, finding a nice balance of drama, humor and suspense. (Full review)
The Black Power Mixtape (2011)–Historically, the Black Power movement of the mid-60s to mid-70s has been somewhat misrepresented, with a tendency to spotlight its more sensationalist elements. The time is ripe to re-examine the movement, which despite its flaws, represents one of the last truly progressive grass roots political awakenings we’ve had in this country (if you’re expecting bandolier-wearing, pistol-waving interviewees spouting fiery Marxist-tinged rhetoric-dispense with that hoary stereotype now).
Director Goran Olsson was given access to a trove of vintage yet pristine 16mm footage that had been tucked away for years in the basement of Swedish Television; representing a decade of candid interviews with movement leaders, as well as meticulous documentation of Black Panther Party activities. Olsson presents the clips in a historically chronological timeline, with minimal commentary. While not perfect, it is an essential document, and one of the more eye-opening films I have seen on this subject. (Full review)
The Boys of Baraka (2005) – Co-directors Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady deliver a fresh take on a well-worn cause celebre: the sad, shameful state of America’s inner-city school system. Eschewing the usual hand-wringing about the underfunded, over-crowded, glorified daycare centers that many of these institutions have become for poor, disenfranchised urban youth, the filmmakers chose to showcase one program that strove to make a real difference.
The story follows a group of 12-year-old boys from Baltimore who attended a boarding school in Kenya, staffed by American teachers and social workers. In addition to more personalized tutoring, there was emphasis on conflict resolution through communication, tempered by a “tough love” approach. The events that unfold from this bold social experiment (filmed over a three year period) are alternately inspiring and heartbreaking. (Full review)
The Force (2017) – Peter Nicks’ documentary examines the rocky relationship between Oakland’s police department and its communities of color. The force has been under federal oversight since 2002, due to myriad misconduct cases. Nicks utilizes the same cinema verite techniques that made his film The Waiting Room so compelling. It’s like a real-life Joseph Wambaugh novel (The Choirboys comes to mind). The film offers no easy answers-but delivers an intimate, insightful glimpse at both sides. (Full review)
The Girls in the Band (2011)– Contextual to a curiously overlooked component within the annals of American jazz music, it’s tempting to extrapolate on Dr. King’s dream. Wouldn’t it be great to live in a nation where one is not only primarily judged by content of character, but can also be judged on the merits of creativity, or the pure aesthetics of artistic expression, as opposed to being judged solely by the color of one’s skin…or perhaps gender? At the end of the day, what is a “black”, or a “female” jazz musician? Why is it that a Dave Brubeck is never referred to as a “white” or “male” jazz musician?
In her film, director Judy Chaikin chronicles the largely unsung contributions that female jazz musicians (a large portion of them African-American) have made (and continue to make) to this highly influential American art form. Utilizing rare archival footage and interviews with veteran and contemporary players, Chaikin has assembled an absorbing, poignant, and celebratory piece. (Full review)
I Am Not Your Negro (2016)– The late writer and social observer James Baldwin once said that “Whatever white people do not know about Negroes reveals, precisely and inexorably, what they do not know about themselves.” Sadly, thanks to the emboldening of certain elements within American society that have been drawn from the shadows by the openly racist rhetoric that spouted from the Former Occupant of the White House, truer words have never been spoken.
Indeed, anyone who watches Raoul Peck’s documentary will recognize not only the beauty of Baldwin’s prose, but the prescience of such observations. Both are on display in Peck’s timely treatise on race relations in America, in which he mixes archival news footage, movie clips, and excerpts from Baldwin’s TV appearances with narration by an uncharacteristically subdued Samuel L. Jackson, reading excerpts from Baldwin’s unfinished book, Remember This House. An excellent and enlightening film. (Full review)
In the Heat of the Night(1967)– “They call me Mister Tibbs!” In this classic (which won 1967’s Best Picture Oscar) the late Sidney Poitier plays a cosmopolitan police detective from Philly who gets waylaid in a torpid Mississippi backwater, where he is reluctantly recruited into helping the bigoted sheriff (Rod Steiger) solve a local murder. Poitier nails his performance; you can feel Virgil Tibb’s pain as he tries to maintain his professional cool amidst a brace of surly rednecks, who throw up roadblocks at every turn.
