Well done, Leah!! Your response was measured and thoughtful and, when appropriate, backed with evidence. I wish more folks did what you recommended … read and/or learn about what the other side thinks. Your interplay with David is a perfect example and model of civil conversation between two opposing viewpoints. We need more of it! Thank you!
Terrific piece today. Nice to have the dialogue with Dave. I will not repeat yout answers to Dave but I will add two rejoinders of sorts: 1) the authoritarian label is thrown around a lot with little explanation or nuance or definition ( who are the five worst ( most) authoritarian in the world today and WHY is that the case); and 2) elections present a binary choice ( in this case trump v harris) : if Harris had won what would be going on today on terms of the border remaining open and deportations ( how many criminals would be deported and would almost rem million non criminals just get to stay and if so why); if there was no DOGE what are the odds that itvwould be business as usual in terms of what we now know clearly was massive waste and fraud and corruption and proof that there is a deep state that funnels billions if not trillions to friends and family ( who get rich) or unelected NGOs that surreptitiously pursue political and ideological goals with ZERO oversight and arguably at the behest of their ideological brethren who are elected officials or appointed to government agencies that operate pretty much in secret as part of a labyrinth that Musk has shined light on.
So yes trump had issued a lot of EOs and is a bull in a China shop but let's remember that the most criticized of his actions have been taken as a reaction to and a reversal of what Biden and Harris allowed to happen ( border) or continue ( deep state spending billions and trillions with no oversight and with politics and fraud being g now discovered in every nook and cranny ).
Well said! Answering these critiques often requires explaining almost a decade of basic facts on key stories (Russiagate origins/politicization, COVID origins/mitigation debates, and the Twitter Files foremost among them). There needs to be some kind of primer on such MSM-buried stories from a source these critics trust. Because, if you assume total ignorance of the facts on those three stories alone, you can see how one might be outraged at what Trump 2.0 is doing re: the federal bureaucracy.
One smaller illustration of this on my end. I somehow missed until now that the Biden admin deliberately flew in 500,000 illegal immigrants under the CHNV programs. Trump’s revocation of their status would look harsh if you lacked that critical factual context
I knew they were flying in illegals, but your comment and that mind-boggling 500K figure got me researching a bit deeper. Found this write-up from a year ago—the Biden era—on the House of Reps' Homeland Security website. Just read the first three paragraphs. Un-flippin-believable!! This kind of treason is what put Trump into office.
Biden is not and never was a leader. In the Senate he was an elder statesman simply by years of service, not intellect or integrity. As president, he was not in charge, the advisors behind the curtain were calling the shots. He was a mannequin being propped up.
Great response regarding Trump being authoritarian. Biden’s lawfare, censorship, “no right is absolute” “, J6 incarceration and other infringes on civil rights were the epitome of an authoritarian regime. To say Trump is an authoritarian is laughable and instantly disconnects me from listening to any more of a persons opinions.
Very nice rebuttal here to Dave who obviously watches MSMedia as he has all the usual suspect tropes. Your work here is calm and balanced. I came to where I am politically now from the Left. I bolted during the covid mandates and started doing deeper research. I realized I didn't really know nearly enough about the Conservative philosophies and policies. And I began to look at MSMedia information about Trump a whole lot closer. Trump is, as you say, a strong personality. But he's way more smarter than I ever realized. He learns from mistakes. He's also wickedly funny. He listens to people who don't always have a voice in this world. And he does nice things for people who need help that almost never get publicized. Right now, with all that DOGE is finding out about our systems and hidden practices, I am realizing that the country we all thought we were living in isn't at all the country we live in. I am hoping and praying for this slim chance to right this failing ship of a nation.
I enjoyed this. I do not have that kind of patience. Personally, I am pleased that employees who refused FEMA benefits, for example, to Trump supporters are getting a wake up call. Empty Government buildings were brought to my attention almost 20 years ago. About time to cut, I'd say. I remember the picture of Elon Musk holding a sink as he took charge of Twitter, who had de-platformed a sitting President. He took a lot of heat and bad press then. Twix is now operating more efficiently, and I have seen no evidence of hate speech. In fact, I have never been bombarded with activists like on You tube and Facebook for voicing an opinion. I have every reason to believe that Elon and President Trump can take the heat and get the job done. No one else could, so yay. The resistance is loud and dangerous this time around.
Very well done Leah. You’ve done a fine job in exposing the frustration of a Trump supporter who is a centrist. You see, the labeling of Trump as “right wing” by the dying media masters is a false flag. Trump is a centrist. He wants a good economy, strong national defense, a safety net for those that need it and a vibrant and thriving private sector. And that is his mission. It is only because the Democrat party has lurched so far to the left, that somehow a centrist can be labeled right wing. But the proof is in recent rallies by Bernie Sanders and AOC. These are the leaders of the Democrat party, unless a normal centrist steps on stage to snatch victory from defeat.
