Bob Sheak, July 24, 2025

Introduction

As a result of Trump’s razor thin victory in the 2024 presidential election, a victory that was abetted by Elon Musk’s massive donations of $250 million or more to Trump’s campaign and the contributions of other billionaires, along with Republican gerrymandering in many states, we now have a president who is again advancing policies that conflict with and threaten to destroy democratic values, constitutional mandates, and services that are important to most Americans. For example, with the help of Musk and his young inexperienced team, there have been major reductions in agencies throughout the federal government, reducing or eliminating people, experts in their fields, and services to millions of Americans.

There have already been cuts in education, health care, regulatory agencies, clean energy policy (climate-change deniers), veterans’ benefits, and foreign aid.

Wikipedia reports

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_United_States_federal_mass_layoffs).

 “More than 275,000 United States federal civil service layoffs have been announced by the second Trump administration.^[1][2] As of June 26, 2025, CNN has tracked at least 128,709 workers laid off or targeted for layoffs.^[3] As of 3 June 2025, The New York Times tracked more than 58,500 confirmed cuts, more than 76,000 employee buyouts, and more than 149,000 other planned reductions; cuts total 12% of the 2.4 million civilian federal workers.^[4] In limited cases, the administration has rescinded layoff notifications.^[5]”

The public justification, lacking evidence, is that there is waste and abuse throughout government that needs to be eliminated. Trump has also naively supported rising tariffs to discourage imports. This has caused shortages in the U.S. economy, rising prices, and the potential loss of trade with even previously allied countries.

Concerned about the negative effects of these actions, including Trump’s “one big, beautiful bill,” Trump and his Republican allies in the Congress have deceptively postponed some of the cuts until after the 2026 mid-term elections or later in hopes of retaining Republican majorities in both chambers of the Congress.

———–

The one big not-so beautiful bill

Amy B Wang reports on what to expect from Trump’s “big tax law”

(https://washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/07/14/trump-tax-bill-takes-effect).

“President Donald Trump signed his massive tax and immigration bill into law on July 4 in a White House ceremony full of patriotic pomp and circumstance. The legislation extends the tax cuts enacted in Trump’s first term and directs hundreds of billions of dollars of new spending to defense and immigration enforcement. To offset those costs, the bill also makes historic cuts to spending on social safety-net programs such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Nonpartisan estimates have said cuts in the bill will cause at least 17 million Americans to lose their health coverage.”

Wang continues.”

The key provisions in Trump’s law, which he called the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill,’ will take effect at different times over several years. The facets of the law have varying degrees of popularity with the American public, according to a recent Washington Post-Ipsos poll. Many of the more unpopular policies in the legislation will not kick in until after the 2026 midterm elections, possibly minimizing the political damage to Republicans that some in their party previously warned the bill could inflict. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), a nonpartisan agency that vets the cost of major legislation, projects the bill will add $3.4 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.”

Here’s a look at when certain provisions from the legislation are scheduled to take effect.

“Effective right away, the new law permanently extends trillions of dollars of tax cuts enacted in 2017 during Trump’s first term that otherwise were set to expire at the end of this year. Those included cuts for corporate businesses and for all income levels, though the highest-earning households saw the biggest benefits. The new law also raises the limit on how much people can deduct in state and local taxes — known as the SALT cap — from their federal returns, from $10,000 to $40,000 a year.

“Under the new GOP bill, the standard deduction will increase to $15,750 for an individual ($31,500 for a married couple filing jointly) and the child tax credit will increase from $2,000 to $2,200 per child, to be adjusted for inflation each year. However, some noncitizens are now barred from claiming the latter, even if their children are American citizens.

“Also essentially kicking in right away are many of the policies Trump promised during his campaign, such as no taxes on tips, overtime compensation or car-loan interest. A worker earning less than $150,000 a year can exclude up to $25,000 of tip income and up to $12,500 of overtime compensation from being taxed. People age 65 and older earning up to $75,000 a year can deduct an additional $6,000, with lower deductions for those earning more. The deductions are all retroactive to Jan. 1 and can be claimed when filing taxes next year.

“‘Finally,’ Wang writes, ‘the law mandates new, more stringent work requirements for those on SNAP, formerly known as food stamps. Adults aged 19-64 who don’t have dependents must prove they are working, volunteering or going to school for a certain number of hours each month to qualify for federal food assistance. (SNAP’s previous work requirements apply to adult recipients up to 54 years old, without dependents.) Requirements will be phased through 2029, depending on how states look to supplement the program without federal help. Groups that are likely to see benefit changes this year are veterans, parents with children 14 to 17 years of age, foster youths and people between 55 and 65 years old.”

“What’s getting cut this year? The legislation ends several green- and clean-energy initiatives enacted under President Joe Biden. Under the Inflation Reduction Act, which Biden signed into law in 2022, certain electric vehicle purchases qualified for a tax credit for anywhere from $4,000 to $7,500. That incentive is now set to end on Sept. 30, instead of in 2032.

“Other credits for green home improvement projects — including the Residential Clean Energy Credit and the Energy Efficient Home Improvement Credit — are also due to sunset on Dec. 31 because of the GOP law. Those credits have been offered for the purchase and installation of things like household solar panels, home batteries and solar water heaters, as well as for homeowners to upgrade to more energy-efficient appliances or improve insulation.

2026 changes

“As the new coverage year starts for health insurance plans purchased on the Affordable Care Act marketplace, people are likely to see new restrictions and higher premiums because of Trump’s law that allows pandemic-era enhanced subsidies to expire at the end of 2025. The CBO estimates that 4.2 million people will lose insurance as a result of losing those subsidies that made coverage affordable.

“Several new restrictions and changes to federal student loan programs are set to kick in on July 1, 2026. Being eliminated are the Graduate PLUS student loan program, as well as the SAVE, PAYE and ICR student loan repayment plans, which are based on income level. New student loan borrowers must choose between one of two repayment plans approved under the new GOP legislation. Parent PLUS loans — which previously allowed parents to borrow up to a student’s full cost of attendance — also will be capped at $20,000 per year, or $65,000 total per student.

Throughout the year, both parties are expected to use the changes enacted in the law as campaign fodder for the midterm elections on Nov. 3, 2026, with Republicans likely to tout the tax cuts that will have already gone into effect.

Wang continues.

2027

“With midterm elections in the rearview mirror, this is the year that the least popular aspects of the law are set to take effect. Jan. 1, 2027, [and] is the deadline for most states to implement new Medicaid work requirements for people who became eligible for Medicaid under the 2010 Affordable Care Act’s expansion of the program, though some states may get exemptions for up to two years. Similar to the new SNAP work requirements, adults 19-64 will have to prove they are working, volunteering or going to school for a certain number of hours per month to qualify for Medicaid.

“The bill provides exemptions for certain groups, including those who are pregnant, disabled or taking care of dependent children 13 or younger — but those recipients could still lose their health insurance if they don’t submit paperwork proving their exemption. The bill requires that states conduct an extra eligibility check every six months, starting in 2027, which could open the door to people losing coverage midyear.

“On Oct. 1, 2027, most states will begin to be required to cover some SNAP benefit costs previously covered entirely by the federal government.”