While Steiger is outstanding as well, I find it ironic that he won “Best Actor in a leading role”, when Poitier was ostensibly the star of the film (it seems Hollywood didn’t get the film’s message). Sterling Silliphant’s brilliant screenplay (another Oscar) works as a crime thriller and a “fish out of water” story. Director Norman Jewison was nominated but didn’t score a win. Future director Hal Ashby won for Best Editing. Quincy Jones composed the soundtrack, and Ray Charles sings the sultry theme. (Full review)
The Landlord (1970)– Hal Ashby only directed a relative handful of films, but most, especially his 70’s output, were built to last (Harold and Maude, The Last Detail, Bound for Glory, Shampoo, Being There).
In The Landlord, Beau Bridges plays a trustafarian with “liberal views” that his conservative parents find troubling…especially after he buys a run-down inner-city tenement, with intentions to renovate. His subsequent involvement with the various black tenants is played sometimes for laughs, other times for intense drama, but always for real. The social satire and observations about race relations are dead-on, but never preachy or condescending.
Top-notch ensemble work, featuring a young Lou Gossett (with hair!) giving a memorable turn. The lovely Susan Anspach is hilarious as Bridge’s perpetually stoned and bemused sister. A scene featuring Pearl Bailey and Lee Grant getting drunk and bonding over a bottle of “sparkling” wine is a minor classic all on its own. Moses Gunn’s sharp screenplay was adapted from Kristin Hunter’s novel. They don’t make ‘em like this anymore-honest, bold, uncompromising, socially and politically meaningful, yet also entertaining. (Full review)
Let the Fire Burn(2013)– While obscured in public memory by the (relatively) more “recent” 1993 Branch Davidian siege in Waco, the eerily similar demise of the Philadelphia-based MOVE organization 8 years earlier was no less tragic on a human level, nor any less disconcerting in its ominous sociopolitical implications.
In this compelling documentary, director Jason Osder has parsed a trove of archival “live-at-the-scene” TV reports, deposition videos, law enforcement surveillance footage, and other sundry “found” footage (much of it previously unseen by the general public) and created a tight narrative that plays like an edge-of-your-seat political thriller.
Let the Fire Burn is not only an essential document of an American tragedy, but a cautionary tale and vital reminder of how far we have yet to go to completely purge the vestiges of institutional racism in this country. (Full review)
The Trials of Muhammad Ali (2013)– There have been a number of films documenting and dramatizing the extraordinary life of Muhammad Ali, but they all share a curious anomaly. Most have tended to gloss over Ali’s politically volatile “exile years” (1967-1970), during which the American sports icon was officially stripped of his heavyweight crown and essentially “banned” from professional boxing after his very public refusal to be inducted into the Army on the grounds of conscientious objection to the Vietnam War.
Director Bill Siegel (The Weather Underground) fills in those blanks in his documentary. As you watch the film, you begin to understand how Ali the sports icon transmogrified into an influential sociopolitical figure, even if he didn’t set out to become the latter. It was more an accident of history; Ali’s affiliation with the Nation of Islam and stance against the Vietnam War put him at the confluence of both the burgeoning Black Power and anti-war movements. How it all transpired makes an absorbing watch. (Full review)
All occupations resemble one another in some way, and it is striking to read descriptions and accounts of the occupation of Boston in light of events in Minnesota. “Having to stomach a standing army in their midst, observe the redcoats daily, pass by troops stationed on Boston Neck who occupied a guardhouse on land illegally taken it was said from the town, and having to receive challenges by sentries on the streets, their own streets, affronted a people accustomed to personal liberty, fired their tempers, and gnawed away at their honor,” writes the historian Robert Middlekauff in “The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763 to 1789.”
“Harrison Gray, a prominent merchant and a member of the council, told soldiers who challenged him one evening that he was not obligated to respond,” writes Richard Archer of the same period in “As if an Enemy’s Country: The British Occupation of Boston and the Origins of Revolution.” “They retaliated by thrusting their bayonets toward his chest and detained him for half an hour.”
Consider the language of occupation authorities as well. Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff and an architect of the administration’s immigration policies, has called protesters violent agitators and accused Minnesota state officials of fomenting an “insurgency” against the federal government. In the same way, the British general who oversaw the Boston occupation, Thomas Gage, described Bostonians as “mutinous” — “desperadoes” who were guilty of “sedition.”
It is also hard not to hear the echo of the Boston Massacre in the killing of Good.
