So much of Trumpiana is like "Where can the 10,000 lb elephant sit?" You know the answer, of course... "Anywhere it wants." Pumpkinhead is using "ad terrorem" tactics to ... terrorize... and intimidate. The law "don't matter." Heck with NYT v. Sullivan... he sues whom he likes and just to "save their ass" ... because "they" are "budget bound" by money and rationality, "they settle." No judge, apparently will impose sanctions or enforce anything. Same with DOGE... Elon Muskova does whatever comes to mind... heck with long established law and precedent... heck with stare decisis... "Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges," say these Millenials armed with water balloons and popcorn... clicking 50 caliber … mice... blowing away entire agencies and lives...evoking that scene from Treasure of the Sierra Madre and the laissez faire life of Portola Valley where money is meaningless... destroying the emotional environment of America... Men, real men, like Chuck Schumer and Dick Blumenthal... and women like you, protect America. I do not advocate violence … and I’ll stop on that note.
If there is a law or reg or norm that somehow might restrict the Mad KIng's feelings of omnipotence, we can be sure he will challenge it, and possibly ignore the court's rulings. Whether there is anything short of brute force to stop the insanity, only time will tell.
BTW I don't advocate violence, or even believe it would be necessary if the courts do their job -- and if Trump obeys court orders. But...we'll wait, and see.
Aye - there's the rub. He has already shown that he ignores any laws, court rulings, etc. that he doesn't like. And who will enforce compliance? Not his Justice Dept. Maybe he thinks that non-compliance is included in his presidential duties, so he is exempt from prosecution.
He avoided most prosecutions as a private citizen, and in the rare instance when he was convicted, he managed to avoid having to pay any penalty.
I understand the argument that a shutdown would give the felon more free reign, but we are ready for a Burlingame! Other countries leaders are demonstrating more courage than our own. We're past politics, Maga won't play fair. We need to fight for what's right.
Yes, and what a profound historical leader Burlingame was in protecting the love of his state, his country. Where is the backbone? We are in different times now, you can't use the same rules of yesteryear, different times demand new rules. I call on SCOTUS to grow that spine as being the very reason we have landed here (alongside Citizens United who helped Muskrat buy our country via the Emperor with no clothes). It is time to checkmate this madman in OUR WHITE HOUSE surrounded by his many Sycophants. The madness must stop or a very dangerous civil war is at its brink. Logic and decency should never stand down.
Learning of Anson Burlingame helped some when I’m trying to take in our present times in America. I’ll listen to this letter again. So much to take in about the ‘doings’ /machinations of Congress, head-spinning IMHO.
I think Senator Schumer was right on most of his points. Trump would have blamed any shutdown on them, and then had his Dog Elon accelerate the destruction, perhaps even let it go on for 35 days, as happened in his first term. And a shutdown would have stopped or greatly slowed the tsunami of court decisions, almost all rejecting the policies expressed in his royal decrees. Strangely, a court allowed them to order whatever USAID personnel were left to destroy all “classified” documents, and not at all in the normal, careful manner. No! They were ordered to destroy all such documents within a very short timeline; the only time that is usually done is when an embassy or consulate, etc. comes under attack or when war breaks out. They told the people to prioritize the use of burn bags, to lessen the chance that the shredders would be overwork and break down. What evidence were they so desperate to destroy? If the documents showed “fraud, waste and abuse”, or corruption, or other criminality, one would think they would be desperate to preserve it, so they could lay out all the proof of why they (mysteriously) had to destroy the agency and most foreign aid. If the agency was guilty of massive fraud, the proof of it would be in those meticulously-maintained documents. Another point: it would seem to me that the Dictator Co-King would instead order all docs to be collected up and sent to his residence for late night bathroom reading material; or for possible sale to Vlad. No! The only logical explanation is that the documents he ordered destroyed would provide incontrovertible evidence that USAID was not engaged in massive fraud, waste and abuse; so extraordinary instructions were given to destroy the evidence of the agency’s general honesty. A court allowed the destruction to be implemented, so I’d like to know more on what rationale it based the decision. Perhaps it was to not blow the cover on some covert activities; but then, by trashing USAID, they shut down possibly numerous such activities, and may have exposed them in the process. WHO does this help the most? The Emperor of China and the Butcher of Moscow.