2028

“This is the year that most permanent funding changes to Medicaid kick in, namely the gradual reduction of provider taxes and state-directed payments that experts say are likely to cause states to have to make cuts to their programs. The Trump administration has cast the cuts as ‘strengthening Medicaid by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse,’ but the CBO projected the nearly $1 trillion cuts to Medicaid alone will result in 11.8 million more uninsured Americans by 2034.

“July 1, 2028, is the deadline for student loan borrowers to change to one of the two new repayment plans approved under Trump’s law.

“Starting Oct. 1, 2028, those who became eligible for Medicaid under the ACA’s expansion of the program in 2010 — and whose income is from 100 percent to 138 percent of the federal poverty level (roughly $32,000 to $44,000 for a family of four) — will begin to pay new out-of-pocket costs of up to $35 per service, which experts have said is likely to lead low-income recipients to avoid seeking care.

“Possibly the changes that will affect the largest swaths of the population will take place at the end of the year, after the election of a new president. On Dec. 31, 2028, the temporary tax provisions for tips, overtime compensation, seniors, car-loan interest and state and local tax deductions will expire. However, the extension of the 2017 tax cuts — including for corporate businesses and higher-income households — will remain because the law made them permanent.”

————-

The creation of a Police State

Rob Wallace ,Joe Sexauer , Rita Valenti  argue that “Trump Is Trying to Dismantle Public Health — and Replace It With a Police State”

 Truthout, July 16, 2025 (https://truthout.org/articles/trump-is-trying-to-dismantle-public-health-and-replace-it-with-a-police-state).

“The Trump administration is fighting to remain a step ahead of the growing popular backlash to its draconian cuts to social programs that millions of Americans depend on — at least until the administration operationalizes enough of the police state it’s practicing on immigrants to put down any such objection.

The deeply unpopular White House is confronted with a second problem of its own making. It’s a trap already apparent during Donald Trump’s first term. In letting go federal employees or replacing them with incompetent sycophants, the administration is having difficulty running its political relay to the fascist finish line.”

“Under the ‘ budget signed into law July 4, all that will be removed from Medicaid, food stamps, and student loans will be reallocated nearly dollar-for-dollar to the Pentagon, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and subsidies and tax cuts for the rich.”

“As Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s failure to deploy federal search and rescue until more than 72 hours after the recent deadly Texas floods underscores, the incompetence on display is likely to blow back upon the administration time and again. Within only the last month:

“Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s ‘Make America Healthy Again’ team used artificial intelligence to write a report plotting out a new vision for health policy that strips out childhood vaccines, ultra-processed foods, and pesticides. The report included false information and fake citations.

“David Richardson, the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA’s) new head, shocked FEMA staff when he shared his surprise there was a hurricane season.

“Casey Means, a wellness influencer and Trump’s pick for surgeon general, never completed her medical residency.

“Against their Hippocratic oaths, Veterans Affairs doctors are now allowed to refuse to treat Democrats, the unmarried, or people of any characteristic not presently protected under law.”

“The U.S. has long suffered the consequences of failing to offer access to well-run federal programs to all Americans. But the new administration’s rollbacks reach another order of abandonment, rejecting any notion of our shared fate.”

————

Trying to limit clean energy

Zack Colman and Josh Siegel report on a Trump administration memo that could strike a fatal blow to wind and solar power (https://politico.com/news/2025/07/18/definitely-playing-favorites-interior-memo-could-strike-dire-blow-to-wind-and-solar-projects-00460801). Here’s some of what they report.

“As POLITICO first reported on Wednesday, the Interior Department issued a directive requiring Secretary Doug Burgum’s personal approval for even the most routine activities related to wind and solar projects on federal lands. The directive could have a much broader impact, affecting scores of projects on private land that must pass through or connect with projects on Interior-managed federal land, according to industry officials, financiers and lawyers.

“The memo comes as President Donald Trump has sought to squelch new wind and solar projects through executive orders and limit use of federal tax credits that moderate Republicans fought to preserve in their megalaw earlier this month. Trump has decried those energy sources as harmful to the power grid’s reliability and said those industries ultimately benefit China, which controls a sizable chunk of the world’s wind and solar supply chains.

“Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), the top Democrat on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, warned the move would hamstring the U.S. economy by delaying additions of readily available power.”

“‘The president and Secretary Burgum will then be responsible for raising electricity prices on every state in this country because that will be the end result of that kind of abuse of permitting,’ he said. ‘I would warn them if they create this as a precedent and it survives, a future administration could play the same game with oil and gas pipelines and leases.’”

“The department’s new policy requires Burgum’s office to weigh in on virtually every aspect of or permit for solar and wind projects with a nexus to Interior. That includes siting, navigating threats to endangered species, road access and right-of-way permissions.”

“Solar, wind and battery storage accounted for 93 percent of power capacity added to the grid last year, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.”

“American Clean Power Association CEO Jason Grumet called the new policy ‘obstruction’ and an ‘intentional effort to slow energy production.’”

“‘In stark contradiction to the Administration’s commitment to tackling bureaucracy, this directive adds three new layers of needless process and unprecedented political review to the construction of domestic energy projects,’ Grumet said in a statement.”

“Harry Godfrey, managing director of Advanced Energy United, who leads the clean energy organization’s federal engagement efforts, said in a statement it is ‘deeply disappointing to see the Administration yet again singling out affordable energy sources for added scrutiny, particularly at a time of rising demand. This is the antithesis of expedited permitting that the Administration supposedly favors.’

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colorado), put it bluntly: ‘It sounds blatantly political on the face of it.’”

————–

Trump exempts more than 100 polluters from environmental standards

Rachel Frazin reports on Trump’s exemption of more than 100 polluters from environmental standards, July 18 2025 (https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/5408714-trump-epa-polluters-environmental-standards-clean-air-act).

She points out, “The Trump administration is exempting dozens of chemical manufacturers, oil refineries, coal plants, medical device sterilizers and other polluters from Clean Air Act rules.

“On Thursday, the White House announced it would exempt more than 100 plants from pollution limits established by the Biden administration.

“The limits are aimed at reducing the releases of toxic chemicals, including those that cause cancer. One rule that the Trump administration is exempting about 50 polluters from would have been expected to reduce cancer risks of people living within 6 miles of a chemical plant by 96 percent.

“The Trump administration touted its decision as being supportive of fossil fuels and manufacturing.” Trump rejects any policy that might “undermine America’s energy reliability, economic vitality, and national security, according to a White House fact sheet.” Frazin notes the move also stands in contrast with the administration’s pledge to “make America healthy again.”

The consequences are likely to be insufferable. Frazin gives the following examples. “Trump’s action on behalf of big corporate polluters will cause more cancer, more birth defects, and more children to suffer asthma. The country deserves better,” Patrice Simms, vice president of litigation at Earthjustice’s Healthy Communities Program, said in a written statement.”

———-

Ignoring global warming

Donald Trump’s Greatest Failure

Tom Engelhardt consider this issue, July 15 2025

(https://tomdispatch.com/donald-trumps-greatest-triumph). Tom Engelhardt created and runs the website TomDispatch.com. He is also a co-founder of the American Empire Project and the author of a highly praised history of American triumphalism in the Cold War, The End of Victory Culture.  A fellow of the Type Media Center, his sixth book is A Nation Unmade by War.