I’ve seen some questions here about the economy and will pass along my two cents, having spent 35 years in the private sector at the top of my profession (Certified Public Accountant). First, Trump’s plan is a very good one. But to be fair, it has not been explained in a coherent manner and that falls on Trump. To better understand, I recommend watching a recent interview with the new Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent. It is a masterclass in common sense.
Second, people who understand the market are very optimistic about the prospects for a vibrant and thriving private sector. I’m one of them. It is way too early to be sounding any type of alarm, because this stuff takes time. The theory is simple. Government previously was 25% of US GDP, that must shrink back to 18%, pre-Biden. That means cutting the government down to size. Brutal, yes. Vitally important, yes. It is critical that the US annual budget deficit be no more than 3% of GDP. Today it is 6% of GDP. This brings down costs, inflation, etc…. This also frees up workers for the private sector, which will be stimulated by: manufacturing returning to the US (because of tariff and other incentives), reducing burdensome regulations, as well as other actions. Corporate American has already indicated significant investment in the US along with foreign corporations as well. To better understand the market side of this, I recommend watching a recent interview with Howard Lutnick, the new Commerce Secretary. This man is a force of nature.
The good news from all of this from an economic perspective is that there is a plan and it is being executed by very capable private sector people. They are patriots who are giving up their earning potential over the next 4 years to serve the United States of America. Don’t be fooled by elites throwing stones saying you don’t understand how the government works. This false flag has been exposed by the past 4 years of carnage and the recent revelations of DOGE.
I was just reading about the Lutnick interview in Jeff Childers' substack. Thanks for these two links and your optimism. I am feeling more hopeful with Trump in place and his tapping of people who are pro-America (vs. pro-globalist). One of the most shocking things to me over the past four years was watching Biden's administration respond to problems by consistently taking action that seemed design to make the problem worse for America rather than mitigate or solve it. It was like they were intent on weakening America rather than strengthening. Like they *wanted* economic collapse. I really hope the changes wrought by Trump's policies will be enough to turn us around.
I watched Biden’s economic policies in horror. Biden’s handlers didn’t so much as want to destroy the US. It is more that what they wanted, more federal spending for their pet projects, is what destroyed the US. Their intentions are always noble, they will say. But the consequences of their policies is what they can’t see or acknowledge because of their ideology. The border, the economy, the wars. These are serious problems caused by the left.
Nicely done, Leah. Civil. Trump is unlike the political elites of the inside the beltway UniParty blob. He is not a politician. Did you catch his comment about overtime pay for the strandef astronauts? " I will pay them myself." MAGA is a populist movement, not a political party. It is neither Republican or Democrat. It is America First. The federal government is America last. Watch for another assassination attempt. "Their democracy" is burning Tesla dealerships.
I pray we make it through this. Roberts needs to get off the 🚽 toilet and stop the Cloward Piven social upheaval. But, I opine, he will let it play out to the detriment of the debt burdened Constitutional Republic.
"And that said, I don’t like how abruptly office workers are being forced out—given twenty minutes to pack up their things and leave."
This is a standard thing in the private business environment. Companies operate on the expectation that a fired employee WILL attempt to f*ck something up on their way out, and they take steps to prevent that from happening. Sometimes a fired employee will get walked out the door and *someone else* will gather their personal belongings into a box that is subsequently given to them.
Government employees seem even more likely than private ones to do their best to wreak havoc on the way out. Especially when they despise the party that is currently in power (and most of them do). I fully support the 'walking them out the door' model for these people.
Thanks for this perspective, Celia. I am aware of this happening in private industry but wasn't aware it was standard. It does make rational sense. And certainly in context of firing federal employees who despise the people in charge. Unfortunately, it also creates a tsunami of grist for the grievance mill that churns out the Democrat talking points and the media narrative. Hysteria central. Oy.
I appreciate the fulsome response, Leah. There is too much here to respond to in a single comment, so I will do this piecemeal (and/or put together a larger post). I want to start with the non-response to the question about Trump's involvement in crypto. I was imprecise in my initial summary comment. The direct question is how you would have responded if a president you did not endorse (1) started up a crypto business (World Liberty Financial) during the campaign into which a Chinese foreign national invested $30 million post-election, and (2) issued meme coins (one named for himself and the other for the first lady) three days before the innauguration?
While there is minimal transparency around these events (which seems shocking in itself given the implicatioins of having our most senior elected officials potentially tainted by conflicts of interest), to the extent we can find a neutral perspective, I believe all of the following are true and my theoretical non-Trump President would be on his or her heels trying to walk this back.
