Author Archives: shiningseausa

Words to Survive By

The following are excerpts from recent speeches by Governor Jay Pritzker of Illinois. He is a Democrat. He has balanced the budget (Republicans, take note of what used to be an article of faith for you). He is intelligent. He is articulate. He is terrified at what is happening to his country. And, yes, he is rich.

In reading them, recall that while the Democratic presidential ticket carried the state comfortably in 2024 (54.37% for Harris/Walz), there was a 6-point shift toward Republicans compared to Biden’s 2020 result.

For perspective, Governor Pritzker notes that “Our [Illinois] economy is over $1.1 trillion and growing – the fifth largest in the United States and the 18th largest in the world.” I had no idea.

State of the State and Budget Address — February 19, 2025 – end of the speech
[Watch on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DGTFzW4Oj4J/?igsh=MWd2Ym13aW5hN3BndA%3D%3D]

 “As some of you know, Skokie, Illinois once had one of the largest populations of Holocaust survivors anywhere in the world. In 1978, Nazis decided they wanted to march there.

The leaders of that march knew that the images of Swastika clad young men goose stepping down a peaceful suburban street would terrorize the local Jewish population – so many of whom had never recovered from their time in German concentration camps.

The prospect of that march sparked a legal fight that went all the way to the Supreme Court. It was a Jewish lawyer from the ACLU who argued the case for the Nazis – contending that even the most hateful of speech was protected under the first amendment.

As an American and as a Jew, I find it difficult to resolve my feelings around that Supreme Court case – but I am grateful that the prospect of Nazis marching in their streets spurred the survivors and other Skokie residents to act. They joined together to form the Holocaust Memorial Foundation and built the first Illinois Holocaust Museum in a storefront in 1981 – a small but important forerunner to the one I helped build thirty years later.

I do not invoke the specter of Nazis lightly. But I know the history intimately — and have spent more time than probably anyone in this room with people who survived the Holocaust. Here’s what I’ve learned – the root that tears apart your house’s foundation begins as a seed – a seed of distrust and hate and blame.

The seed that grew into a dictatorship in Europe a lifetime ago didn’t arrive overnight. It started with everyday Germans mad about inflation and looking for someone to blame.

I’m watching with a foreboding dread what is happening in our country right now. A president who watches a plane go down in the Potomac – and suggests — without facts or findings — that a diversity hire is responsible for the crash. Or the Missouri Attorney General who just sued Starbucks – arguing that consumers pay higher prices for their coffee because the baristas are too “female” and “nonwhite.” The authoritarian playbook is laid bare here: They point to a group of people who don’t look like you and tell you to blame them for your problems.

I just have one question: What comes next? After we’ve discriminated against, deported or disparaged all the immigrants and the gay and lesbian and transgender people, the developmentally disabled, the women and the minorities – once we’ve ostracized our neighbors and betrayed our friends – After that, when the problems we started with are still there staring us in the face – what comes next?

All the atrocities of human history lurk in the answer to that question. And if we don’t want to repeat history – then for God’s sake in this moment we better be strong enough to learn from it.

I swore the following oath on Abraham Lincoln’s bible: “I do solemnly swear that I will support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the state of Illinois, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of Governor …. according to the best of my ability.”

My oath is to the Constitution of our state and of our country. We don’t have kings in America – and I don’t intend to bend the knee to one. I am not speaking up in service to my ambitions — but in deference to my obligations.

If you think I’m overreacting and sounding the alarm too soon, consider this:

It took the Nazis one month, three weeks, two days, eight hours and 40 minutes to dismantle a constitutional republic. All I’m saying is when the five-alarm fire starts to burn, every good person better be ready to man a post with a bucket of water if you want to stop it from raging out of control.

Those Illinois Nazis did end up holding their march in 1978 – just not in Skokie. After all the blowback from the case, they decided to march in Chicago instead. Only twenty of them showed up. But 2000 people came to counter protest. The Chicago Tribune reported that day that the “rally sputtered to an unspectacular end after ten minutes.” It was Illinoisans who smothered those embers before they could burn into a flame.

Tyranny requires your fear and your silence and your compliance. Democracy requires your courage. So, gather your justice and humanity, Illinois, and do not let the “tragic spirit of despair” overcome us when our country needs us the most.

Thank you.”

****

Later, on April 28, 2025, Governor Pritzker spoke at a Democratic fundraiser in New Hampshire. The video can be seen here if that is your thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMndfvxVeRo Transcript excerpts follow [the transcript was AI-produced; I have fixed typos when possible]:

“… we need to knock off the rust of poll-tested language and decades of stale decorum. It’s obscured our better instincts. We have to abandon the culture of incrementalism that has led us to swallow the cruelty and the callousness with barely a cowardly croak.

It’s time to fight everywhere and all at once.

Let’s start with something that should be easy to say: it’s wrong to snatch a person off the street and ship them to a foreign gulag with no chance to defend themselves in a court of law. I want to be clear this is not an argument about immigration. This is an argument about the Constitution.

Remember Trump just last week arrested and deported three children under 8 years old, all US citizens, all of them, one of them a four-year old with Stage 4 cancer. Let that sink in. This country was founded on the idea of habeas corpus. It’s a fancy legal term that in plain words means no government has a right to arbitrarily take your freedom away from you. Preserving habeas corpus is not some fever dream of the left-wing echo chamber. It’s a fundamental concept of justice that people have fought and died for dating back to the Middle Ages. It was in the Magna Carta. It was considered by our nation’s founders to be so vital to our liberty that they wrote it right into the Constitution.

Thomas Jefferson called it the essential principle of government. Benjamin Franklin opined that those who would give up habeas corpus for temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security, and Alexander Hamilton wrote that the practice of arbitrary imprisonments has been in all the ages the favorite and most formidable instrument of tyranny.

Franklin, Jefferson, and Hamilton standing for the idea that the government doesn’t have the right to kidnap you without due process is arguably the most effective campaign slogan in history. What do we think that Colonel Stark was talking about if not this when he said, “live free or die?” Today it’s an immigrant with a tattoo. Tomorrow it’s a citizen whose Facebook post annoys Donald Trump.

There are plenty of people in this country who hold opinions that I find abhorrent, but my faith and our Constitution dictate that I fight for their freedoms as loudly as I defend my own. As a Ukrainian-American Jew who built a Holocaust museum, whose family immigrated here as refugees from the Russian pogroms, let me say this to Donald Trump: stop tearing down the Constitution in the name of my ancestors. Do not claim that your authoritarian power grabs are about combating antisemitism. When you destroy social justice, you are disparaging the very foundation of Judaism.