“‘My guess,’ Engelhardt writes, “is that you haven’t read much about it recently, despite the fact that a significant part of this country, including the city I live in, set new heat records for June. And Europe followed suit soon after with a heat hell all its own in which, at one point, the temperature in part of Spain hit an all-time record 114.8 degrees Fahrenheit. And oh yes, part of Portugal hit 115.9 degrees as both countries recorded their hottest June ever. Facing that reality, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres said (again all too appropriately): ‘Extreme heat is no longer a rare event — it has become the new normal.’ The new normal, indeed! He couldn’t have been more on target!”

“And why am I not surprised by all this? Well, because whether you’re in the United States or Europe (or so many other places on this planet) these days, if you’ve been paying any attention at all, you’ve noticed that June is indeed the new July, and that, thanks to the ever increasing amounts of greenhouse gases that continue to flow into the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels, heat waves have grown more frequent and more intense. After all, we’re now on a planet where, without a doubt, heat is at an all-time-record high. After all, 2024, was the hottest year in history and the last 10 years, the hottest decade ever known.” Worse yet, in the age of Donald Trump, this is clearly just the beginning, not the end (though somewhere down the line, of course, it could indeed prove to be exactly that).”

—————

An Ongoing Act of Global Terrorism

Engelhardt continues. “In short, despite everything else he’s doing in and to this world of ours, there’s nothing more devastating (not even his bombing of Iran) than his urge to ignore anything associated with climate change, while putting fossil fuels back at the very center of our all-American world. Yes, he can no longer simply stop solar and wind power from growing rapidly on this planet of ours, but he can certainly try. And simply refusing to do anything to help is — or at least should be — considered an ongoing act of global terrorism.

Fewer forecasts

“And don’t think it’s just that either. For example, Trump administration cuts to the National Weather Service have already ensured that, when truly bad weather hits (and hits and hits), as it’s been doing this year, whether you’re talking about stunning flash-flooding or tornadoes, there will be, as the Guardian‘s Eric Holthaus reports, ever fewer staff members committed to informing and warning Americans about what’s coming or helping them once it’s hit. Meanwhile, cuts to the government’s greenhouse gas monitoring network will ensure that we’ll know less about the effects of climate change in this country.”

Engelhardt concludes his article, “Of all the wars we shouldn’t be fighting on this planet of ours from Ukraine to Gaza, Iran to Sudan, there is indeed one that we all should be fighting, including the president of the United States, and that’s the war against our destruction of this planet (as humanity has known it all these endless thousands of years) in a planetary heat hell.” 

————

Monitoring and suppressing dissent

John W. Whitehead – Nisha Whitehead consider this issue

(https://counterpunch.org/2025/07/17/thewearables-trap-how-the-government-plans-to-monitor-score-and-control-you). Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His latest books The Erik Blair Diaries and Battlefield America: The War on the American People are available at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org. Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

The Whiteheads make their key point: “Under the present Republican-dominated government, ‘bodily autonomy—the right to privacy and integrity over our own bodies—is rapidly vanishing.

“‘We are entering a new age of algorithmic, authoritarian control, where our thoughts, moods, and biology are monitored and judged by the state.

“This is the dark promise behind the newest campaign by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Trump’s Secretary of Health and Human Services, to push for a future in which all Americans wear biometric health-tracking devices.

“Under the guise of public health and personal empowerment, this initiative is nothing less than the normalization of 24/7 bodily surveillance—ushering in a world where every step, heartbeat, and biological fluctuation is monitored not only by private companies but also by the government.”

“‘According to Kennedy’s plan,’ which has been promoted as part of a national campaign to ‘Make America Healthy Again,’ wearable devices would track glucose levels, heart rate, activity, sleep, and more for every American.

“Participation may not be officially mandatory at the outset, but the implications are clear: get on board, or risk becoming a second-class citizen in a society driven by data compliance.”

“Devices like Fitbits, Apple Watches, glucose trackers, and smart rings collect astonishing amounts of intimate data—from stress and depression to heart irregularities and early signs of illness. When this data is shared across government databases, insurers, and health platforms, it becomes a potent tool not only for health analysis—but for control.”

“Once health tracking becomes a de facto requirement for employment, insurance, or social participation, it will be impossible to ‘opt out’ without penalty. Those who resist may be painted as irresponsible, unhealthy, or even dangerous.

“This is not merely the expansion of health care. It is the transformation of health into a mechanism of control—a Trojan horse for the surveillance state to claim ownership over the last private frontier: the human body.”

“The goal is no longer simply to monitor behavior but to reshape it—to preempt dissent, deviance, or disease before it arises.”

————

 Trump’s angry, erratic behavior explains his lowball poll numbers, except among his MAGA base

Stephen Collinson reports for CNN on Trump’s low poll ratings

(https://cnn.com/2025/07/17/politics/trump-powell-epstein-poll-numbers-analysis).

Collinson focuses on Trump’s views toward Jerome Powell, chair of the Federal Reserve, and his relations to Jeffrey Epstein, who committed suicide while serving a prison sentence for enticing young girls into sex acts with him and his wealthy friends, including, as the Wall Street Journal has reported, Trump.

On Powell

Trump’s inclination to fire Jerome Powell, the head of the Federal Reserve would represent, Collinson writes, “the riskiest power grab yet of Trump’s expansive second term, since it would traumatize markets by obliterating an assumption that made the US the world’s most powerful economy — that presidents don’t emulate developing world dictators by cooking the books for political gain.”

Trump later insisted it was “highly unlikely” he’d dismiss Powell after markets shuddered. But given his volatile nature and obvious desire to exact revenge on an official who has refused to bow to his autocratic impulses, few will take such assurances to the (central) bank.

Notably, “Powell is praised by many economists for doing the impossible — taming the worst inflation crisis in 40 years without setting off a recession or surging unemployment. But unlike the Fed chief, whom he appointed in his first term, Trump acts on hunches. If he gets this wrong and ignites contagion in the financial markets, the savings and livelihoods of millions could be on the line.”

On Epstein

Meanwhile, in an extraordinary outburst on Truth Social, “Trump blasted some of the most vocal MAGA personalities as ‘weaklings’ over their criticism of his administration’s refusal to throw open files on the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Trump’s defensiveness supercharged a furor simmering for more than a week — and is likely to spur more claims he’s got something to hide and to encourage Democratic calls for more transparency.”

Trump sues the Wall Street Journal

Amid the controversy, Nandita Bose and Jonathan Stempel report for Reuters that Trump has sued the Wall Street Journal seeking $10 billion (https://apnews.com/article/trump-epstein-wall-street-journal-b006f3ef25e6b4ab910cc3b41c865227). Here’s some of what they write.

“U.S. President Donald Trump sued the Wall Street Journal and its owners including Rupert Murdoch for at least $10 billion on Friday, over the newspaper’s report that his name was on a 2003 birthday greeting for Jeffrey Epstein that included a sexually suggestive drawing and a reference to secrets they shared.

The lawsuit filed in Miami federal court names Murdoch, Dow Jones, News Corp (NWSA.O), opens new tab and its Chief Executive Robert Thomson, and two Wall Street Journal reporters as defendants, saying they defamed Trump and caused him to suffer “overwhelming” financial and reputational harm.”

Bose and Stempel continue. “A spokesperson for Dow Jones said in a statement: “We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit.”