- Donald Trump and his sons are active in World Liberty Financial (WLFI). They were marketed as having named roles on its behalf. Zach Witkoff (son of Trump friend and Middle East Special Envoy, Steve Witkoff) is the co-founder.
- MSNBC reported earlier that documents filed at WLFI's inception indicate the Trump's may be the beneficiaries of up to 75% of its revenue.
- The largest investor in the "coins" that provide governance voice (but not direct share of earnings) is Chinese national Justin Sun. The company has collected $550 million in two offerings.
- ABC reported that Sun's $30 million investment shortly after the election triggered the provision qualifying a "Trump-related entity" to receive 75% of company revenue (I doubt these investments are "revenue" for these purposes, but just the interest on $550 million, which would be revenue, is material) https://abcnews.go.com/US/chinese-entrepreneur-sued-fraud-invests-30-million-trump/story?id=116499146
- In February the Trump SEC announced a move to resolve a 2023 law suit they had brought against Sun alleging fraudulent activity (price manipulation) in his crypto currency business, TRON.
Separately,
- Days before the innauguration, Trump announced and began marketing $Trump and $Melania meme coins
- We do know the value of the two coins peaked a few days after issuance at north of $27 billion, making the "paper" value of the coins retained by Trump (only 20% were issued) more than $20 billion.
- As for hard cash results, I don't have a Financial Times subscription, but Wikipedia reports that "A March 2025 Financial Times analysis found that the crypto project netted at least $350 million through sales of tokens and fees."https://www.ft.com/content/cb1def8f-53a6-478e-9b3e-33c383b29629
It isn't only that Trump (and Musk) have enormous potential conflicts of interest, but the Administration is actively gutting the regulatory infrastructure intended to monitor these kinds of complex and opague financial programs. Trump evolved from being a fierce skeptic of all things crypto to being the industry's loudest cheerleader. I think we should all be curious about that.
More to follow - but one thing you said really resonated with me. It isn't that you and I aren't curious and don't read what is being said from across the spectrum. But we judge the credibility of the various sources very differently. Since it's impossible to prove a negative, the search for truth is a challenge. Among the things I'd ask you to stay curious about are
(1) are the Doge claims of fraud and abuse uncovered holding up?
(2) Is Gates' involvement as a private citizen really equivalent to Musk's current role? You say Musk "doesn’t lobby government leaders to stomp on civil liberties," but he uses his outsized voice on X to promote irresponsible and undocumented accusations against his enemy of the day (indeed how does he have time to do anything given the level of social media output?).
(3) Is this administration really a fan of free speech? It sure looks like Trump is determined to threaten anyone who challenges him and he's moving to deport folks without alleging or proving any activity other than speech he finds objectionable.
If you're assessment around J6 and the pandemic end up being 20% correct, I will buy at the restaurant of your choice. In this regard, I hope Trump is successful in these deep investigations as I think the findings will sorely disappoint the conspiracy claims. As for RFK - in the spirit of sharing alternative sources, here is a link to a source whose credibility I suspect we will not agree on :). I tried to read RFK's book on Fauci, but - similar to this analysis, kept finding the copious footnotes didn't really support the points referenced.
1) My sense has been the information is being distorted by both sides, but yes, I do think that a tremendous amount of consequential waste and fraud is being exposed and will continue to be. As I mentioned in my comment replying to Yet Another Nature Love, Elon's discovery of "magic money machines" scattered throughout the federal bureaucracy is about as outrageous a fraud as it gets.
2) Elon's work with DOGE is a very specific role in a legitimately established department under Trump's executive authority, with a defined mission. Gates uses his wealth, connections, and influence to impose his personal ideals and pet projects on citizens the world over. Elon creates and sells things to people who choose to buy/use them; Gates works with elites in government to force his products and ideas on unwilling masses. I don't support Elon's hypocrisy when he gets in a snit and bans people from X, but if he wants to use his platform to amplify his views and criticize his opponents, I don't think he is any further out of line than Gates operating with world leaders behind the scenes to impose his personal agenda for managing other people's health and wellbeing (which always seems to be add to his own profits).
3) I think most Americans don't understand the differences between free speech rights for citizens versus legal resident aliens versus illegal aliens. There are laws that delineate them and so far, by my reading, Trump as not operated outside his Constitutional authority or the statutory limits. We can certainly have the debate about the fairness and morality of his deportations, but that's not the same question as their legality. And based on the polling data it seems most Americans are fine with the deportations. It's likely hard for people to get caught up in knots over the exit plan when Biden's administration cared not at all about following the law when finding ways to twist and circumvent it in their scheme let the 10-20 million illegals in.