When the pendulum swings back, and it always does, you will have contributed to the climate of retribution that will inevitably follow, so let’s dispel another myth from the MAGA Republicans: that we Democrats believe that undocumented people who are convicted of violent crimes shouldn’t be allowed to stay in this country. We want public safety just as much as Republicans do and when we get back in control of Congress, and we will, and when we get the White House back, and we will, Democrats need to make it a priority to pass real sensible immigration reform. We need to secure our border. We need to keep and attract hardworking taxpaying law-abiding people and give them a path to citizenship. Immigration with all its struggles and its complexities is part of the secret sauce that makes American great always. Immigrants strengthen our communities, enrich our neighborhoods, renew our passion for America’s greatness, enliven our music and our culture, and enhance understanding of the world. The success of our economy depends upon immigrants. In fact, 46% of Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or the children of immigrants.

The return on investment for America’s 250-year commitment to immigration is incalculable, but because of Donald Trump’s xenophobia, we’ve seen foreign students already choosing not to attend our universities and being told to leave. Businesses from overseas are afraid to invest their money here and to bring their executives to our shores. Scientists are choosing to innovate in European laboratories instead of American ones already in just 100 days. If the best and the brightest around the world no longer flock to this shining city on a hill, then the US economy is likely to fail.

But failure is starting to look like that’s the point of all this, doesn’t it? We have a Secretary of Education who hates teachers and schools. We have a Secretary of Transportation who hates public transit. We have an Attorney General who hates the Constitution. We have a Secretary of State, the son of naturalized citizens and a family of refugees. on a crusade to expel both from our country. We have a head of the Department of Government Efficiency, an immigrant granted the privilege of living and working here, a man who has made hundreds of billions of dollars after the government rescued his business for him, who is looking to destroy the American middle class to fund tax cuts for himself.

And we have a president who claims to love America, but who hates our military so much that he calls them losers and suckers, and who can’t be bothered to delay his golf game to greet the bodies of four fallen U.S. soldiers. And we have a Grand Old Party  founded by one of our nation’s bravest presidents, Abraham Lincoln, who today would be a Democrat I might add, a Grand Old Party so afraid of the felon and the fraud that they put into the White House that they would sooner watch him destroy our country than lift a hand to save it.

Democrats, we may have to fix our messaging and our strategy, but our values are exactly where they ought to be, and we will never join so many Republicans in the special place in Hell reserved for quislings and cowards. It’s time for us to be done with optimism about their motives or their objectives, time to stop wondering if you can trust the nuclear codes to people who don’t know how to organize a group chat. It’s time to stop ignoring the hypocrisy wearing a big gold cross while announcing the defunding of children’s cancer research, and time to stop thinking we can reason or negotiate with a madman. Time to stop apologizing when we were not wrong. Time to stop surrendering when we need to fight.

Our small businesses don’t deserve to be bankrupted by unsustainable tariffs. Our retirees don’t deserve to be left destitute by a Social Security Administration decimated by Elon Musk. Our citizens don’t’ deserve to lose health care coverage because Republicans want to hand a tax cut to billionaires. Our federal workers don’t deserve to have a 19-year-old Doge bro called Big Balls destroy their careers. Autistic kids and adults who are loving contributors to our society don’t deserve to be stigmatized by a weird Nepo baby who once stashed a dead bear in the backset of his car, Our military service members don’t deserve to be told by a washed-up Fox TV commentator who drank too much and committed sexual assault before being appointed Secretary of Defense that they can’t serve their country simply because they’re Black or gay or a woman.

If it sounds like I’m becoming contemptuous of Donald Trump and the people he has elevated, it’s because I am. You should be too. They’re an afront to every value this country was founded upon.

But there’s a way out of this mess. I know because I’ve been to this movie before. When I was elected Governor in 2018, it was after four years of a very destructive Republican chief executive. He had run on the idea of shaking things up as Governor, and he promptly started defunding key government agencies, slashing state benefits, and refusing to pass a state budget. Illinois’s credit rating took a dive. Companies fled. State social service agencies closed, and government services that the poor and elderly and sick relied upon vanished.

Does that sound familiar? Illinoisans hated it, even the ones who voted for the guy. They hated it so much that four years later they elected me.

Here’s the lesson that I learned. When we emerge from this, and we will emerge from this. our democratic agenda must be bold and our ideas fearless. We must be willing to slay sacred cows and allow the courage of our actions to match the immediacy of our words. We must deliver on that agenda for working families and for the real people who truly make America great.

I understand the tendency to give in to despair right now, but despair is an indulgence that we cannot afford. In the times upon which history turns never before in my life have I called for mass protests, for mobilization, for disruption, but I am now.

These Republicans cannot know a moment of peace. They have to understand that we will fight their cruelty with every megaphone and microphone that we have. We must castigate them on the soap box and then punish them at the ballot box. They must feel in their bones that when we survive this shameful episode of American history with our democracy intact, because we have no alternative but to do just that, we will relegate their portraits to the museum halls reserved for tyrants and traitors. And when the courage of our civic leaders waivers, when they fail to stand up for our country in its moment of greatest need, then we should remind them that cowardice always comes at a cost in the world’s most successful republic.

No generation of Americans has escaped our true inheritance, the test that we are given that asks how hard we are willing to fight to keep our society free. It was selfish to think that ours would be the first but the fact that we are still here debating the question tells me our predecessors never failed this test in the past. Often in situations just as dire as the one in front of us cowardice can be contagious, but so too can courage. Courage born during times when complacency beckons like a siren call is the most important kind of all. Just as the hope that we hold on to in the darkness shines with its own special light these days, I cling to the courage and the hope demonstrated by Andy and Gavin and Lucy. Courage and hope that risks limbs and livelihoods to go to the most visible place possible to wave a sign or to post an upside-down flag and remind everyone that what we do and what we don’t do matters.

So, tonight, I’m telling you what I’m willing to do and that’s fight for our democracy, for our liberty, for the opportunity for all of our people to live lives that are meaningful and free. I see around me tonight a room full of people who are ready to do the same. So, I have one question for all of you Granite Staters. Are you ready for the fight for real? Granite Staters, are you ready for the fight? Good night, New Hampshire. God bless you, and God bless these United States.”

                                                            ####

Harvard, Tell the Clown Prince to F*ck Off

Late yesterday, reports stated that the Department of Homeland Security, headed by dog-killer Kristi Noem, acting on instructions from Donald Trump, purported to revoke Harvard University’s certification of admit foreign students who account for more than one-quarter of the enrolled student body.

The pretext for this latest violation of law, the Constitution, and common sense, and without evidence, was that Harvard was allowing:

anti-American, pro-terrorist” foreigners “to harass and physically assault individuals … and obstruct its once-venerable learning environment.” The secretary also accused the university of working with the Chinese Communist Party by hosting and training members of its paramilitary group.