Bouie’s historical allusions are spot on and you can’t help but think about the astonishing fact that Trump is not only acting like a tyrannical imperialist monarch by putting troops in the streets to subdue the population, he actually plans to hold a UFC cage match on the White House lawn to celebrate the country’s 250th anniversary. He’s beyond a British king — he thinks he’s a Roman emperor.
The Minneapolis Star Tribune compiled a chilling recap of multiple incidents showing ICE agents escalating aggression toward innocent bystanders including detainments, threats of violence, and physical abuse.
I’ve been wondering what the numbers show about the viral ICE videos that show their police state tactics. Peter Hamby took a look at it:
At this point, it seems rather obvious that viral videos are inflicting enormous damage on ICE’s standing with the public. Americans are bearing witness—almost in real time—to their behavior and the human anguish on the other end. Most political stories don’t come with visceral, real-world images that bring them to life for Americans who don’t closely follow the news; meanwhile, ICE’s enforcement actions are constantly playing and replaying on the small screen in everyone’s pocket.
But it’s not just Minnesotans documenting this. Everyday citizens all over the country are racking up hundreds of millions of views with on-the-ground videos, and seem increasingly willing to film ICE agents on job sites, at traffic stops, and even on their doorsteps—even while being threatened at gunpoint. It’s a scrappy, diffuse content campaign against the Trump media machine, which likes to turn ICE arrests into highly produced hype videos that look as if they were produced by an SEC football program.
Indeed, in light of the polling, it seems possible the White House might even be hurting their cause by endlessly promoting ICE. After all, the data suggests that the more Americans see, the less they like. Progressive content creators I spoke to this week reported a surge in views on their posts, and at Crooked Media, home to Pod Save America, YouTube content on ICE overperformed their typical engagement after the Minnesota shooting, staffers told me. At MeidasTouch, the progressive media outfit, co-founder Ben Meiselas also said that views on ICE-related content are surging, thanks in part to a partnership they launched with Status Coup, an independent reporting outlet that’s been livestreaming protests on the ground in Minneapolis.
Magnitude Media, a Democratic media-tracking firm, also found that social media posts on left-leaning pages that mentioned the Minnesota shooting overperformed their usual engagement by 72 percent, dramatically outpacing content on right-leaning pages, which jumped by only 5 percent relative to usual performance. The right caught up in views over the weekend after Ross’s cellphone footage of the encounter—which, in the eyes of ICE supporters, validated his decision to shoot—was leaked to a reporter. But overall, the initial footage of Good’s death had a larger impact, with an estimated 230 million views compared to 170 million for the second angle, according to Magnitude.
I think these videos are making it into the mainstream even if people aren’t on social media. Needless to say, they aren’t reaching those who are exclusive Fox viewers or cult members who post stupid memes on Truth Social all day. But there are plenty of people who are only peripherally aware of politics and these vids are being passed around at work, on email and finding their way onto local news. They are breaking through and that’s going to be very important as we confront what Miller and his henchmen are trying to do.
Imitando la vestimenta de un oficial de las SS, el jefe de la Guardia Fronteriza racista de Trump, Gregory Bovino, apareció hoy rodeado de esbirros en las protestas de Minneapolis, ordenando más represión.
Please explain why these agents attacked this person without giving any verbal warning whatsoever, or how any of this relates to immigration enforcement.pic.twitter.com/7xUEZE8l60
And this is what’s happening locally. They are scenes taking place all over America.
Buttigieg: I don’t know how you can have ever heard the slightest bit of scripture and not wonder about the judgement that comes for anyone who is involved in treating people like that pic.twitter.com/yX2Px4yjhr
It’s a lie and the only people who see this country the way Miller does are brainwashed cultists. There are a lot of them but they aren’t a majority and the rest of us think this stuff is insane.
I highly recommend signing up for Philip Bump’s newsletter. It’s interesting and unique because he’s not only a good essayist, he’s also a numbers guy with a flair for making charts. (The newsletter is called “How To Read This Chart”) It comes out on the weekend and is very comprehensive. Bump is obviously one of those super prolific journalists I can only envy.
Anyway, here is one excerpt from today’s newsletter that I found most interesting because I haven’t seen very much discussion of this:
The U.S. population is in decline
Speaking of grim analysis, the Congressional Budget Office reported earlier this month that the country’s population is likely to start shrinking by 2030 without immigration. Luckily for us, we’re doing everything we can to encourage immigrants to come to this country. Right? I haven’t checked the news for about 13 months, so let me know if something’s changed.