The great problem with that argument, as far as I can see into these things, is that neither Schumer nor anyone else could possibly assess whether passing the bill will have any effect at all on the administration's actions. They are still deleting government digital records despite valiant attempts by a loose coalition of archivists and librarians to protect these records. Every day brings news of further monstrosities. Meanwhile, Schumer has effectively surrendered leverage to Trump who sarcastically applauded him for his decision. He took only a few Democratic senators with him (only 9 from 45) thereby undermining his authority. He's soured relations with many House Democrats by his decision (yesterday when asked about the Senate vote, House minority leader turned away from the questioners and asked 'next question'). Furthermore, he's undermined confidence in the party as well having been only a few days earlier adamant that he would oppose the bill. The whole thing has been badly managed and he's still been going around defending his decision claiming to be proud of his decision and also claiming to have "the overwhelming support of my caucus". A petition has been launched, from the moderate wing of the party, to boycott donations to Senate Democrats until he's forced out as minority leader. If Trump is to be effectively resisted then Democrats need to be united in their unflinching opposition - that's their constitutional role now in the face of tyranny and if Schumer can't see this he should be pensioned off.
Like you, I admire the words of Burlingame, but Democrats in Congress know that their words in the chambers dissolve into thin air. However, I wish the Democrats in Congress had a spokesperson who would forcefully announce to the press EVERY SINGLE DAY the ways in which the executive branch and the Republican legislators are failing in their duties and endangering the Country and not just with dull canned, biased talking points but instead the way that you do, sharing the simple facts with authority. The general population simply doesn't know. Sadly, because the whole situation is so bizarre, my Republican friends don't believe it. They scoff at the possibility of an autocracy in the making. Many believe it but feel too overwhelmed to respond.
I have a question with an historical aspect so I am hoping Heather might comment upon it. In, I think it was 1925, a famous trial occurred in Dayton, TN, that altered the political landscape in positive fashion for many years to come even though Mr. Scopes was found guilty. The ACLU was founded only 5 years earlier and even though they were very young found the censorship which resulted in the Scopes trial repugnant in a democracy. There is not a single action pursued by Trump & Company that does not represent CENSORSHIP! Why is it the UCLU, the NAACP and others so horribly affected by this horror have not joined in counter actions, I just don't know. Now, from the historical perspective just what is censorship and have we ever seen this type of deliberate censorship from our leaders in the past and what were the results?
For once I agree with someone here. Schumer is doing what is best in the long run for the Democrats, thinking about what is best for America versus what mean-spirited short term gain will benefit the Dems.
I wish they would see that going along with the GOP - BUT influencing the way to cut spending, fraud etc. would make the Dems appear to be on the side of the people, who are unutterably weary of politicians who claim to want to help them but everything ends up costing more and creating more stultifying regulations. Anything else is so clearly focused on Dems getting more power - we do not need more regs and taxes, we need relief from politicians who want to "help us" into more taxes and restrictions. It would be so nice, for once, to see Democrats care about how stultifying the regulations are that restrict how we get things done.
Trump is white trash. All the people you never wanted to see because they put you to shame. Now he has the S. African monkey jumping around him. It is a clown show on steroids. Well, on the farm (not wanting to be like the bitch) you have the bitch killing a bitch. Hmmmm. I grew up on a farm. It is cruel in the true meaning of the word. A dog would get tangled in a mower, devastating injuries with no hope of recovery, yes, you put it down. But not trainable? Really? Let the kids play with it, give it away, let your grandmother live with it, whatever, don’t kill the animal UNLESS you are a sociopath monster. Sociopaths don’t always wear a tie that hangs down to their dick. Sometimes they have camel toes in the lingerie. Emotionally deranged and enormously incapable sociopaths run our government. I’m joining the invaders when they come attack us.
Please indulge me with one more message today. I'd like to hear more about the UNITARY EXECUTIVE THEORY (UET), which has the backing of the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation. It would increase presidential powers in the executive branch and weaken some in the Congress. It appears to be the basis for many (most?) of the executive orders Trump signed that are currently illegal or unconstitutional. I don't know if a Republican Congress could pass laws to further its realization or if they are relying on the Supreme Court. (Probably both.) During his first term, Trump specifically nominated justices associated with the Federal Society for the Supreme Court and the courts of appeals. Of course Republicans in Congress cannot oppose Trump's rule breaking but support the UET at the same time. Russell Vought, director of the Office and Management and Budget (OMB), was a major author of Project 2025. This office is a little known but extremely powerful entity of the government. Very ominous threat, as they wouldn't want a Democrat president to have these powers. I wish there was a simple way to explain all this this to voters.