 As reported by the Washington Post,

The decision means Harvard can no longer enroll foreign students, and existing international students at Harvard must transfer or lose their legal status, Noem said.

Noem gave the school 72 hours to turn over a list of records on international students to regain its certification before the upcoming academic year. DHS is seeking disciplinary records as well as electronic records, video and audio footage of international students who engaged in illegal activity, violence, threats to personnel or students, or protest activity on or off campus over the past five years.

Since neither Trump nor Noem appears to have any awareness of what goes on at our most important institutions of higher learning, we can perhaps see in Noem’s hostility the underlying resentment of what they neither know nor appreciate:

It is a privilege, not a right, for universities to enroll foreign students and benefit from their higher tuition payments to help pad their multibillion-dollar endowments. Harvard had plenty of opportunity to do the right thing. It refused. Let this serve as a warning to all universities and academic institutions across the country.

And there is this:

“Harvard has turned their once-great institution into a hotbed of anti-American, antisemitic, pro-terrorist agitators,” said White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson on Thursday. “They have repeatedly failed to take action to address the widespread problems negatively impacting American students, and now they must face the consequences of their actions.”

Evidence? Compliance with procedures? The Clown Prince cannot be bothered.

There you have it. The federal government now claims the right to decide what the “right thing” is for universities it regards as unaligned with its agenda.

This hubris, based on no evidence and not in compliance with legal procedures for decertification, is likely inspired by the worst-in-legal-history Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision in which it created the doctrine that the president can commit crimes in office within the scope of his official duties under Article II and that his motives may not be questioned, all without criminal accountability.

It goes without saying, though I’ll say it anyway, that Noem’s message has instilled uncertainty and fear among Harvard’s 6,793 international students. But it’s worse than that.

More than 1 million international students attend colleges in the United States every year, contributing nearly $44 billion to the national economy, according to NAFSA: Association of International Educators.

They play an outsize role in the economics of higher education, in that many international students pay full tuition …. and by creating a critical mass of students to support certain departments, such as computer science and engineering.

It’s time to call the question. Donald Trump and the sycophants that do his bidding believe they are above the law. The Supreme Court indicated as much and, given an inch, Trump always takes the proverbial mile.

So, Harvard, stand your ground. You’ve done it before in the face of gross government overreach, and you have the resources, including one of the world’s great law schools (disclosure: my law school) to mount a compelling defense against this grotesque overreach by the federal government.

It’s interesting that the political party that for decades decried the growing power of the federal government at the expense of the states now applauds anything that Clown Price Trump says he wants. Trump is a fraud, a cheat, a fool, and is intent on destroying not only the greatest American institutions but on removing the authority of the United States from the world arena, leaving it to the likes of Vladimir Putin. One of the many losses resulting from the Trump administration’s embrace of universal ignorance is the loss of opportunity to spread the message of democracy to the world through the voices of international students who learn about and experience it here.

It’s time to call the question and Harvard, your number has been called. Stand up to this petty wanna-be dictator and let’s get down to the core question whether our Constitution will be obeyed or not. If not, then the question will be put squarely before the people as to whether they want a democracy or not.

Finally, in case Trump is considering calling up the military to take control of Harvard and compel its submission, all military personnel should re-familiarize themselves with the principles of Nuremberg. You have no immunity for complying with unlawful orders. Think before you act.

Update: Harvard has sued to stop the administration’s unlawful overreach, citing violations of the First Amendment, the Due Process clause of the Constitution, and the Administration Procedures Act. Good. Meanwhile, Harvard, press your response in the media. Don’t give Trump the advantage of sole occupation of the public space. You have  the horsepower so use it!

If You Care About Democracy, You Must Read This

I copied the text below from a Facebook post. There is some confusion about who wrote it. I don’t care about that. The message is compelling. And if you care about whether it was Liz Cheney or the mysterious Dr Pru Pru (Facebook moniker), you should stop being distracted and focus on what is so critically important: the message. If you’re unsure about where Liz Cheney is coming from, you should read her book, Oath and Honor: A Memoir and a Warning, that I reviewed at https://shiningseausa.com/2024/02/06/man-unacquainted-with-honor-courage-and-character/ In any event I urge to read the following in its entirety.

“Dear Democratic Party,

I need more from you.

You keep sending emails begging for $15,

while we’re watching fascism consolidate power in real time.

This administration is not simply “a different ideology.”

It is a coordinated, authoritarian machine — with the Supreme Court, the House, the Senate, and the executive pen all under its control.

And you?

You’re still asking for decorum and donations. WTF.

That won’t save us.

I don’t want to hear another polite floor speech.

I want strategy.

I want fire.

I want action so bold it shifts the damn news cycle — not fits inside one.

Every time I see something from the DNC, it’s asking me for funds.

Surprise.

Those of us who donate don’t want to keep sending money just to watch you stand frozen as the Constitution goes up in flames — shaking your heads and saying,

“Well, there’s not much we can do. He has the majority.”

I call bullshit.

If you don’t know how to think outside the box…

If you don’t know how to strategize…

If you don’t know how to fight fire with fire…

what the hell are we giving you money for?

Some of us have two or three advanced degrees.

Some of us have military training.

Some of us know what coordinated resistance looks like — and this ain’t it.

Yes, the tours around the country? Nice.

The speeches? Nice.

The clever congressional clapbacks? Nice.

That was great for giving hope.

Now we need action.

You have to stop acting like this is a normal presidency that will just time out in four years.

We’re not even at Day 90, and look at the chaos.

Look at the disappearances.

Look at the erosion of the judiciary, the press, and our rights.

If you do not stop this, we will not make it 1,460 days.

So here’s what I need from you — right now:

  1. Form an independent, civilian-powered investigative coalition.

I’m talking experts. Veterans. Whistleblowers. Journalists. Watchdog orgs.

Deputize the resistance. Build a real-time archive of corruption, overreach, and executive abuse.

Make it public. Make it unshakable.

Let the people drag the rot into the light.

If you can’t hold formal hearings, hold public ones.

If Congress won’t act, let the country act.

This isn’t about optics — it’s about receipts.

Because at some point, these people will be held accountable.

And when that day comes, we’ll need every name, every signature, every illegal order, every act of silence—documented.

You’re not just preserving truth — you’re preparing evidence for prosecution.

The more they vanish people and weaponize data, the more we need truth in the sunlight.

  1. Join the International Criminal Court.

Yes, I said it. Call their bluff.

You cannot control what the other side does.

But you can control your own integrity.

So prove it. Prove that your party is still grounded in law, human rights, and ethical leadership.

Join.

If you’ve got nothing to hide — join.

Show the world who’s hiding bodies, bribes, and buried bank accounts.

Force the GOP to explain why they’d rather protect a war criminal than sign a treaty.