Low poll ratings, except among many in his base

Bottom of Form

Collinson (cited previously) refers to a new CNN/SSRS poll that sheds light on Trump’s unruly presidency.

“In the CNN poll, Trump’s approval rating was largely unchanged from the spring, at 42%. But less than a year after an election that turned in part on frustration about the cost of groceries and housing, only 37% of those polled say Trump is concentrating on the right issues — down 6 points from March.”

And his “biggest-ever domestic triumph — the just-passed “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” which contains much of his second-term domestic agenda — is opposed by 61% of Americans. And his approval among independents is an anemic 32%.”

Still, “the CNN/SSRS findings show that Trump’s standing with Republicans is rock-solid at 88%.”

———–

Does Trump have a plan to avoid becoming a lame duck?

The Editorial Board of the Washington Post considers Trump’s plan, July 11, 2025

(https://washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/07/11/trump-third-term-legacy-era).

Members of the Editorial Board: Deputy Opinion Editors Mary Duenwald and Stephen Stromberg, as well as writers Robert Gebelhoff, James Hohmann, Megan McArdle, Eduardo Porter and Keith B. Richburg.

They write,

“Trump cannot lawfully seek a third term, but he may continue to dominate U.S. politics, according to the Washington Post’s editorial board.

“One especially ostentatious way that Trump has sought to avoid becoming a lame duck is by flirting with seeking a third term in 2028. Usually, Trump is clearly joking. At other times, he has acknowledged that he will be a two-term president.”

But the Board writes that some of Trump’s policies will have a negative effect on his future.

“His tax cuts promise to add trillions to the debt, risking a fiscal crisis the likes of which Americans have never experienced.”

“The president’s erratic tariff policy risks stoking inflation and promotes corrosive uncertainty for businesses trying to plan and invest.

“His war on undocumented immigrants, marked by a provocative, militarized federal presence in Los Angeles, could bring more economic pain.

“…as Trump rolls out a new, massive tariff seemingly every hour, the bigger he goes, the higher the risk to the nation’s fortunes.”

————-

Is it about his psychological instability and incapacity?

There is concern in some circles that Trump’s erratic behavior is affected by a growing mental instability and incapacity.

Bandy X. Lee, the author and editor of the bestselling book The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President (publ. 2017), has written another book about Trump’s psychological state. The title: The Psychology of Trump Contagion: An Existential Danger to American Democracy and All Humankind (publ. 2024). Lee writes that “mental incapacity” occurs when “a person does not possess the rationality and mental stability to be able to make reality-based, sound decision, so that one can perform a task or a job” (p. 62).

Here are two examples from Lee’s book. One, “Donald Trump became the source of almost half the world’s disinformation on Covid-19, at a time when public education was the most critical defense against the disease” (p. 62). Two, he encouraged his supporters to gather in Washington D.C., to stop the certification of Biden’s presidency on January 6, 2021, where at least 2,000 of them engaged in a violent insurrection at the U.S. capitol, and “injuring 174 police officers and killing four (p. 63).

Lee points out that trump waited hours to intercede while the rioters ransacked the capitol and unleased their damage and harm. Lee writes: “Donald Trump himself never telephoned the National Guard, and never contacted any federal law enforcements agency to order security assistance to the Capitol Police. Instead, during the attack’s first three hours, Trump was transfixed on the violence shown on television, ignoring pleas to call off the mob” (p. 68).

Trump continues to this day to claim that the 2020 presidential election was rigged against him. It has become known as the “big lie.” However, the overwhelming evidence conclusively denies his claim. Sixty-three lawsuits brought by Trump or his supporters failed to change the election results against him. To top it off, and as an illustration of Trump’s unhinged views, one of Trump’s first executive orders in his second presidential term was to pardon over 1,500 of the incarcerated rioters, viewing them as “patriots” rather than the law-breakers they are.

———–

Concluding thoughts

Trump’s actions and policies indicate that he has a poor judgment on the policies he supports and opposes and on the people he selects for important posts in hisadministration. Consequently, the majority of Americans are being negatively affected and their future is of concern, from global warming to loss of government services Polls show that majorities of American reject his policies on tariffs, immigration, and on his overall performance. If his erratic and harmful behavior continues, the Republican Party may lose their control of at least one of the Congressional houses in the midterm 2026 midterms. That would be beneficial for the country.

Bob Sheak, July 8, 2025

Trump has a great capacity for expressing hatred for his opponents. He is anything but a “unifier,” which he often falsely claims to be.

Here are 5 examples.

#1 – Hatred of Democrats

He has called his political opponents “vermin.” (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-compares-political-opponents-vermin-root-alarming-historians). This was published on Nov. 13, 2023.

Leigh Kimmins reports on Trump declaration of hatred for Democrats (https://thedailybeast.com/trump-kicks-off-celebration-of-america-by-declaring-his-hatred-for-democracy). The article was published on July 5, 2025. Here’s some of what Kimmins writes.

“President Donald Trump declared his hatred for his political opponents during a supposedly bipartisan celebration of the 250th anniversary of America’s independence.

“Taking to the lectern behind thick bulletproof glass in Des Moines, Iowa, on Thursday, Trump immediately started firing off political potshots. ‘They wouldn’t vote only because they hate Trump, but I hate them, too, you know?’ Trump said, referring to Democrats who voted against his “Big Beautiful Bill, which the House sent to the president’s desk after a tight vote.”

“I really do. I hate them. I cannot stand them, because I really believe they hate our country.”

“With all of the things we did with the tax cuts and rebuilding our military, not one Democrat voted for us, and I think we use it in the campaign that’s coming up the midterms, because we got to beat them,” he said.

“We’ve saved our country,” he boasted as his favorite MAGA singer, Lee Greenwood, pumped out his campaign anthem “God Bless the U.S.A.”

“‘We got great marks in the first term, and this is going to blow it away,’ Trump said at one point, ignoring a recent AP-NORC poll showed that six in 10 Americans disapprove of Trump’s performance as president and other surveys showing him with negative approval ratings.”

————-

#2 – Targeting opponents

Trump is not just talking. Tom Dreisbach and Inskeep report for NPR that “Trump has targeted more than 100 opponents and institutions for retribution in his second term (https://npr.org/2025/04/29/nx-s1-5379979/trump-has-targeted- more-than-100-opponents-and-institutions-npr-analysis-finds). The reporters write

“During that campaign, critics and supporters alike warned that it’s wrong for a president to go after people he doesn’t like. So Trump downplayed his promise, saying his retribution would merely be success. Now Trump is president. In his first 100 days, the president has ordered the U.S. government to target his personal political opponents, as well as law firms, universities and others. An NPR analysis finds Trump has taken action against more than 100 people and institutions.”

For example, DREISBACH points out the following. “Well, we found the administration using more than 10 different agencies in various ways, not just the Justice Department, which we should say is also announcing criminal investigations into the Democratic governor and attorney general of New Jersey over immigration policy. Trump has also pulled secret service protection for two of President Biden’s children, Hunter and Ashley. Media companies that Trump dislikes are facing investigations from the FCC. That includes NPR, we should say. Universities are facing investigations from the Department of Education, international students who protested the war in Gaza have also faced ICE detention and deportation.”