So much of Trumpiana is like "Where can the 10,000 lb elephant sit?" You know the answer, of course... "Anywhere it wants." Pumpkinhead is using "ad terrorem" tactics to ... terrorize... and intimidate. The law "don't matter." Heck with NYT v. Sullivan... he sues whom he likes and just to "save their ass" ... because "they" are "budget bound" by money and rationality, "they settle." No judge, apparently will impose sanctions or enforce anything. Same with DOGE... Elon Muskova does whatever comes to mind... heck with long established law and precedent... heck with stare decisis... "Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges," say these Millenials armed with water balloons and popcorn... clicking 50 caliber … mice... blowing away entire agencies and lives...evoking that scene from Treasure of the Sierra Madre and the laissez faire life of Portola Valley where money is meaningless... destroying the emotional environment of America... Men, real men, like Chuck Schumer and Dick Blumenthal... and women like you, protect America. I do not advocate violence … and I’ll stop on that note.
If there is a law or reg or norm that somehow might restrict the Mad KIng's feelings of omnipotence, we can be sure he will challenge it, and possibly ignore the court's rulings. Whether there is anything short of brute force to stop the insanity, only time will tell.
BTW I don't advocate violence, or even believe it would be necessary if the courts do their job -- and if Trump obeys court orders. But...we'll wait, and see.
"and if Trump obeys court orders."
Aye - there's the rub. He has already shown that he ignores any laws, court rulings, etc. that he doesn't like. And who will enforce compliance? Not his Justice Dept. Maybe he thinks that non-compliance is included in his presidential duties, so he is exempt from prosecution.
He avoided most prosecutions as a private citizen, and in the rare instance when he was convicted, he managed to avoid having to pay any penalty.
So the "if" is a non-starter.
I understand the argument that a shutdown would give the felon more free reign, but we are ready for a Burlingame! Other countries leaders are demonstrating more courage than our own. We're past politics, Maga won't play fair. We need to fight for what's right.
Yes, and what a profound historical leader Burlingame was in protecting the love of his state, his country. Where is the backbone? We are in different times now, you can't use the same rules of yesteryear, different times demand new rules. I call on SCOTUS to grow that spine as being the very reason we have landed here (alongside Citizens United who helped Muskrat buy our country via the Emperor with no clothes). It is time to checkmate this madman in OUR WHITE HOUSE surrounded by his many Sycophants. The madness must stop or a very dangerous civil war is at its brink. Logic and decency should never stand down.
Heather, perhaps you could put Burlingame's speech on Letters from an American.
https://archive.org/details/defenceofmassach00burl/page/5/mode/2up
Yes, please!! I would love to read it
If only the Democrats would stand up like that!!!!
Agreed! I think we may be seeing some of that starting to happen
Yes!
Learning of Anson Burlingame helped some when I’m trying to take in our present times in America. I’ll listen to this letter again. So much to take in about the ‘doings’ /machinations of Congress, head-spinning IMHO.
I think Senator Schumer was right on most of his points. Trump would have blamed any shutdown on them, and then had his Dog Elon accelerate the destruction, perhaps even let it go on for 35 days, as happened in his first term. And a shutdown would have stopped or greatly slowed the tsunami of court decisions, almost all rejecting the policies expressed in his royal decrees. Strangely, a court allowed them to order whatever USAID personnel were left to destroy all “classified” documents, and not at all in the normal, careful manner. No! They were ordered to destroy all such documents within a very short timeline; the only time that is usually done is when an embassy or consulate, etc. comes under attack or when war breaks out. They told the people to prioritize the use of burn bags, to lessen the chance that the shredders would be overwork and break down. What evidence were they so desperate to destroy? If the documents showed “fraud, waste and abuse”, or corruption, or other criminality, one would think they would be desperate to preserve it, so they could lay out all the proof of why they (mysteriously) had to destroy the agency and most foreign aid. If the agency was guilty of massive fraud, the proof of it would be in those meticulously-maintained documents. Another point: it would seem to me that the Dictator Co-King would instead order all docs to be collected up and sent to his residence for late night bathroom reading material; or for possible sale to Vlad. No! The only logical explanation is that the documents he ordered destroyed would provide incontrovertible evidence that USAID was not engaged in massive fraud, waste and abuse; so extraordinary instructions were given to destroy the evidence of the agency’s general honesty. A court allowed the destruction to be implemented, so I’d like to know more on what rationale it based the decision. Perhaps it was to not blow the cover on some covert activities; but then, by trashing USAID, they shut down possibly numerous such activities, and may have exposed them in the process. WHO does this help the most? The Emperor of China and the Butcher of Moscow.