And while you’re at it, publicly invite ICC observers into U.S. borders.

Make this administration explain — on camera — why they’re terrified of international oversight.

  1. Fund state-level resistance infrastructure.

Don’t just send postcards. Send resources.

Channel DNC funds into rapid-response teams, legal defense coalitions, sanctuary networks, and digital security training.

If the federal government is hijacked, build power underneath it.

If the laws become tools of oppression, help people resist them legally, locally, and boldly.

This is not campaign season — this is an authoritarian purge.

Stop campaigning.

Act like this is the end of democracy, because it is.

We WILL REMEMBER the warriors come primaries.

Fighting this regime should be your marketing strategy.

And let’s be clear:

The reason the other side always seems three steps ahead is because they ARE.

They prepared for this.

They infiltrated school boards, courts, local legislatures, and police unions.

They built a machine while you wrote press releases.

We’re reacting — they’ve been executing a plan for years.

It’s time to shift from panic to blueprint.

You should already be working with strategists and military minds on PROJECT 2029 —

a coordinated, long-term plan to rebuild this country when the smoke clears.

You should be publicly laying out:

  • The laws and amendments you’ll pass to ensure this never happens again
  • The systems you’ll tear down and the safeguards you’ll enshrine
  • The plan to hold perpetrators of human atrocities accountable
  • The urgent commitment to immediately bring home those sold into slavery in El Salvador

You say you’re the party of the people?

Then show the people the plan.

  1. Use your platform to educate the public on rights and resistance tactics.

If they’re going to strip us of rights and lie about it — arm the people with truth.

Text campaigns. Mass trainings. Downloadable “Know Your Rights” kits. Multilingual legal guides. Encrypted phone trees.

Give people tools, not soundbites.

We don’t need more slogans.

We need survival manuals.

  1. Leverage international media and watchdogs.

Stop hoping U.S. cable news will wake up.

They’re too busy playing both sides of fascism.

Feed the real stories to BBC, Al Jazeera, The Guardian, Reuters, Der Spiegel — hell, leak them to anonymous dropboxes if you have to.

Make what’s happening in America a global scandal.

And stop relying on platforms that are actively suppressing truth.

Start leveraging Substack. Use Bluesky.

That’s where the resistance is migrating. That’s where censorship hasn’t caught up.

If the mainstream won’t carry the truth — outflank them.

Get creative. Go underground. Go global.

If our democracy is being dismantled in broad daylight, make sure the whole world sees it — and make sure we’re still able to say it.

  1. Create a digital safe haven for whistleblowers and defectors.

Not everyone inside this regime is loyal.

Some are scared. Some want out.

Build the channels.

Encrypted. Anonymous. Protected.

Make it easy for the cracks in the system to become gaping holes.

And while you’re at it?

Stop ostracizing MAGA defectors.

Everyone makes mistakes — even glaring, critical ones.

We are not the bullies.

We are not the ones filled with hate.

And it is not your job to shame people who finally saw the fire and chose to step out of it.

They will have to deal with that internal struggle — the guilt of putting a very dangerous and callous regime in power.

But they’re already outnumbered. Don’t push them back into the crowd.

We don’t need purity.

We need numbers.

We need people willing to burn their red hats and testify against the machine they helped build.

  1. Study the collapse—and the comeback.

You should be learning from South Korea and how they managed their brief rule under dictatorship.

They didn’t waste time chasing the one man with absolute immunity.

They went after the structure.

The aides. The enforcers. The loyalists. The architects.

They knocked out the foundation one pillar at a time —

until the “strongman” had no one left to stand on.

And his power crumbled beneath him.

You should be independently investigating every author of Project 2025,

every aide who defies court orders,

every communications director repeating lies,

every policy writer enabling cruelty,

every water boy who keeps this engine running.

You can’t stop a regime by asking the king to sit down.

You dismantle the throne he’s standing on — one coward at a time.

Stop being scared to fight dirty when the other side is fighting to erase the damn Constitution.

They are threatening to disappear AMERICANS.

A M E R I C A N S.

And your biggest move can’t be another strongly worded email.

We don’t want your urgently fundraising subject lines.

We want backbone.

We want action.

We want to know you’ll stand up before we’re all ordered to sit down — permanently.

We are watching.

And I don’t just mean your base.

I mean millions of us who see exactly what’s happening.

I’ve only got 6,000 followers — but the groups I’m in? The networks I touch? Over a quarter million.

Often when I speak, it echoes.

But when we ALL

speak, it ROARS with pressure that will cause change.

We need to be deafening.

You still have a chance to do something historic.

To be remembered for courage, not caution.

To go down as the party that didn’t just watch the fall — but fought the hell back with everything they had.

But the clock is ticking.

And the deportation buses are idling.”

Words

Call me a quibbler if you like. I don’t mind. I believe that how we use words is very important and can reveal hidden meanings of intention of which the writer may be unaware. I expect, however, that the Editorial Board of the New York Times would be particularly conscious of the meaning of their statements. Recent experience suggests I am wrong about that, and I suspect I know the reason.

Some background. The Times describes its editorial board as “a group of opinion journalists whose views are informed by expertise, research, debate and certain longstanding values. It is separate from the newsroom.” Fine as far as it goes although a bit vague on details.

On May 1 a digital version of the Editorial Board’s position titled There Is a Way Forward:  How to Defeat Trump’s Power Grab was published in the Times. On May 4, “A version” of the article appeared in print, Section SR, Page 2 of the New York edition with the headline: Fight Like Our Democracy Depends On It. Having not seen that version, I address here the digital version. The printed version at least has a title more accurately stating what the battle is really about.

Note first that the article is introduced by a probably-AI generated depiction of an American bald eagle, our national symbol, struggling to free itself from a green, goo-like substance adhering to its wings and claws. I read that image to mean that democracy is in serious trouble, an assertion that I and many others have made in multiple posts, and which I believe cannot rationally be denied.

I was intrigued to see the Times standing up for democracy this way. Then I read it.

The opening was very strong:

The first 100 days of President Trump’s second term have done more damage to American democracy than anything else since the demise of Reconstruction. Mr. Trump is attempting to create a presidency unconstrained by Congress or the courts, in which he and his appointees can override written law when they want to. It is precisely the autocratic approach that this nation’s founders sought to prevent when writing the Constitution.

The opening was followed by recognition that the Trump challenge is not ephemeral:

Mr. Trump has the potential to do far more harm in the remainder of his term. If he continues down this path and Congress and the courts fail to stop him, it could fundamentally alter the character of American government. Future presidents, seeking to either continue or undo his policies, will be tempted to pursue a similarly unbound approach, in which they use the powers of the federal government to silence critics and reward allies.