————-

#3 – He is relentless in going after “enemies”

David Smith considers this issue (https://theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jun/02/trump-social-media-threats).

Smith refers to “Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington” which has documented even before he was re-elected. The organization analyzed “more than 13,000 messages published by Trump on his Truth Social platform and found him vowing revenge, retaliation and retribution against his foes.

“The presumptive Republican nominee has threatened to use the federal government to go after Biden during a second Trump administration 25 times since the start of 2023, the study found. These threats include FBI raids, investigations, indictments and even jail time.

“He has also threatened or suggested that the FBI and justice department should take action against senators, judges, members of Biden’s family and even non-governmental organizations.

“‘He is promising to go after what he perceives to be his political enemies,’ said Robert Maguire, vice-president for research and data at Crew. ‘He is promising to essentially weaponize the government against anyone he sees as not sufficiently loyal or who is openly opposed to him.’”

————–

 #4 – Politicizing the F.B.I. and making Americans Less Safe (https://nytimes.com/2025/07/05/opinion/trump-fbi-politics-safety.html).

The editorial board is a group of opinion journalists whose views are informed by expertise, research, debate and certain longstanding values. It is separate from the newsroom.

“Only 11 days after President Trump was inaugurated for a second term, his administration began a purge of the F.B.I. that now threatens some of the bureau’s most important missions. His appointees ousted eight of its most experienced managers, including the division heads overseeing national security, cybersecurity and criminal investigations. Several had worked on prosecutions of Jan. 6 rioters or had assisted in the various investigations of Mr. Trump, and Emil Bove, then the acting deputy attorney general, said they could not be trusted to carry out the president’s agenda.

“That was just the beginning. Over the past five months, many F.B.I. agents, including other top managers and national security experts, have been fired, pressured to leave or transferred to lesser roles. Hundreds have resigned on their own, unwilling to follow the demands of the Trump administration. Their absence has left a vacuum in divisions that are supposed to protect the public. These losses have “obliterated decades of experience in national security and criminal matters at the F.B.I.,” Adam Goldman of The Times wrote.

“Mr. Trump’s playbook for the F.B.I. is plain to see. He is turning it into an enforcement agency for MAGA’s priorities. He is chasing out agents who might refuse to play along and installing loyalists in their place. He is seeking to remove the threat of investigation for his friends and allies. And he is trying to instill fear in his critics and political opponents. Among his many efforts to weaken American democracy and amass more power for himself, his politicization of the F.B.I. is one of the most blatant.”

————–

#5 – The “big beautiful bill” represents “a massive transfer of wealth upward”

This is the title of an interview of John Nichols on Democracy Now (https://democracynow.org/2025/7/7/trump_spending_bill). Nichols is the national affairs correspondent for The Nation.

Amy Goodman, the host of the program, offers these highlights of the Trump/Republican bill.

“President Donald Trump and his allies are celebrating the passage of his sweeping tax and spending bill, which he signed into law on July 4 after a monthslong effort to shepherd it through Congress. Ultimately, just three Republicans in the Senate and two in the House voted against the legislation. The so-called Big, Beautiful Bill includes about $1 trillion in federal cuts to Medicaid and could kick 17 million people off their healthcare. It makes the largest-ever cuts to food assistance benefits, could cause the closure of nursing homes and rural hospitals across the country, raises housing and energy costs, and supercharges the Trump crackdown on immigrants — all while delivering massive tax benefits for the wealthiest people in the country. ‘This is the most massive transfer of wealth upward in American history,’ says John Nichols, national affairs correspondent for The Nation.

“President Donald Trump signed his sweeping tax and spend bill into law on July 4th, after a monthslong push that saw just three Republicans in the Senate and two in the House break away to oppose how it slashes the social safety net while extending tax cuts to the rich and ballooning the deficit. That left room for the measure to pass with the final vote mostly along party lines.”

And yet, this is the bottom line: In states across the country, not according to liberal Democrats, not according to progressive think tanks, but according to Republicans who are on the ground in these states, and one Republican in the U.S. Senate, Thom Tillis, this is going to have a devastating impact on Medicaid, on access to healthcare, so that we will get to a point where roughly 5% of Americans are at threat of losing their healthcare. That’s a massive, massive shift. In addition, you’ve got roughly 11.8, 12 million people at risk of losing SNAP anti-hunger benefits. And when we look at all the numbers here, because of the way the tax cuts are massively weighted toward the wealthy, you have members of Congress, who are pretty serious analysts of all this, telling us that roughly 40% — going to underline that, 40% — of Americans will end up worse off under this. They won’t get a significant tax cut. They will lose health benefits. They will lose anti-hunger benefits and a lot of other benefits, as well. This is the most massive transfer of wealth upward in American history, and yet it’s designed to create a circumstance where Republicans can run in 2026 and claim that they didn’t do the damage.

“I’ll give you one more set of facts that are just useful. This comes from Governor Andy Beshear in Kentucky. Kentucky is a state that votes quite Republican in federal elections. Beshear is a Democrat, but he’s had to work with a Republican Legislature. He’s a very kind of facts and numbers guy. He says this is the worst piece of federal legislation in his lifetime. He says that 200,000 Kentuckians — this is just one state — 200,000 Kentuckians will lose healthcare, 20,000 healthcare workers will lose their jobs, and as many as 35 rural hospitals are now in danger of closing in that one state. And that doesn’t even take in the devastating impact to nursing homes, especially in small towns.”

————-

Concluding thoughts

This is a time in US history that democracy is under assault

From what we know, Trump and Republicans in Congress areusing their power to advance their own anti-democratic interests and doing harm to  the country (See Marjorie Cohn’s article (https://truthout.org/articles/by-ruling-against-nationwide-injunctions-scotus-affirms-the-imperial-presidency).

Bob Sheak, May 15, 2025

Introduction

Trump and his allies are doing their utmost to enrich themselves and avoid the law, while hollowing out programs designed to assist the majority of Americans. In the process, they have disrupted the economy and politics and caused increasing hardship.

Economic turmoil

Trump’s tariffs have taken their toll on the economy and most Americans. Scott Horsley writes that they have sparked recession fears (https://npr.org/2025/04/30/nx-s1-5380204/trump-economy-gdp-tariffs-recession-consumers). After 100 days in the White House, Hosley writes, “Economic output is shrinking. The stock market has dropped sharply. And consumer confidence has tumbled to its lowest level since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Since then, Trump has “paused” or reduced tariffs and the stock market has been up and down, creating widespread investor and consumer uncertainty and caution.  “Trump [initially] imposed 10% taxes on nearly everything the United States imports, along with tariffs of 145% on many goods from China. The president has also called for additional tariffs — only to suspend them — leaving many businesses and consumers uncertain about what import taxes will look like in the future.”

He has subsequently lowered the tariffs on China.

The economic effects have been negative. Horsley writes, “Economic growth, as measured by the United States’ gross domestic product “contracted at an annual rate of 0.3% in the first quarter of the year, after growing at a solid pace of 2.4% in the final months of 2024.” He also points out, “Personal spending, which is the biggest driver of the U.S. economy, also slowed during the first quarter, after robust growth at the end of last year. Personal spending grew at an annual rate of just 1.8% in January, February and March — less than half the pace of the previous quarter.”