Thanks. I need to hear more about the "magic money machines." Skeptical of the claim for now based on the track record Doge has so far on its claims. I think our different perspectives on Gates track back to our perspectives on credible sources. As you say, "priors" have such a big effect. At some point, one makes a choice as to who to believe and it gets very hard to move beyond that. By the end of the pandemic I think most engaged people got pushed to that point.
If you're willing to hear the claims from the horse's mouth, I recommend this interview, which is where (I think?) Elon first mentioned the "magic money" publicly. If you don't want to watch the whole thing, I recommend the first 12-15 minutes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDREZmpkIz8
Thanks for this explication, Dave. I have to confess I do not know much about crypto, though I am aware that Trump has done a 180 on it. Some of the people I follow are big into crypto and my understanding it that they are fans of the potential for it act as a firewall against government regulation/manipulation of people via their finances, which sounds like a very good thing for protecting free market economies and individual liberties.
Based on your description, your concern about lack of transparency around Trump's WFLI Chinese investor sounds reasonable. I most definitely wanted more investigation and airing of Biden's suspected influence peddling with the Chinese (and others), and I remember being outraged by Clinton's receipt of millions in illegal campaign donations from China that, as I recall, occurred just before he used his executive power to declassify and send the CCP some of our nuclear missile technology. So yes, Trump making a private deal with a Chinese national warrants a full airing of facts. But Trump changing his mind on crypto and creating his own seems like a good thing for securing the future of digital currencies—1000 times better than a government trying to force everyone onto their own.
Re: meme coins, I don't feel particularly bothered by that. If people are privately investing and no tax dollars are being misappropriated, I'm not going to stand in their way. From what I know, meme coins are inherently risky and IMO a waste of money, but if Trump fans "invest" in such a shaky commodity (or whatever meme coins are), I don't think its a scandal for Trump to cash in on his political popularity. He's not receiving a salary from tax payers and other politicians certainly have found ways to enrich themselves while on the taxpayers' dime.
I'll reply to your numbered questions in a different comment.
I think so. I don't care about people in power making legal profits as long as they aren't selling influence or selling out U.S. interests, or otherwise breaking their oath of office. This meme coin thing sounds like a vanity project, not an abuse of power or breach of law. Generally I think it's smart to pick your battles. For example, I was beyond frustrated back in the Clinton era that the idiot House Republicans focused their impeachment efforts on Monica Lewinsky, as sordid as that whole affair was. There were far more obvious and compelling crimes they could have pursued, like the quid pro quo campaign money for our rocket technology (I misspoke in my previous comment: it was declassification of rocket tech, and it was projected to have advanced the CCP's missile capabilities by about 20 years, creating concern about the ability of China to launch nukes).
That's fair. Just want to be sure we both apply criteria consistently across the different players. For me, the meme coin thing is terribly unseemly - just a grift and too easily manipulated in ways that move into the realm of illegality.
If it crosses the line into illegality then prosecutions are in order. I want to live in a nation of laws where everyone is subject to the same protections, enjoys the same opportunities.
Just appreciating that you are still here, Dave, and reading with a critical eye, and responding in such a civil manner, with plenty of information and new questions. More than I could do.
Mahmoud Khalil, a green card holder, is being deported because the Secretary of State views his presence in the US as either: (1) a national security threat, or (2) counter to US foreign policy, under immigration law. His deportation has nothing to do with free speech. He need not have been convicted of a crime to be deported. Take a listen to this discussion by an expert prosecutor of terrorists who was previously the Assistant US Attorney @ SDNY, Andy McCarthy.
I understand the legal argument, but the practical question here is why did the Secretary of State conclude he was (1) or (2)? The simplest answer is that Trump has decided the protests last year are still a great issue for him to leverage. Because Khalil is an unsympathetic character to most people, you can use strong man tactics to take him down and then people get used to letting you do whatever you want - like rounding up possible Venezuelan gang members and shipping them to El Salvador.
No. The protests stepped over the line in many cases, for far too long. The Universities did a terrible job of containing the protests and in holding the students activists to established protest rules on campus. This jeopardized the safety Jewish students on campus. Worse, the federal government under Biden did nothing, zero. Why ? To bow down to their political masters, the progressive left. Why ? Because the progressive left believes that Jews and Israel are oppressors. If the protests were behind ropes and only involved words, the Jewish students would not have been bothered. That’s not what happened.
Khalil was the leader of a campus group called Columbia University Apartheid Divest. He led the negotiations on behalf of this group to force Columbia to divest from investing in Israel. US foreign policy under Trump is to support Israel. Khalil’s actions frustrate US foreign policy. That is all that is needed for the Secretary of State to deport. And that’s from what we know. We don’t know what evidence students from Columbia provided to the government. We don’t know what evidence the government obtained from Israeli Mossad prior to coming to the US.