But wait. Let’s look more closely:

Mr. Trump has the potential to do far more harm in the remainder of his term. If he continues down this path and Congress and the courts fail to stop him, it could fundamentally alter the character of American government. Future presidents, seeking to either continue or undo his policies, will be tempted to pursue a similarly unbound approach, in which they use the powers of the federal government to silence critics and reward allies.

The piece continues with “It pains us to write these words” …. The patriotic response to today’s threat is to oppose Mr. Trump. But it is to do so soberly and strategically, not reflexively or performatively.”

The strong opening has thus been diluted with reference to the “potential” for future harms that will occur “if he continues down this path,” suggesting there is a reasonable chance Trump will suddenly transform into a person different than he has been his entire life. And the article makes clear that the writers don’t like having to criticize Trump. The solution they propose is implicitly critical of what many people have been doing and thinking in response to Trump’s unhinged blast through the federal government. The authors slip-slide into a description of a “coalition” of damn near everyone who isn’t a committed Trump cultist. A coalition of the willing so broad and encompassing that it will seem, because it is, a bridge too far.

I am encouraged in my cynicism about the position being advocated by what comes next:

 The building of this coalition should start with an acknowledgment that Mr. Trump is the legitimate president and many of his actions are legal. Some may even prove effective. He won the presidency fairly last year, by a narrow margin in the popular vote and a comfortable margin in the Electoral College. On several key issues, his views were closer to public opinion than those of Democrats. Since taking office, he has largely closed the southern border, and many of his immigration policies are both legal and popular. He has reoriented federal programs to focus less on race, which many voters support. He has pressured Western Europe to stop billing American taxpayers for its defense.

The reference to the southern border and other Trump policies is apparently based on a poll of 2,128 Americans crafted by and analyzed by the crafters for another article in the Times.

In the interest of fairness, I note this closing of the paragraph arguing that Trump has been doing what the American public wants:

Among these policies are many that we strongly oppose — such as pardoning Jan. 6 rioters, cozying up to Vladimir Putin of Russia and undermining Ukraine

But even that qualification comes with a qualification: “but that a president has the authority to enact. Elections have consequences.”

Then:

Mr. Trump nonetheless deserves criticism on these issues, and Congress members and grass-roots organizers should look for legal ways to thwart him.

Just criticism? Is the Times Editorial Board unaware that the Republican Party has majorities in both Houses of Congress and that the Congress thus constituted is incapable of judgment independent of whatever madness Trump wants, including an astonishing array of unqualified and incompetent cabinet and agency appointments?

The equivocation continues throughout the article. Under “Pillars of democracy,” the writers felt it necessary to point out that Presidents Biden and Obama had “tested these boundaries [separation of powers] and at times overstepped them.” While the Editorial Board strongly criticizes Trump/Vance about their attitude toward the judiciary, in my view there is no question that the approach used undermines the full impact of the Trump story. They note, for example, that Trump/Vance “seem to have defied clear [court] orders.”

Regarding Congress, the Board says, “Mr. Trump’s steamrolling of Congress involves more legal complexity, many scholars believe.” The obvious implication is that “many scholars dispute the view being stated. More equivocation subtly inserted at every turn. Another example:

Other attempts to assert power over previously independent parts of the executive branch seem more defensible, however. The executive branch reports to the president, after all, and parts of it have suffered from too little accountability in recent decades.

It is true, I admit, that the Editorial Board’s article contains much damning information about Trump’s conduct of the presidency. It could not be otherwise.

Yet, again and again, the subtle equivocation creeps in:

It remains possible that our concerns will look overwrought a year or two from now. Perhaps Mr. Trump’s shambolic approach to governance will undermine his ambitions. Perhaps federal courts will continue to constrain him and he will ultimately accept their judgments.

Sure, it’s “possible” that a lot of unexpected things may happen, but why in an article ostensibly designed to expose the President’s violations of the Constitution and his oath of office, to name just a few, are these constant “on the other hands” inserted?

Maybe I am just quibbling, but, as the Editorial Board notes near the end of its article:

our constitutional order depends to a significant degree on the good faith of a president. If a president acts in bad faith, it requires a sophisticated, multifaceted campaign to restrain him. Other parts of the government, along with civil society and corporate America, must think carefully and rigorously about what to do. That’s especially true when the most powerful alternative — Congress — is prostrate.

Yet, while noting that Trump’s political support seems to be waning, the Board warns us to avoid:

“exaggeration about what qualifies as a violation. Liberals who conflate conservative policies with unconstitutional policies risk sending conservatives back into Mr. Trump’s camp.”

In the end, the Board gets one thing right:

The past 100 days have wounded this country, and there is no guarantee that we will fully recover. But nobody should give up. American democracy retreated before, during the post-Reconstruction era, Jim Crow, the Red Scare, Watergate and other times. It recovered from those periods not because its survival was inevitable but because Americans — including many who disagreed with one another on other subjects — fought bravely and smartly for this country’s ideals. That is our duty today.

Having beat this dead horse, I point the Times Editorial Board and my readers to a video that nails it. The woman in the video understands how language usage matters as she states ways to avoid equivocation and ambiguity. You can see the video here: https://www.threads.com/@debbieelledgeofficial/post/DJb2YEIN-pg?xmt=AQF0BLloj6EmrkRVS8pzJFTxn8QHvGWYkz2cHHWwynWmrA

A New York State of Mind

Hopefully you’re familiar with that title of an anthem song about New York City that was written and made famous by Billy Joel. We achieved this euphoric condition last week with four glorious days there.

We took Amtrak as usual on Wednesday, arriving in plenty of time to get squared away in the Luxury Collection Hotel (formerly the Conrad), one of our favorites well-located on West 54th Street. The weather was perfect. We dined at PJ Clarke’s across the street from Lincoln Center, and walked there to see New York City Ballet perform Apollo, Ballo della Regina, Tschaikovsky Pas de Deux, and, finally, Chaconne. The dancing was, as always, perfectly performed. We weren’t thrilled by Apollo, but the ballerinas were exceptional. Another night to remember.

The next night we traveled out Broadway to Smoke, the post-pandemic remodeled version, where Cyrus Chestnut was performing. We’ve seen Cyrus many times, perhaps too many, but his playing still resonates, and his trio is always “on.” One odd but serendipitous thing was that we chose our seats from the online seat map that showed we would be seated immediately behind Cyrus and could thus follow his hands on the keyboard. But it turned out that the map was inaccurate, and we were going to be jammed in the back corner in an uncomfortably tight space.

As it happened a couple seated a few tables forward of the bandstand overheard our exchange with the maître d’. They told her that the couple who were to join them had come down with COVID and would not be present, so would we like to join them? [Finally, COVID fortuitously did something good for us.] We moved to their table and discovered two delightful New Yorkers who loved jazz as much as we do and have seen pretty much everyone we have. The man was a retired professor; his wife was a neuro-psychologist. They were most interesting and engaging companions for the evening.