———–

Meanwhile, the President and his Family have prospered

Some, including the President and his family, have prospered amid the mayhem

Robert Reich writes on “The Grifter-in-Chief Trump and the Grift That Keeps on Grifting” (https://commondreams.org/opinion/trump-qatar-air-force-one-corruption).

Robert Reich, is the Chancellor’s Professor of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and a senior fellow at the Blum Center for Developing Economies. He served as secretary of labor in the Clinton administration, for which Time magazine named him one of the 10 most effective cabinet secretaries of the twentieth century. He is the author of books.

Reich thinks that Trump is “overplaying his hand.”

He writes,

“Not just by usurping the powers of Congress and ignoring Supreme Court rulings. Not just abducting people who are legally in the United States but have put their name to opinion pieces Trump doesn’t like and trucking them off to ‘detention’ facilities. Not just using the Justice Department for personal vengeance. Not just unilaterally deciding how much tariff tax American consumers will have to pay on almost everything they buy.” These moves have lost Trump popular support. But “almost all Americans…are firmly against — even many loyal Trumpers — us bribery. And Trump is taking bigger and bigger bribes.” Reich gives the following example.

“It was reported over the weekend that he’s accepting a luxury Boeing 747-8 plane worth at least $400 million from the Qatari royal family, for use during his presidency and for his personal use afterward.”

Reich continues.

“Trump just can’t resist. He’s been salivating over the plane for months. It’s bigger and newer than Air Force One — and so opulently configured that it’s known as ‘a flying palace.’ (No report on whether it contains a golden toilet.).” Reich adds:

“Apparently, he’s been talking about the plane for months. In February, he toured it while it was parked at Palm Beach International Airport.”

But there is a Constitutional issue. “The U.S. Constitution clearly forbids officers of the United States from taking gifts from foreign governments. It’s called the “emoluments clause.” (See Article I, Section 9.)” If Trump accepts the plane, he will be breaking the law.

 Reich asks, “what does Qatar get in return for the $400 million plane? What’s the quid for the quo?” Reich answers as follows.

This week’s Trump’s trip to Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the U.A.E. is as much a personal business trip for Trump and his family businesses as a diplomatic trip.

“Trump’s company has just announced a new golf resort in Qatar, reportedly partnering with a company owned by the royal family.” But the potential financial rewards are not limited to Qatar.

“Eric Trump, who officially runs the family business, has just announced plans for a Trump-branded hotel and tower in Dubai, part of the U.A.E.”

The Trump family’s developments in the Middle East depend on a Saudi-based real estate company with close ties to the Saudi government. Saudi Arabia has a long list of pressing matters before the United States, including requests to buy F-35 fighter jets and gain access to nuclear power technology.”

There is more.

“Trump’s family crypto firm, World Liberty Financial, announced that its so-called ‘stablecoin’ — with Trump’s likeness all over it — will be used by the U.A.E. to make a $2 billion business deal with Binance, the largest crypto exchange in the world. The deal will generate hundreds of millions of dollars more for the Trump family.”

——————

Kleptocracy

Author Ann Appelbaum considers an example of Trump’s priorities (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/04/trump-kleptocracy-autocracy-inc/682281).

The first point she makes is that Donald Trump puts his financial interests and golfing high in his list of priorities. Appelbaum puts it this way.

“As the stock markets crashed on Friday, April 4, Donald Trump left Washington, D.C. He did not go to New York to consult with Wall Street. He did not go to Dover, Delaware, to receive the bodies of four American servicemen, killed in an accident while serving in Lithuania. Instead, he went to Florida, where he visited his Doral golf resort, which was hosting the Saudi-backed LIV Golf tournament, and stayed at his Mar-a-Lago club, where many tournament fans and sponsors were staying too. His private businesses took precedence over the business of the nation.

Appelbaum continues.

“Many of his guests were also interested in boosting Trump’s personal interests, as well as gaining the American president’s favor. One of them was Yasir al-Rumayyan, who runs the $925 billion Saudi sovereign-wealth fund and is also the chair of the LIV tournament. Other sponsors of the tournament included Riyadh Air, a Saudi airline; Aramco, the Saudi state oil company; and, startlingly, TikTok, the Chinese-owned social-media platform whose fate Trump will personally be deciding, even as he profits from its sponsorship and support.

“Conflict of interests”

“Once upon a time (and not even that long ago), blatant conflicts of interest, especially involving foreign entities, were,” Appelbaum writes, “something presidents sought to avoid.” Trump is almost unique among American Presidents.

“No previous inhabitant of the White House would have wanted to be seen doing personal business with companies from countries that seek to influence American foreign policy. Such dealings risk violating the Constitution, which prohibits government officials from accepting “gifts, titles or emoluments from foreign governments.” But during Trump’s first term, the court system largely blew off his commercial entanglements. Now he not only does business with foreign as well as domestic companies that have a direct interest in his policies, he advertises and celebrates them. We know the identities of the golf-tournament sponsors not because investigative journalists burrowed deep into secret contracts, but because they appear on official websites and were displayed on a billboard, observed by The New York Times, at his golf course.”

Scandalous

“Both the website and the billboard would have been scandals in any previous administration. If they are hardly remarked upon now, that’s because Trump’s behavior is a symptom of something much larger. We are living through a revolutionary change, a broad shift away from the transparency and accountability mandated by most modern democracies, and toward the opaque habits and corrupt practices of the autocratic world. For the past decade, American government and business alike have slowly begun to adopt the kleptocratic model pioneered by countries such as Russia and China, where the rulers’ conflicts of interest are simply part of the fabric of the system.”

—————–

Gutting programs that uphold the law

Trump wants a huge and permanent tax break for billionaires and the rich, as well as simultaneously reducing federal government programs and expenditures that serve ordinary and poor citizens and the common good. It has the making of budding fascism. Here are some examples.

#1 – “The end of the rule of law” in the U.S.  Retired federal judge J. Michael Luttig considers “the end of the rule of law” (https://theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/05/law-america-trump-constitution/682793).

His basic thesis is that the 47^th president “seems to wish he were king—and he is willing to destroy what is precious about this country to get what he wants.” He writes:

“The president of the United States appears to have long ago forgotten that Americans fought the Revolutionary War not merely to secure their independence from the British monarchy but to establish a government of laws, not of men, so that they and future generations of Americans would never again be subject to the whims of a tyrannical king.” Trump seems not to understand this legacy.  Luttig notes this: “Just last month, an interviewer from Time magazine asked the president in the Oval Office, “Mr. President, you were showing us the new paintings you have behind us. You put all these new portraits. One of them includes John Adams. John Adams said we’re a government ruled by laws, not by men. Do you agree with that?” To which the president replied: ‘John Adams said that? Where was the painting?’” Luttig continues: “When the interviewer pointed to the portrait, Trump asked: ‘We’re a government ruled by laws, not by men? Well, I think we’re a government ruled by law, but you know, somebody has to administer the law. So therefore men, certainly, men and women, certainly play a role in it. I wouldn’t agree with it 100 percent. We are a government where men are involved in the process of law, and ideally, you’re going to have honest men like me.’” And, earlier in May, “a television journalist asked Trump the simple question “Don’t you need to uphold the Constitution of the United States as president?” Astonishingly, the president answered, ‘I don’t know.’ The interviewer then asked, Don’t you agree that every person in the United States is entitled to due process? The president again replied, “I don’t know.”