Some of this is political, sure. Trump 1.0 was a big supporter of Israel. The electorate knew that and voted for Trump 2.0 to push back against the madness of the past 4 years under Biden as it relates to Israel, especially since the war with Hamas began 10/7. This war is Biden’s fault and Trump is 100% right to do what is necessary to: (1) allow Israel to win the kinetic war against Hamas, and (2) prevent the abuses on US campuses from continuing.
Recently Trump watched the 47 minute video compiled by IDF captured from the GoPro cameras of Hamas on 10/7. This told the bloody reality of the killings. He also met with the hostages and listened to their story. Trump is motivated by more than just politics on this one. Enough is enough.
Agree with you on the mishandling of the protests. I'd be curious to know how often Secretaries of State have utilized this provision. It just seems like a stretch that this individual is an obstacle to execution of our foreign policy.
Hi Mr. President, this is Bibi, thank you for taking my call. As you know, Google recently announced the purchase of Wiz, an Israeli cyber security firm, for $32 billion cash. We think about $4 billion of that will come to the Israeli treasury, which will help with those fighter jets we just ordered from Lockheed Martin. Sadly, one of our other Tel Aviv start ups is experiencing a challenge. It’s in the middle of phase 2 clinical trials for a cancer drug and Columbia University is threatening to remove its funding. Wants its money back. Is there anything you can do to help us Mr. President ? The clinical trials are for a cancer drug that will have wide ranging implications for the treatment of this horrible disease.
The constitution does not provide for independent departments controlled by congress in the executive branch. That will end when it gets to SCOTUS.
From my own substack:
"Last January, RMG Research, a firm founded by Scott Rasmussen and based in Clearwater Florida, surveyed a representative sample of 2,380 federal government managers in order to ascertain their attitudes towards the incoming Trump Administration. The results offer convincing evidence of the existence of the Deep State.
Support or Resistance: Federal government managers were asked whether they would support or resist the Trump administration. The results showed that 44% of federal managers said they would support the administration, while 42% said they would resist it, and nearly a quarter (23%) indicated they will "strongly resist".
Response to Lawful Orders: The poll also asked federal managers what they would do if Trump gave them a lawful order that they considered to be bad policy. Only 17% of Democratic managers who voted for Vice President Kamala Harris said they would follow the order, while 64% said they would ignore the order and do what they thought was best."
Any President is elected based on his campaign promises. He is entitled to hire loyalists to pursue those policies. The deep state is real and must be quashed. Let Congress legislate, not unelected bureaucrats.
I forgot to mention in my first response the imbalanced impact of the Trump meme coin on its investors. A few people made millions and hundreds of thousands got fleeced. Then this reporting (from another source worth considering) hit this morning - https://popular.info/p/trump-and-pump
In your response, Leah, I very much appreciated your reflection on Trump's less appealing aspects and I follow (though am not willing to justify) the argument that the ossified structure we have built might only be addressed with crude means. The problem isn't that the government is so broken it cannot be fixed in humane and rational ways. The problem is that our POLITICS are so broken that, absent radical reform, no leaders or groups of leaders will ever arise or be incentivized to do the long, hard work of fixing the government.
I have written on this topic at great length in my 5 part series "How Did We Get Here - What To Do Now." As outlined there, there are major reform movements directed at correcting the way we elect our representatives that show great promise for remaking our legislatures into bodies that are capable and rewarded for fixing the government. The need for a stronger executive is not our problem. The problem is that we have had a non-functioning legislative branch, and all branches must be working strongly for our system to thrive.
In that series I also, reluctantly, make the case that Trump - far from being a corrective - is more likely to break things so badly that revolution, not reform, will be the only path forward. Understand, I am not arguing in favor of the things you have found so distasteful and alarming about our social and economic trajectory. I am saying that trajectory was a natural outcome of a broken electoral system that only rewards extremism. Trump is not the solution to that - he is a symptom and an acceleration of it. I remain convinced that a highly functioning democracy is humanity's only great hope. We are not that today and Trump is not leading us in that direction.
Certainly, transparency will be a prime attribute of a highly functioning democracy - but that is not what Trump is bringing. He wishes to make transparent anything that places his opponents in a negative light while readily using the levers of power for his own aggrandizement. The aspects about him that you find distasteful are the warning signs that this is true. The country got mesmerized with the idea that the ends (smaller government, less ideology) justified the means (elect a selfish bully). That idea never works out well.
You said the following in your reply, "It’s not at all clear to me that Trump 2.0 is a more virulent form of authoritarianism. Nobody’s civil liberties are being threatened (much less abridged), no one in Trump’s administration is colluding to censor inconvenient truths on social media, or to prosecute political rivals on brazenly trumped-up charges."