The Cyrus Chestnut trio performed as expected and were applauded by a packed house of jazz enthusiasts.

The third night we traveled to the Winter Garden Theater that sits in the center of Times Square. Winter Garden dates to 1911 (remodeled in 1922) and while it is well-worn, the seats were surprisingly roomy. We were there to see Good Night, and Good Luck, starring George Clooney. We snagged our tickets early and avoided paying the current extremely high prices. In the event, it would have been worth almost any amount. Clooney’s acting was what you would expect, such that you tended to forget he was not Edward R. Murrow reincarnated.

The show tracked the movie very closely … except for the ending. I will not spoil it by revealing the ending here. Suffice to say, I have seen many plays over my long years and never was I stunned and moved by an ending like this one. Hopefully, you will see this play and experience it for yourself.

Incidentally, because of the way the play is staged, with normal action and dialogue on stage combined with screens of Joe McCarthy and others, it doesn’t much matter where you sit. You can see and hear just fine. Just be ready for the ending. I am still reeling.

The final night of our New York experience arrived with a challenging weather forecast but the details said it would clear by the time to line up (seats at Birdland are first come-first seated; there is always a line outside well before the doors open). We were meeting a New York friend (and my wife’s fellow hula dancer from the local dance group) who also loves the music and joins us for these shows when she is not traveling the world.

As our Lyft crept down West 44th Street in the usual stop-and-stop traffic, and we were 100 feet from the club, the clouds suddenly dropped their water (all of it) in an overwhelming deluge, zero to a hundred in one second. When we finally reached the club, the rain had intensified; our driver offered to pull over and let us stay in his car until the rain let up (tell me again about those rude New Yorkers). Seeing our friend being drenched in the rear of the line, we declined the offer, departed the car, and were promptly soaked. My wife approached the club people managing the line, and we were immediately admitted to the club. This led to everyone being admitted well before the official “doors” time (see prior parentheses).

The trio this night was led by Emmet Cohen at the piano, with Phillip Norris on bass, and Joe Farnsworth on drums. We had seen a different group under Cohen’s leadership on the first post-pandemic night of jazz at Birdland, so we didn’t know what to expect. We had thought Cohen was great that night, but part of the vibe was excitement that “jazz was back!”

There was no reason for concern. The band was “on” from the first note. And Joe Farnsworth put on a class in drum technique accentuated by his constant change of facial expressions as he and Cohen communicated in that mysterious way that jazz musicians have. Over my life of 150 years, I have had the pleasure of seeing many great jazz drummers, including the magical Eric Harland and Billy Kilson. Farnsworth left no room between him and the best. I told him so after the performance and he seemed genuinely delighted at the praise. I also spoke briefly with Norris who was open and welcoming to my approach.

One thing about Cohen and his ensemble – they seemed always to be having fun, and that vibe translated through the music to the audience. It was an extraordinary performance that left us exhilarated and spent when it was over. They played for almost an hour and a half, long by jazz group standards, and left nothing on the table. Halfway through, my wife leaned over and whispered to me, “this is an amazing show.” Indeed, it was.

Thus, ended our New York State of Mind for this trip, memorable in every way. We still talk about the play, something I will never forget. There is no place on earth like New York City. We miss it every day. I suspect that once you achieve that New York State of Mind, it never leaves you. I hope not.

The Problem of Pledging Allegiance to a President Over the Constitution

For those who don’t know ….

The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution reads, in pertinent part:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury … nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law….

The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution reads, in pertinent part:

…nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution reads, in pertinent part:

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution reads, in pertinent part:

No State shall … pass any ex post facto Law….

Pam Bondi (Attorney General) and Stephen Miller (White House Deputy Chief of Staff) maintain that since the gang to which Kilmar Abrego Garcia allegedly belonged to was declared a terrorist organization by President Trump, that since Mr. Garcia belonged to the gang back in 2019, he is now a terrorist and subject to immediate removal from the United States and return to his native land of El Salvador, at which point the United States is free to wash its hands of him and leave him to his fate at the hands of rival gangs in the CECOT Prison.

As Ms. Bondi, the US Attorney General robotically recited recently, “Mr. Garcia does not belong in this country.” Bondi and Miller must not have been paying attention during that part of constitutional law class. You can see where I’m going with this.

Even if it is absolutely true that Mr. Garcia is a bad guy, a gang member and all the rest of the allegations made against him by Bondi, Miller, and Trump, his kidnapping and removal from the United States after a federal judge ordered that he not to be removed cannot be justified because:

  • Garcia did not receive an indictment for a crime committed in the United States,
  • was not presented with the details of an alleged crimes,
  • received no Miranda warnings,
  • had no opportunity to retain and consult counsel and, therefore,
  • no opportunity to contest the “findings” on which the government purported to act in arresting and deporting him.

In short, whatever else Mr. Garcia may be, he is a “person”, and he received nothing resembling “due process of law” to which the Constitution entitles every “person.” He was secretly snatched from the street and forcibly removed from the country. Just like what the Nazis and other totalitarian regimes have done in the past. The faux anger displayed by AG Bondi and Stephen Miller in the White House video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pv4HjZmiueo] are no excuse for this outrageous behavior. By comparison, the student who killed two people and wounded six others at Florida State University will receive the full panoply of opportunities guaranteed by the law and the Constitution.

What is the main difference between Mr. Garcia and the Florida State shooter? You know it without my spelling it out. The Trump regime is a foul collection of racist idol worshippers committing daily crimes against humanity, among other offenses to our Constitution, laws, and culture. Performative yelling at a White House press event that Mr. Garcia is bad person is no excuse for depriving him of the rights every other person in this country is entitled to receive.

Trump’s followers had better realize that if the government can do this to Mr. Garcia, it can do it to anyone. And it is.

NBC News reported on Senator Van Hollen’s visit to Mr. Garcia in El Salvador this way:

Van Hollen traveled to El Salvador on Wednesday to push for Abrego Garcia’s release after the Trump administration did not demonstrate any efforts to “facilitate” his return, despite a Supreme Court ruling last week requiring just that.

The legal battle continued Thursday, when a federal appeals court rejected an effort by the administration to put the requirement on hold. In a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel said the administration was trying to assert “a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process.”

In a statement Thursday night, the White House called Van Hollen’s efforts in support of Abrego Garcia “disgusting” and said Trump will “continue to stand on the side of law-abiding Americans.”