The gist of Luttig’s analysis is summed up by him as follows, “Thus far, Trump’s presidency has been a reign of lawless aggression by a tyrannical wannabe king, a rampage of presidential lawlessness in which Trump has proudly wielded the powers of the office and the federal government to persecute his enemies, while at the same time pardoning, glorifying, and favoring his political allies and friends—among them those who attacked the U.S. Capitol during the insurrection that Trump fomented on January 6, 2021. The president’s utter contempt for the Constitution and laws of the United States has been on spectacular display since Inauguration Day.”

Luttig refers to examples of Trump’s self-serving views.

“When Trump again assumed the presidency in January, he—like every American president before him—swore an oath to faithfully execute the laws of this nation, as commanded by the Constitution. In the short time since, Trump hasn’t just refused to faithfully execute the laws; he has angrily defied the Constitution and laws of the United States. In America, where no man is above the law, Trump has shown the nation that he believes he is the law, even proclaiming on social media soon after assuming office that ‘He who saves his Country does not violate any Law.’”

“From the moment he entered the White House on January 20, 2025, Trump has waged war against the rule of law. He not only instigated a worldwide economic crisis with his hotheaded, unlawful tariffs leveled against our global trading partners and our enemies alike; he deliberately provoked a constitutional crisis with his frontal assault on the federal judiciary, the third and co-equal branch of government and guardian of the rule of law—grabbing more and more power for nothing but power’s sake.

“On his first day back, foreshadowing his all-out assault on the rule of law, Trump pardoned or commuted the sentences of 1,200 January 6 rioters. Soon, he began to persecute his political enemies—of whom there are now countless numbers—and to fire the prosecutors for the United States who attempted to hold him accountable for the grave crimes against the Constitution that he committed after losing the 2020 election.

Here’s a summary of Trump’s offenses to the law.

“For not one of his signature initiatives during his first 100 days in office does Trump have the authority under the Constitution and laws of the United States that he claims. Not for the crippling global tariffs he ordered unilaterally; not for his unlawful deportations of hundreds of immigrants to the Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT), El Salvador’s squalid maximum-security prison; not for his deportation of U.S. citizens to Honduras; not for his defiantly corrupt order from the Great Hall of the Department of Justice to weaponize the department against his political enemies; not for his evil executive orders against the nation’s law firms for their representation of his political enemies and clients of whom he personally disapproves; not for his corrupt executive orders against honorable American citizens and former officials of his own administration, Chris Krebs and Miles Taylor, a former Homeland Security chief of staff who dared to criticize Trump anonymously during his first term; not for his unlawful bludgeoning of the nation’s colleges and universities with unconstitutional demands that they surrender their governance and curricula to his wholly owned federal government; not for his threatened revocation of Harvard University’s tax-exempt status; not for his impoundment of billions of dollars of congressionally approved funds or his politically motivated threats to revoke tax exemptions; not for his attempt to alter the rules for federal elections; not for his direct assault on the Fourteenth Amendment’s birthright-citizenship guarantee; not for his mass firings of federal employees; not for his empowerment of Musk and DOGE to ravage the federal government; not for his threats to fire Federal Reserve Board Chairman Jerome Powell; not for his unconstitutional attacks on press freedoms; and finally, not for his appalling arrest of Judge Dugan.”

“Amid the ocean of unconstitutional orders, Luttig writes, “Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting some of the most prestigious law firms in the country because these firms represented or employed Trump’s personal enemies in the past are the most sinister and corrupt, which is saying something.

“Some of the firms—Paul Weiss; Latham & Watkins; Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; Kirkland & Ellis; and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett—cut “deals” to avoid the president’s persecution. In doing so, they shamefully sold out their own lawyers, clients, and the entire legal profession, including the handful of courageous law firms—such as WilmerHale, Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and Susman Godfrey—that rightly and righteously decided to fight the president instead. It is the sworn duty of all American lawyers to denounce the president’s lawlessness, not to ingratiate themselves to him.

“The utter unconstitutionality of these executive orders is perfectly captured by the following remarkable paragraph from Perkins Coie’s brief filed against the Trump administration by the legendary Washington law firm Williams & Connolly. I would venture to say there has never been a paragraph like this written in a brief before a federal court in the 235 years of the federal courts’ existence, every word of the paragraph indisputably correct.

“Because the Order in effect adjudicates and punishes alleged misconduct by Perkins Coie, it is an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers. Because it does so without notice and an opportunity to be heard, and because it punishes the entire firm for the purported misconduct of a handful of lawyers who are not employees of the firm, it is an unconstitutional violation of procedural due process and of the substantive due process right to practice one’s professional livelihood. Because the Order singles out Perkins Coie, it denies the firm the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. Because the Order punishes the firm for the clients with which it has been associated and the legal positions it has taken on matters of election law, the Order constitutes retaliatory viewpoint discrimination and, therefore, violates the First Amendment rights of free expression and association, and the right to petition the government for redress. Because the Order compels disclosure of confidential information revealing the firm’s relationships with its clients, it violates the First Amendment. Because the Order retaliates against Perkins Coie for its diversity-related speech, it violates the First Amendment. Because the Order is vague in proscribing what is prohibited “diversity, equity and inclusion,” it violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Because the Order works to brand Perkins Coie as persona non grata and bar it from federal buildings, deny it the ability to communicate with federal employees, and terminate the government contracts of its clients, the Order violates the right to counsel afforded by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.”

#2 – Warrantless spying

Daniel Boguslaw considers the expansion of domestic spying in the U.S. in an article for The American Prospect, May 12, 2025 (https://prospect.org/2025=05-12-warrantless-spying-report-signals-expansion-of-domestic-suveillance).

“Earlier this month, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released a report on the most well-known aspect of the United States’ mass surveillance apparatus: Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The report, which discloses surveillance actions undertaken during the last year of the Biden administration, details a marked uptick in querying of terms associated with U.S. persons, a decrease in the number of persons queried by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and most notably, an expansion of the 702 authority to include the war on drugs.

“Signed into law in 2008 by George W. Bush, the 702 authority amended a 1978 law to allow mass communications collection without a warrant, as long as broad rules of engagement from the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) were followed. (In reality, the FISC acts as a rubber stamp for just about every request that comes across its desk.) Even marginal attempts to reform 702 authority when its renewal comes up every few years have been met with unprecedented vitriol and leaking from intelligence officials enraged at any check on their ever-increasing powers.

“Civil liberties advocates have repeatedly pointed to the fact that millions of Americans’ communications are routinely swept up in FISA surveillance, even if the marginal safeguards implemented by Congress constrain the most active FBI surveillance of U.S. persons. The intelligence agencies try to point to the first letter of FISA, “foreign,” to argue that the intention and bulk of surveillance collection is targeting non-U.S. persons and is by agencies like the National Security Agency (NSA) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), which are, at least on paper, barred from domestic surveillance.

But of course, the 702 back door allows for intercepting any communication with a targeted non-U.S. person, which includes millions of communications between non-U.S. and U.S. persons. This underscores why the new ODNI report is so important: It suggests that the authority is being broadened to include new ranges of targets.