The great problem with that argument, as far as I can see into these things, is that neither Schumer nor anyone else could possibly assess whether passing the bill will have any effect at all on the administration's actions. They are still deleting government digital records despite valiant attempts by a loose coalition of archivists and librarians to protect these records. Every day brings news of further monstrosities. Meanwhile, Schumer has effectively surrendered leverage to Trump who sarcastically applauded him for his decision. He took only a few Democratic senators with him (only 9 from 45) thereby undermining his authority. He's soured relations with many House Democrats by his decision (yesterday when asked about the Senate vote, House minority leader turned away from the questioners and asked 'next question'). Furthermore, he's undermined confidence in the party as well having been only a few days earlier adamant that he would oppose the bill. The whole thing has been badly managed and he's still been going around defending his decision claiming to be proud of his decision and also claiming to have "the overwhelming support of my caucus". A petition has been launched, from the moderate wing of the party, to boycott donations to Senate Democrats until he's forced out as minority leader. If Trump is to be effectively resisted then Democrats need to be united in their unflinching opposition - that's their constitutional role now in the face of tyranny and if Schumer can't see this he should be pensioned off.
I'm with Burlingame. A shutdown would be bad but appeasement of Republicans & MAGA with no negotiations is worse.
Ms. Richardson,
Like you, I admire the words of Burlingame, but Democrats in Congress know that their words in the chambers dissolve into thin air. However, I wish the Democrats in Congress had a spokesperson who would forcefully announce to the press EVERY SINGLE DAY the ways in which the executive branch and the Republican legislators are failing in their duties and endangering the Country and not just with dull canned, biased talking points but instead the way that you do, sharing the simple facts with authority. The general population simply doesn't know. Sadly, because the whole situation is so bizarre, my Republican friends don't believe it. They scoff at the possibility of an autocracy in the making. Many believe it but feel too overwhelmed to respond.
I have a question with an historical aspect so I am hoping Heather might comment upon it. In, I think it was 1925, a famous trial occurred in Dayton, TN, that altered the political landscape in positive fashion for many years to come even though Mr. Scopes was found guilty. The ACLU was founded only 5 years earlier and even though they were very young found the censorship which resulted in the Scopes trial repugnant in a democracy. There is not a single action pursued by Trump & Company that does not represent CENSORSHIP! Why is it the UCLU, the NAACP and others so horribly affected by this horror have not joined in counter actions, I just don't know. Now, from the historical perspective just what is censorship and have we ever seen this type of deliberate censorship from our leaders in the past and what were the results?
i Heather, Love when you read Letters from an American. The time will come soon enough when hard choices are going to come calling.
The Progressive DEMs just shot themselves in the foot and they are losing me. Good for Schumer and ignore the divisive Progressives.
For once I agree with someone here. Schumer is doing what is best in the long run for the Democrats, thinking about what is best for America versus what mean-spirited short term gain will benefit the Dems.
I wish they would see that going along with the GOP - BUT influencing the way to cut spending, fraud etc. would make the Dems appear to be on the side of the people, who are unutterably weary of politicians who claim to want to help them but everything ends up costing more and creating more stultifying regulations. Anything else is so clearly focused on Dems getting more power - we do not need more regs and taxes, we need relief from politicians who want to "help us" into more taxes and restrictions. It would be so nice, for once, to see Democrats care about how stultifying the regulations are that restrict how we get things done.
Trump is white trash. All the people you never wanted to see because they put you to shame. Now he has the S. African monkey jumping around him. It is a clown show on steroids. Well, on the farm (not wanting to be like the bitch) you have the bitch killing a bitch. Hmmmm. I grew up on a farm. It is cruel in the true meaning of the word. A dog would get tangled in a mower, devastating injuries with no hope of recovery, yes, you put it down. But not trainable? Really? Let the kids play with it, give it away, let your grandmother live with it, whatever, don’t kill the animal UNLESS you are a sociopath monster. Sociopaths don’t always wear a tie that hangs down to their dick. Sometimes they have camel toes in the lingerie. Emotionally deranged and enormously incapable sociopaths run our government. I’m joining the invaders when they come attack us.
Ms. Richardson et al,
Please indulge me with one more message today. I'd like to hear more about the UNITARY EXECUTIVE THEORY (UET), which has the backing of the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation. It would increase presidential powers in the executive branch and weaken some in the Congress. It appears to be the basis for many (most?) of the executive orders Trump signed that are currently illegal or unconstitutional. I don't know if a Republican Congress could pass laws to further its realization or if they are relying on the Supreme Court. (Probably both.) During his first term, Trump specifically nominated justices associated with the Federal Society for the Supreme Court and the courts of appeals. Of course Republicans in Congress cannot oppose Trump's rule breaking but support the UET at the same time. Russell Vought, director of the Office and Management and Budget (OMB), was a major author of Project 2025. This office is a little known but extremely powerful entity of the government. Very ominous threat, as they wouldn't want a Democrat president to have these powers. I wish there was a simple way to explain all this this to voters.
Sadly, they are all more worried about the price of eggs.