Sometimes people suggest that population decreases are not a big deal. Those people are wrong, for a lot of reasons. Google it.
This possibility reflects how two important patterns are intertwined — an interlacing that’s important for reasons beyond just the raw population numbers.
Consider how state-level population has changed over the past 15 years. A lot of growth in the West and Southwest, stagnation in the Midwest and Northeast.
Now I know some of you are going to be frustrated that the vertical axes here are not labeled. Well, it doesn’t really matter for our purposes. Just know that up-and-to-the-right means more population growth. If you want to email me about it to complain anyway, you can reach me at i.am.obsessive.about.axes@nowhere.bananas.
The reason it doesn’t matter is because I’m going to use the same axes to show the difference in growth between the native-born (non-immigrant) and foreign-born (immigrant) populations over that same period.
See how in nearly every state the rate of immigrant population growth is higher than the rate of growth among native-born Americans? In some cases, states have only grown because they’ve welcomed immigrants — a preview of the challenge that is looming for the whole country.
That challenge derives from the changing demographics of the population (and particularly the native-born population). I talk about the baby boom a lot, in part because I wrote a whole goldarn book about it.
But the combination of the baby boom getting older (its oldest member turned 80 on Jan. 1 of this year) and the advent of the coronavirus pandemic means that a number of states have seen negative natural population change — that is, more deaths than births — since 2000.
Fifteen states had more deaths than births in 2024 alone.
While I was still at The Washington Post, I wrote about how Trump’s attack on immigration (I read the news just now) comes at a historically bad time demographically. If for no other reason than that the increasingly large elderly population needs caregivers, the ratio here matters.
Oh well!
I’m pretty sure that we’re not yet in a place where robots can pick our strawberries, garden, raise our kids, cook our food or watch over our elderly. And there just aren’t enough native born Americans to do that work. It’s yet another sign of a society committing suicide for no earthly reason.
James Fallows is a former speechwriter (and acclaimed author and journalist, obviously) who knows a powerful turn of phrase when he hears one. So he did some of our leaders a solid by pointing out some of the useful and meaningful rhetoric that we’ve seen from a handful of our leaders even as most of them have completely abdicated their duty to say or do anything to resist the encroaching tyranny.
I urge you to click over and read them all but here’s a sampling of the first five he mentions:
The purpose of this post is to note and support people who are using platforms bigger than most of us have, to speak more bravely and bluntly than many others with their privilege dare.
It’s an unscientific and only partial list, ordered chronologically. It starts at the beginning of Trump II, and so leaves out the likes of Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, who took brave stands during the January 6 investigative hearings. Many of these entries will link to reports I did in real time. Here we go:
1) Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde, Jan. 21, 2025.
What she said: That a new president should show mercy to those who were afraid, specifically because of the enmity he had stirred up and the policies he stood for. She named people who pick crops in the field; people “who wash the dishes after we eat in restaurants and work the night shift in hospitals.” People who make the country go, and are afraid.
Why it mattered: She was the first. She said it on live TV. She said it directly, and to his face—a man who is physically well over twice her size, and had a million times more power to wreak vengeance upon her in our mortal world.
She set an example. Let us remember her.
2) Justin Trudeau, Feb. 1, 2025.
What he said: That Canada would not knuckle under to the wave of sweeping tariffs that Donald Trump had just announced, against America’s closest neighbors and largest trading partners (Canada and Mexico).
Why it mattered: Trudeau kicked off what has become a theme of the past year: National pride and dignity among nations that for generations had considered themselves close US allies, now united by standing up to the US.
Who had imagined that the force that would make the European Union more unified than ever, that would give NATO new resolve, was fear of the United States? Donald Trump’s predecessors had worked to build bonds among our allies. Trump has united other countries—against their former friend.
It was Trudeau who, knowing he was about to leave office, first and most clearly made the case for (reluctantly) anti-US-based national pride.
“I want to speak directly to Americans, our closest friends and neighbours.
“This is a choice [the punitive tariffs] that yes, will harm Canadians. But beyond that, it will have real consequences for you, the American people.
And then:
We have our own identity, our own history and our own values. Canadians are welcoming, open, and ambitious. We prefer to solve our disputes with diplomacy, but we’re ready to fight when necessary.