In addition to its other offenses against the Constitution and laws of this country, the Trump administration has decided it’s perfectly acceptable to try and convict individuals in the press without even a semblance of due process. We insist that murderers get full due process, but the President of the United States is allowed to assert the guilt of individuals without any process whatever? Trump has obviously learned nothing from his multiple court defeats in defamation cases. Read any history book about totalitarian regimes, and you can see where this is headed. Americans better wake up and put a stop to this.

We Have Reached the End of the Line

OR: The Trump Noose Tightens on the National Neck

The Trump administration, laced through and through with unqualified and incompetent appointees to positions of great responsibility, mistakenly snatches a man (Kilmar Abrego Garcia) off the street and, in the face of a court order to stop, puts him on a plane for a hellhole prison in El Salvador. The court orders his return. Trump’s Department of “Justice” declines and appeals. The Supreme Court majority eventually votes unanimously to order the administration to “facilitate” the victim’s return. In doing so, however, the Court gratuitously and unnecessarily “advises” the District Court judge to act with due regard for the separation of powers and the President’s supreme authority over foreign affairs.

As was 100 percent predictable, the administration leaps upon that advice and says “no thanks, we’re not going to bring him back. Mr. Garcia, charged with no crime, can rot in El Salvador for all we care and there is nothing you can do about it because this decision is made under the President’s Article II power to control absolutely the foreign affairs of the country, just as the Court suggested.”

Recall that in a prior decision this same Supreme Court held that the President could conspire with the Department of Justice to commit crimes, including the crime of trying to overturn an election he clearly lost, and could not be held accountable for his criminal conduct in office. Further, in carrying out his “executive powers,” the President’s motives could not be questioned.

So, here we are. A man properly in the United States, charged with no crimes, is ripped from his family and employment, hustled onto a plane full of others similarly situated for the most part, and imprisoned in a foreign country. With the apparent approval of the highest court in the land.

Trump then invites the dictator of El Salvador to the White House where that dictator labels as “preposterous” the question of his returning his prisoner to the United States. In a statement that is typical of people who consider themselves unbound by law, the Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele told Trump: “To liberate 350 million people, you have to imprison some. That’s the way it works.”

The power of courts to hold the federal government in contempt of court and sanction it or its attorneys is far from clear. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11271 That is perhaps why the District Court judge, in whose face the Department of Justice has metaphorically spit, has thus far fumed and fussed over the DOJ’s recalcitrance but has not issued any form of mandatory punishment for its resistance to the court’s mandates. Likely the judge realizes that the Supreme Court, having recently pronounced the unprecedented and astonishing doctrine of presidential immunity for crimes committed in office, will not support mandatory sanctions against DOJ for its disobedience.

And we now hear the President of the United States and people who work for him remarking that the power to snatch people off the streets and imprison them in foreign countries permits the federal government to do this to American citizens as well as people like Mr. Garcia who were properly here under work permits but were not citizens. Many of us have seen the videos of armed men in blackened vans visiting people in their homes for what are ludicrously labeled by the men as “wellness checks.” And some people are literally being assaulted on the streets, arrested and hauled away with no formal charges, no due process, and no opportunity to get counsel. These behaviors are blatant violations of our criminal laws and the Constitution.

We have reached the point of no return. The President has made clear he will stand for no resistance to his wishes. It seems virtually certain therefore that we will soon experience a declaration of martial law and a presidential directive to imprison here or abroad, without trial or other due process, anyone the President or his compliant appointees selects for removal. Or maybe he won’t even bother with a declaration that he likely regards as superfluous.

If allowed to get away with this, the President will have completed his subordination of the Constitution and brought about his dictatorship over the United States. As insane as that future seems, there is little happening now that suggests it is an overblown scenario. Trump has repeatedly made clear that he regards the Constitution as authorizing him to “do whatever I want.” We are there now. He is doing whatever he wants.

It is beyond dispute that if he can with impunity deport and imprison Mr. Garcia, he can do it to anyone, including American citizens who cross him or are merely suspected of being “disloyal.” Anyone who has studied the history of dictators surely knows that is how the process works.

The question then becomes: who will stop him and how? Certainly not the Republican cowards in Congress who value retaining what they fancifully believe is their “power” over their oaths to support the Constitution. It was once believed that the senior military leadership would handle the problem, but Trump has replaced most of those who might have acted decisively to restrain him. The courts lack both the will and the mechanisms for holding the President to account.

Trump’s abuse of power is plain and open. He believes the law does not apply to him and that the Constitution grants him powers that the Founders would never have imagined. Who then will stop him? And when?

Where is the Moral Outrage at Nazis Running the Federal Government?

OR: Trump Administration is Guilty of Kidnapping, Unlawful Transport & Crimes Against Humanity

The Washington Post reported on Saturday, April 5, that: 1) the Department of Justice that has admitted it mistakenly deported Kilmar Abrego García to a prison in El Salvador, and (2) DOJ has argued to an appellate court that the U.S. government is helpless to secure his return. https://tinyurl.com/yzm27mjy

In effect, the U.S. Department of Justice, an element of the Executive Branch of what was, at least prior to Trump’s re-election, the most powerful and influential country in the world, says it has no means of compelling or negotiating for Mr. Garcia’s return. This, even though the United States is paying El Salvador about $6 million to hold the group of deportees of which Mr. Garcia is a member.

In effect, Attorney General Pam Bondi’s Justice Department is arguing that it (1) deported Mr. Garcia by mistake, (2) violated Mr. Garcia’s civil rights, (3) violated Mr. Garcia’s rights under multiple amendments to the U.S. Constitution, not least of which was due process of law, (4) essentially kidnapped Mr. Garcia and unlawfully transported him to a foreign country where it relinquished control of him to a foreign government over which the United States has zero influence, (5) that the Judicial Branch of the U.S. government effectively has no remedial authority as against a decision of the Executive Branch regarding a foreign national “removal decision.”

In short, the US government is saying “who cares?”

These astonishing arguments reveal a fundamental error that the Trump administration continues to make. It appears to believe that the Executive Branch of the U.S. government is the final word on legal decisions even where, as here, the Executive admits it make a mistake that, in effect, may destroy a man’s family and perhaps forfeit his life.

I cannot resolve the conflicting claims as to whether Mr. Garcia was a member of MS-13 that has now been declared a terrorist organization by the Trump administration. However, the admission by the administration that Mr. Garcia’s deportation to El Salvador was mistaken would seem, regardless of anything else, to compel the U.S. government to bend every effort to secure his return. AG Bondi says, “no, we may have erred in deporting him, but we owe him no duties now and are helpless to do anything to rectify our mistake. Let him rot in El Salvador.”

This is a perfect illustration of why we insist on due process in this country. That process, which may be slow and even tedious, helps assure that grotesque mistakes like the Garcia case do not occur. The Trump administration has shown time and again that it has no regard for constitutional protections, and that it will arrogantly disregard any damage it may do in it rush to prove how tough it is on “crime.”