I strongly disagree with that statement. The method is different, but the effect is the same. Trump has targeted individual law firms and universities for punishments (and the implied threat of marshalling all MAGA supporters to enact broader retribution). He makes unsubstantiated claims of bad faith or fraudulent acts, ensures their magnification in social media and then puts out executive orders outlining punishments justified on that flimsy foundation. He wants judges to be impeached for exercising their constitutional duties if doing so interferes with his project, and he encourages rash over-reaction (send a whole bunch of people to El Salvador prisons) without the minimum level of due diligence to avoid unjust abduction.
I have no doubt there are things in the underbelly of our massive government that are in bad need of rooting out and fixing (I also have no doubt that a massive government is not avoidable for a nation of our size in the complex world in which we live today - notwithstanding the dreamy hopes of libertarians). But, unless we start with wise and compassionate leadership at the top, any rooting out done will be to no avail. The guts of the system will eventually reflect the character of its leadership.
"The need for a stronger executive is not our problem. The problem is that we have had a non-functioning legislative branch, and all branches must be working strongly for our system to thrive."
I concur. And one of the main ways the legislative branch has abdicated its proper role and thrown everything off balance is by creating larger and larger bureaucracy by statute but then leaving the bureaucrats to create their own regulations which carry the force of law. Of course they expand their own power. Thanks heavens SCOTUS overturned Chevron.
"The method is different, but the effect is the same. Trump has targeted individual law firms and universities for punishments (and the implied threat of marshalling all MAGA supporters to enact broader retribution). He makes unsubstantiated claims of bad faith or fraudulent acts, ensures their magnification in social media and then puts out executive orders outlining punishments justified on that flimsy foundation."
The method is the legitimating difference. It is hardly a small point that Trump is inside the bounds of the law. It's notable that, in contrast to Biden's actions, nothing you've listed is a violation of Americans' civil liberties. Universities do not have a Constitutional right to taxpayer funding; law firms do not have a Constitutional right to security clearances—especially when they abuse them to pursue lawfare against a presidential candidate and then former president. His claims are not unsubstantiated, as anyone who's been following the Leftist lawfare outside of mockingbird media sources knows. I get Trump's not making the argument in a PR campaign, but that doesn't mean there is no basis for the claims and investigations that are being launched or threatened.
Trump is wielding political power in a very blunt fashion, but so have many of his predecessors in their own time. The crucial point, to my mind, is that he is doing it within the bounds of law. Entirely unlike Biden, whose violations of the Constitution, breaches of his oath of office and of citizens' civil liberties went wholly unremarked upon . . . one might even say, were sanctioned, by the mockingbird media and Left commentariat.
Lastly, I am overall sympathetic to your concerns for America's future. It feels pretty precarious to me as well and it's possible your take on Trump will turn out justified. But if there is anything my forty years of fretting over the pendulum swings and political winds have taught me, it's that we're dealing with countless layers of a complex system in which so much is happening all the time behind the scenes on various levels, that there's no real way to predict how things will go. Unseen outcomes are the rule, not the exception.
To this point about the complexity, if you have time to watch this interview of a former Trump State Department official. I'd be very interested in your thoughts. The discussion here is not about Trump, but about the messy realities of power and security and the how it is managed in the geopolitical arena.
Forgot to say - I'll watch the video and give my reactions. Hope you'll watch video link I sent out at the end of my reply yesterday (the analysis of RFK's Joe Rogan appearance)
If Trump is doing everything within the bounds of the law, why have the courts had to interfere with more of his actions than any other president? Left-leaning courts don't explain the extent of his legal losses. The track record is similar when juries have been involved.
Again, this goes back to prior beliefs. If you are certain that J6 is all a conspiracy of the left (and the election was stolen), the courts must be corrupt. But if J6 was an anti-constitutional attempt to change a legitimate election, then the courts were, laboriously, doing what needed to be done (while Trump and his lawyers obfiscated and delayed at every possible turn).
We're about to enter into a whole new phase of the same thing. Trump is clearly going to push across the line over and over to test courts' resolve and take whatever expansion of power he can manufacture.
I agree it has a lot to do with priors and trusted sources. For the record, I don't think J6 was a conspiracy of the Left, per se. I think the violence was fomented to some yet-unknown extent, and the Capitol security deliberately reduced, to create a kind of false flag event, a pretext for propagandizing MAGA and Trump as domestic terrorists to eliminate him politically. I also think that courts are not intrinsically neutral arbiters (as witnessed by the AI review of court rulings mentioned in my essay), and activist district judges on the Left are currently over-reaching their authority with activist efforts to stop Trump enacting the will of the people—effectively a judicial coup. It sounds like Congress is gearing up to finally do their job vis a vis their role in creating and delineating the lower courts' power. So yay for the Legislative branch finally waking up, if they do.