“Just four lines of text in the 44-page report expose this new direction: “In 2024, the Government submitted applications for the renewal certifications and a new certification for counternarcotics. In March 2025, the FISC approved the renewal certifications for 2025, and in April 2025, the FISC authorized the new certification for counternarcotics. The IC will process the opinions for subsequent public release under FISA Section 1872.”

“Neither Congress nor the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is willing to curb powers that are increasingly being turned on lawful permanent residents and U.S. citizens.”

Boguslaw continues.

Thanks to the FISC’s rubber-stamping, drug trafficking surveillance is likely the tip of the iceberg. FBI director Kash Patel, DHS chief Kristi Noem, and border czar Tom Homan have all made it known that U.S. intelligence agencies are committed to working together to target immigrants, green card holders, foreign nationals in the country on student visas, and law-abiding Americans who disagree with the sitting administration’s policies.”

#3 – The proposed suspension of Habeas Corpus

Marjorie Cohn is a professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, dean of the People’s Academy of International Law and past president of the National Lawyers Guild. She sits on the national advisory boards of Veterans For Peace and Assange Defense, and is the U.S. representative to the continental advisory council of the Association of American Jurists. Her books include Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral and Geopolitical Issues. Here, on May 12, 2025, she writes against the Trump administration’s argument of suspending habeas corpus (https://truthout.org/articles/stephen-millers-argument-for-suspending-habeas-corpus-is-legal-garbage).

Cohn comments on White House Chief of Staff Stephen Millier who “told reporters [on May 9] that the administration is considering whether to suspend the right to habeas corpus – known as “The Great Writ” – in immigration cases. Suspending habeas corpus, which allows individuals to challenge the legality of their detention in court, would be unconstitutional. The Suspension Clause, located in Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Constitution, says: ‘The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.’”

Cohn cites Georgetown Law Professor Steve Vladeck: “To casually suggest that habeas might be suspended because courts have ruled against the executive branch in a handful of immigration cases is to turn the Suspension Clause entirely on its head.”

“Moreover, Miller’s alarming declaration contains several legal and factual errors.

Only Congress, Not the President, Has the Power to Suspend Habeas Corpus

Contrary to Miller’s assertion, only Congress — not the president — can suspend habeas corpus, and only in rare circumstances. “Although [the Suspension Clause] does not state that suspension must be effected by, or authorized by, a legislative act, it has been so understood, consistent with English practice and the Clause’s placement in Article I,” Antonin Scalia wrote in dissent in the Supreme Court’s 2004 decision in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld. (Article I of the Constitution lists the powers of Congress).

“Amy Coney Barrett, a current member of the Supreme Court, agrees with Scalia. When she was a judge on the 7^th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, she and Neal K. Katyal, a professor at Georgetown Law Center, wrote for National Constitution Center: ‘The Clause does not specify which branch of government has the authority to suspend the privilege of the writ, but most agree that only Congress can do it.’ That is because the Suspension Clause is located in the section of the Constitution that details the powers of Congress, and habeas corpus has only been suspended four times since the Constitution was ratified in 1789.”

Cohn writes that “Miller is also wrong because there is no ‘invasion’ currently occurring in the United States, despite several of Donald Trump’s January 20 executive orders declaring that there is an invasion of the southern U.S. border.”

She gives the following examples.

“For example, in his order entitled “Guaranteeing the States Protection Against Invasion,” Trump declared, ‘I have determined that the current state of the southern border reveals that the Federal Government has failed in fulfilling this obligation to the States and hereby declare that an invasion is ongoing at the southern border, which requires the Federal Government to take measures to fulfill its obligation to the States.’ He claimed that he was suspending what he described as ‘the physical entry of aliens involved in an invasion into the United States across the southern border until I determine that the invasion has concluded.”

Trump also signed an order titled “Clarifying the Military’s Role in Protecting the Territorial Integrity of the United States.” It calls the situation at the southern border an “invasion” that includes “unlawful mass migration, narcotics trafficking, human smuggling and trafficking, and other criminal activities.’”

Cohn also refers to the opinion of Rear Adm. James McPherson, former U.S. undersecretary of the Army, who “said on PBS ‘NewsHour’ that ‘We don’t have a war going on at the southern border. We have a law enforcement crisis perhaps. But that’s not an invasion.’” The courts have not supported the idea.

• Several federal courts have also rejected the idea that there is an ongoing invasion at the southern border.
• In February 2024, a federal district court in Texas rejected the equating of immigration with an invasion, concluding that “surges in immigration do not constitute an ‘invasion’ within the meaning of the Constitution.”
• During the first week of May, three federal judges rejected the Trump administration’s argument that the immigration situation constitutes an invasion.

U.S. District Judge Fernando Rodriguez, Jr., in South Texas, granted a petition for writ of habeas corpus on May 1 and rejected the Trump administration’s attempt to justify using the Alien Enemies Act by arguing that the U.S. was being invaded by a Venezuelan gang.

• On May 6, U.S. District Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney in Colorado called the Trump administration’s definition of invasion “unpersuasive” and rejected the government’s argument that the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act was beyond judicial review.
• Also on May 6, U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein in New York held that the Tren de Aragua gang (TdA) is not attacking the United States. “TdA may well be engaged in narcotics trafficking, but that is a criminal matter, not an invasion or predatory incursion,” he wrote, and halted deportations from most of New York City and nearby areas.
• Although immigration matters generally start in immigration courts, appeals from those decisions are routinely heard by Article III (federal) courts.
• In Boumediene v. Bush, the Supreme Court ruled that noncitizens held within the United States have the right to seek a writ of habeas corpus.

—————–

Concluding thoughts

Sadly, Trump and the sycophants and cronies in his administration want a government that favors their interests. And their interests are in opening up opportunities for the enrichment for his family and other rich people, while diminishing opportunities for the majority. On the latter point, see the article by Celine McNichols and her colleagues on “the 100 ways Trump has hurt workers in his first 100 days” (https://epi.org/publication/100-days-100-ways-trump-hurt-workers/#read-the-report), and Elois Goldsmith’ “Trump Social Security Cuts Will Result in New Burdens for millions” (https://commondreams.org/news/social-security-direct-deposit-2-million), and Sasha Abramsky’s article “NIOSH Upheld Workplace Safety for Millions in the U.S. Trump is dismantling it (https://truthout.org/articles/niosh-upheld-workplace-safety-for-millions-in-the-us-trump-is-dismembering it). All is not yet lost. In response to the Trump administration’s attacks on vital government programs, there have been ongoing protests across the country. Trump has not done well in polls. Nonetheless, Trump and his allies have taken the country away from democracy or a republic and towards something increasingly authoritarian.

 Steven LevitskyLucan Way and Daniel Ziblatt, political scientists who study how democracies come to an end, write the following (https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/08/opinion/trump-authoritarianism-democracy.html).

“Under authoritarianism… opposition comes with a price. Citizens and organizations that run afoul of the government become targets of a range of punitive measures: Politicians may be investigated and prosecuted on baseless or petty charges, media outlets may be hit with frivolous defamation suits or adverse regulatory rulings, businesses may face tax audits or be denied critical contracts or licenses, universities and other civic institutions may lose essential funding or tax-exempt status, and journalists, activists and other critics may be harassed, threatened or physically attacked by government supporters.”