Now, after the government disregarded direct orders from a District Court judge to stop the deportation of Mr. Garcia and to provide him with the due process of law to which every resident is entitled under the Constitution, the Supreme Court has finally, days late, awakened to the inescapable realization that it can’t paper over this outrage. But in doing so, the “moral majority” on the Court seems singularly unmoved by the potential human catastrophe that the incompetent fools running the Trump administration have created.

We have grown accustomed, though hardly accepting, of Justices Alito and Thomas (that one, who takes hugely expensive favors from sponsors with business in the Court without a whimper from the Chief Justice) taking severe umbrage at decisions they consider insufficiently respective of Christian values. Now, when the government has monumentally screwed up a deportation case, putting at risk of death by gang execution, among other risks, a father never accused of a crime here or in El Salvador, all we get are lectures about the proper procedure for bringing the issue before the Court and about the lower court being more respectful of the President’s authority over foreign affairs.

How exactly the Garcia case implicates the President’s foreign affairs powers has not been fully explained. We know the obvious: El Salvador is a sovereign country and to retrieve Mr. Garcia from its clutches may require some negotiating. But it shouldn’t be that hard a problem. The US is paying El Salvador a lot of money to house the people it has snatched off the streets and out of homes — the way a good Gestapo does — and shuttled out of the country as fast as possible without even a nod to due process. It shouldn’t take a negotiating genius, as Trump claims to be, to figure out a way to induce the El Salvadoran establishment to release at least one man that our government admits should never have been sent there in the first place.

Yet our Supreme Court, while nodding to the continued need for due process of law and all the rest seems most concerned with lecturing the District Court judge, the main judicial authority standing up for Mr. Garcia, about not overreaching into the President’s foreign affairs prerogatives.  Is this a hint to Trump to slow-walk the entire business in the hope that Mr. Garcia will be murdered in the hellhole prison in El Salvador thereby solving the US government’s embarrassing problem? Is it a signal to Attorney General Bondi that her abject indifference to Mr. Garcia’s welfare is just fine if the US government just goes through the motions of seeking Mr. Garcia’s safe return?

Compare what has transpired. The District Court judge, closest to the evidence of what occurred here, found that Mr. Garcia’s removal, when the government knew an order was imminent to stop his removal, was a “grievous error” and that the risk to Mr. Garcia “shocks the conscience.” While DOJ claims Mr. Garcia is a member of the MS-13 gang, the District Court judge found that the government had not proved that claim:

That silence is telling…. As Defendants acknowledge, they had no legal authority to arrest him, no justification to detain him, and no grounds to send him to El Salvador — let alone deliver him into one of the most dangerous prisons in the Western Hemisphere.

The judge’s ruling against the government was sustained by a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Virginia, not exactly a liberal bastion of judicial decision-making.

DOJ, at the behest of the morally vacuous Attorney General appointed by Trump, claimed that the order to return Mr. Garcia was, despite conceded errors in deporting him to the El Salvadoran hellhole prison, “indefensible” because, golly, damn, it “commands Defendants to do something they have no independent authority to do: Make El Salvador release Abrego Garcia, and send him to America.”

“If this precedent stands, other district courts could order the United States to successfully negotiate the return of other removed aliens anywhere in the world by close of business,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote. In simpler English, DOJ objects to being compelled to do its job because just imagine the horror of having to return “removed aliens” whose rights we have violated.

I haven’t read all the briefs, but reliable reports note that the “Government lawyers compared the administration’s power to bring Abrego Garcia back to a court ordering the administration to end Russia’s war in Ukraine or return Israeli hostages held by Hamas in Gaza.”

Arguments like that should have led the Supreme Court majority to, at a minimum, sanction government counsel for arguments lacking reason, precedent, and common sense. But no, the Court seemed more concerned with being sure no one stepped on the President’s authority in foreign affairs. No sense of moral outrage that the government conceded a terrible, potentially life-threatening and unconscionable error, then argued we should just ignore it and let the chips fall on Mr. Garcia who, after all, is, in the eyes of the Trump administration, a bad person, evil incarnate. The DOJ attitude recalled a segment from the Dragnet TV series of the 1950s. Detective Jack Webb captures a serial killer and asks him “what have you got against people?” The killer answers: “People? I got nothing against people. What do I care about people?”

The Americans arguing that the courts should butt out of this and leave Mr. Garcia to his fate apparently do not understand that if the government can do this to Mr. Garcia, it can do it to anyone. Indeed, there is talk of “removing” US citizens now.

In preparing this post for publication, I read that the government has balked at the timeline established by the District Court to explain what it’s going to do to comply with the court’s orders now reinforced by the Supreme Court. The judge, quite rightly, is having none of it. He should hold the government in contempt and, if necessary to get DOJ to comply, hold weekend hearings. This fiasco has gone on too long already and Mr. Garcia remains at risk.

New York Times Lines Up with Bezos

Yesterday was a great day in our country. Millions of Americans participated in peaceful protests all over the country, including cities in  Red States and even other countries. Millions. Hopefully, this signals the beginning of the early end of the Trump administration and the clowns he has appointed, with Republican Party complicity, to destroy the government and our international standing.

In reviewing the remarkably clever signs created by protesters around the country and marveling at the size of many of the crowds, I turned to the New York Times online, expecting to see the top headline and at least a photo from the huge turnout in New York City, despite bad weather. But, lo, what did my eyes behold but a photo of Donald Trump and, well, see for yourself:

If you skip the dog story and the “Analysis” whose title suggests everything is going to be ok, scroll down a screen, you see this:

A presidential seal and another photo of Trump dominate the page. In the lower left corner, you finally  reach the report about the nationwide protests over Trump’s attempt to destroy the federal government.

Do the editors of the New York Times now thing a story about dogs in the workplace and talking about women’s cleavage there is more important? This presentation reminded me of how CNN had promoted Trump in the run-up to the 2016 election, showing constant pictures of podiums while waiting for Trump to appear. This is a Washington Post type presentation in the post-Bezos-ownership era.

The Times owes the world an explanation.

OR ….

It just hit me tonight … suppose the real reason Trump’s military “planners” for the attack on the Houthis did their talking in a Signal space that was vulnerable to spying by Russia was not a mistake. Suppose instead it was done that way at Trump’s direction because he made a deal with Putin that Putin and/or Putin’s people would be “in” on the conversation or at least be able to hear it. Maybe that’s why Trump didn’t fire Hegseth and Gabbard and the others who “should have known better.” It was because Trump had directed them to make the planning “visible to Russia and if Trump had then fired them when the disclosure was made public, they might have disclosed that Trump directed them to proceed that way. Maybe one or more of them have the receipts. Speculation, I admit, but ….