Honestly, I don't know enough about economics and finance (or even accounting) so I don't think I can comment intelligently specifically on the numbers.
I will say that I doubt the projections are accurate, and likely not even realistically predictable. By that I mean that when they were running these numbers there was no way to know exactly how much fraud and waste would be found and ended, much less what those impacts would be. We still don't know. In fact, it feels like the ground is constantly shifting, and as the geopolitical scene changes how will that impact our financial picture, for better or worse?
What we really need is to get a clear idea of the truth about our financial situation—do an actual audit of the Federal Reserve and Fort Knox. Get a handle on the true numbers so we know what the real situation is. The fact that Elon just found 14 "magic money machines" throughout various agencies that were being operated like debit cards but with no network or tie to the overall system is terrifying. As one financial guru I follow put it: "We have just discovered that we literally don't know what our denominator is"—aka we don't know the total dollars supposedly in circulation. Our federal finances have been operating from a bottomless well.🤯🤯🤯 How long has this been going on? The implications could be huge.
Well done, Leah!! Your response was measured and thoughtful and, when appropriate, backed with evidence. I wish more folks did what you recommended … read and/or learn about what the other side thinks. Your interplay with David is a perfect example and model of civil conversation between two opposing viewpoints. We need more of it! Thank you!
Terrific piece today. Nice to have the dialogue with Dave. I will not repeat yout answers to Dave but I will add two rejoinders of sorts: 1) the authoritarian label is thrown around a lot with little explanation or nuance or definition ( who are the five worst ( most) authoritarian in the world today and WHY is that the case); and 2) elections present a binary choice ( in this case trump v harris) : if Harris had won what would be going on today on terms of the border remaining open and deportations ( how many criminals would be deported and would almost rem million non criminals just get to stay and if so why); if there was no DOGE what are the odds that itvwould be business as usual in terms of what we now know clearly was massive waste and fraud and corruption and proof that there is a deep state that funnels billions if not trillions to friends and family ( who get rich) or unelected NGOs that surreptitiously pursue political and ideological goals with ZERO oversight and arguably at the behest of their ideological brethren who are elected officials or appointed to government agencies that operate pretty much in secret as part of a labyrinth that Musk has shined light on.
So yes trump had issued a lot of EOs and is a bull in a China shop but let's remember that the most criticized of his actions have been taken as a reaction to and a reversal of what Biden and Harris allowed to happen ( border) or continue ( deep state spending billions and trillions with no oversight and with politics and fraud being g now discovered in every nook and cranny ).
Well said! Answering these critiques often requires explaining almost a decade of basic facts on key stories (Russiagate origins/politicization, COVID origins/mitigation debates, and the Twitter Files foremost among them). There needs to be some kind of primer on such MSM-buried stories from a source these critics trust. Because, if you assume total ignorance of the facts on those three stories alone, you can see how one might be outraged at what Trump 2.0 is doing re: the federal bureaucracy.
One smaller illustration of this on my end. I somehow missed until now that the Biden admin deliberately flew in 500,000 illegal immigrants under the CHNV programs. Trump’s revocation of their status would look harsh if you lacked that critical factual context
I knew they were flying in illegals, but your comment and that mind-boggling 500K figure got me researching a bit deeper. Found this write-up from a year ago—the Biden era—on the House of Reps' Homeland Security website. Just read the first three paragraphs. Un-flippin-believable!! This kind of treason is what put Trump into office.
https://homeland.house.gov/2024/04/30/new-documents-reveal-airports-used-by-secretary-mayorkas-to-fly-hundreds-of-thousands-of-inadmissible-aliens-into-u-s-via-chnv-mass-parole-scheme/
It’s somehow illegal to ship these folks home without due process, but legal to fly them into the US in the dark of night and release them.
And that's why msm wants to try to prevent you from knowing facts such as those
Facts are pesky things. Dems must have some sort of fact repellant.
Biden is not and never was a leader. In the Senate he was an elder statesman simply by years of service, not intellect or integrity. As president, he was not in charge, the advisors behind the curtain were calling the shots. He was a mannequin being propped up.
Great response regarding Trump being authoritarian. Biden’s lawfare, censorship, “no right is absolute” “, J6 incarceration and other infringes on civil rights were the epitome of an authoritarian regime. To say Trump is an authoritarian is laughable and instantly disconnects me from listening to any more of a persons opinions.