Jeesh.
3) Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Feb. 28, 2025.
What he said: “I’m not playing cards, Mr. President. I’m very serious.”
Why it mattered. Zelenskyy was answering Trump’s angry and soulless “you don’t have any cards!” dismissal of Ukraine and its cause. Zelenskyy was establishing: This is not just one of your deals. Or a game.
4) Mark Carney, March 9, 2025.
What he said: “I know these are dark days. Dark days brought on by a country we can no longer trust.”
Why it mattered: Carney—former head of the Bank of England and Bank of Canada, educated in the US and goalie on the Harvard hockey team, elected Canadian prime minister on a surge of anti-Trump sentiment—expressed the heartbroken realism of a neighbor that had to declare its independence from a once-loved but now abusive partner.
“We’re getting over the shock, but let us never forget the lessons: we have to look after ourselves and we have to look out for each other. We need to pull together in the tough days ahead.”
The “we” in the last sentence referred to Canadians, not Canada and the US.
5) Alan Garber, April 14, 2025.
What he said: Go to hell. This, from the previously mild-mannered and compromise-minded president of Harvard.
Why it mattered: The nation’s oldest, richest, and most influential university refusing to bow to Trump/MAGA demands. And thus setting an example and providing protection for other schools.
The others he quotes are Harvey Wilkinson, Gavin Newsom, JB Pritzker, Lisa Cook, Pope Leo, Jack Smith, Mark Kelly, Jacob Frey, Jerome Powell, Tim Walz.
It’s good to see these quotes all in one place. It restores your faith a little bit.
There has been a recent uptick of Republicans using the rationale that it’s not Trump making unwise decisions — it’s that he’s received “bad advice” or is not actually serious about some of his most high-profile policy proposals.
Given the solid grip he’s had on the party for the past decade, direct criticism of Trump is a third rail of modern Republican politics, which has been on full display during his second term. Over the past year, Trump has proposed initiatives that have seemingly been at odds with conservatives and his own MAGA base, leaving them to blame external forces for him steering off course.
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., has said Trump has gotten “bad advice” on issues ranging from a proposed U.S. takeover of Greenland; repeated attacks on Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell; criticisms of Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, on approving judicial nominees; and the pardon of Jan. 6 rioters.
“The president has been given bad advice, and whoever gave him bad advice should probably not be in that role,” Tillis told NBC News last week of Trump’s Greenland pronouncements.
Earlier this year, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., directly blamed Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro for the plan to implement across-the-board tariffs. “Yeah, it’s not the president,” Paul said in April. “I mean, Navarro is a protectionist. He thinks that tariffs are good and that trade is bad, and so he’s wrong on the issues.”
Over the summer, Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, told NBC News that he thought the president shouldn’t have named Powell as Fed chair in 2018. But, he added, it wasn’t Trump’s fault.“Sometimes you make bad decisions and are given bad advice,” Moreno said. “And President Trump was obviously given bad advice by somebody he trusted.”
And as Trump has recently embraced some economic policy proposals that would usually come from progressives, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said he thinks Trump is being steered in the wrong direction. “And so, you know, he may be getting advice on some of those issues, like, for example, the 10% cap on credit cards,” Thune said yesterday. “Don’t know where that came from. I don’t know. I don’t know the answer.”
Lol. Bless their hearts.
They’re not wrong, actually. He is receiving terrible advice from the craven opportunists around him who have sucked up so successfully that the addled fool believes they have his best interest at heart. All he cares about now is building his legacy which he apparently thinks will be on the level of Alexander the Great. (More like Nero…) They know that if he can get gold trinkets, build buildings, throw his name on everything including foreign countries, and they flatter him like a god and they can pretty much convince him to do anything. That’s not to say that he isn’t actually for all that. He likes most of it and as for the rest he doesn’t care. But his focus is solely on himself and he’s literally convinced that he can do no wrong.
It’s a good thing that the Republicans are starting to do this because it’s their lily-livered way of finally trying to separate themselves from the president’s policies. It’s just possible they may even exert a tiny bit of their substantial power to stop him from completely blowing up the Atlantic alliance. Maybe. They get no kudos because these are very powerful people who could have put a stop to a lot of this a long time ago ( in fact, they could have prevented him from ever running again after January 6th) but better late than never.