Very nice rebuttal here to Dave who obviously watches MSMedia as he has all the usual suspect tropes. Your work here is calm and balanced. I came to where I am politically now from the Left. I bolted during the covid mandates and started doing deeper research. I realized I didn't really know nearly enough about the Conservative philosophies and policies. And I began to look at MSMedia information about Trump a whole lot closer. Trump is, as you say, a strong personality. But he's way more smarter than I ever realized. He learns from mistakes. He's also wickedly funny. He listens to people who don't always have a voice in this world. And he does nice things for people who need help that almost never get publicized. Right now, with all that DOGE is finding out about our systems and hidden practices, I am realizing that the country we all thought we were living in isn't at all the country we live in. I am hoping and praying for this slim chance to right this failing ship of a nation.
I enjoyed this. I do not have that kind of patience. Personally, I am pleased that employees who refused FEMA benefits, for example, to Trump supporters are getting a wake up call. Empty Government buildings were brought to my attention almost 20 years ago. About time to cut, I'd say. I remember the picture of Elon Musk holding a sink as he took charge of Twitter, who had de-platformed a sitting President. He took a lot of heat and bad press then. Twix is now operating more efficiently, and I have seen no evidence of hate speech. In fact, I have never been bombarded with activists like on You tube and Facebook for voicing an opinion. I have every reason to believe that Elon and President Trump can take the heat and get the job done. No one else could, so yay. The resistance is loud and dangerous this time around.
Very well done Leah. You’ve done a fine job in exposing the frustration of a Trump supporter who is a centrist. You see, the labeling of Trump as “right wing” by the dying media masters is a false flag. Trump is a centrist. He wants a good economy, strong national defense, a safety net for those that need it and a vibrant and thriving private sector. And that is his mission. It is only because the Democrat party has lurched so far to the left, that somehow a centrist can be labeled right wing. But the proof is in recent rallies by Bernie Sanders and AOC. These are the leaders of the Democrat party, unless a normal centrist steps on stage to snatch victory from defeat.
I’ve seen some questions here about the economy and will pass along my two cents, having spent 35 years in the private sector at the top of my profession (Certified Public Accountant). First, Trump’s plan is a very good one. But to be fair, it has not been explained in a coherent manner and that falls on Trump. To better understand, I recommend watching a recent interview with the new Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent. It is a masterclass in common sense.
https://open.spotify.com/episode/1uZdUpXs0jyhqqVq9mTBYy?si=h_lQlmlASJG9W_pQcX8E2g
Second, people who understand the market are very optimistic about the prospects for a vibrant and thriving private sector. I’m one of them. It is way too early to be sounding any type of alarm, because this stuff takes time. The theory is simple. Government previously was 25% of US GDP, that must shrink back to 18%, pre-Biden. That means cutting the government down to size. Brutal, yes. Vitally important, yes. It is critical that the US annual budget deficit be no more than 3% of GDP. Today it is 6% of GDP. This brings down costs, inflation, etc…. This also frees up workers for the private sector, which will be stimulated by: manufacturing returning to the US (because of tariff and other incentives), reducing burdensome regulations, as well as other actions. Corporate American has already indicated significant investment in the US along with foreign corporations as well. To better understand the market side of this, I recommend watching a recent interview with Howard Lutnick, the new Commerce Secretary. This man is a force of nature.
https://open.spotify.com/episode/1DACI9sBywPc4mRuwkTFju?si=x9Q_Q3uiT1qONJ-SCAfB_g
The good news from all of this from an economic perspective is that there is a plan and it is being executed by very capable private sector people. They are patriots who are giving up their earning potential over the next 4 years to serve the United States of America. Don’t be fooled by elites throwing stones saying you don’t understand how the government works. This false flag has been exposed by the past 4 years of carnage and the recent revelations of DOGE.
I was just reading about the Lutnick interview in Jeff Childers' substack. Thanks for these two links and your optimism. I am feeling more hopeful with Trump in place and his tapping of people who are pro-America (vs. pro-globalist). One of the most shocking things to me over the past four years was watching Biden's administration respond to problems by consistently taking action that seemed design to make the problem worse for America rather than mitigate or solve it. It was like they were intent on weakening America rather than strengthening. Like they *wanted* economic collapse. I really hope the changes wrought by Trump's policies will be enough to turn us around.
I watched Biden’s economic policies in horror. Biden’s handlers didn’t so much as want to destroy the US. It is more that what they wanted, more federal spending for their pet projects, is what destroyed the US. Their intentions are always noble, they will say. But the consequences of their policies is what they can’t see or acknowledge because of their ideology. The border, the economy, the wars. These are serious problems caused by the left.
Nicely done, Leah. Civil. Trump is unlike the political elites of the inside the beltway UniParty blob. He is not a politician. Did you catch his comment about overtime pay for the strandef astronauts? " I will pay them myself." MAGA is a populist movement, not a political party. It is neither Republican or Democrat. It is America First. The federal government is America last. Watch for another assassination attempt. "Their democracy" is burning Tesla dealerships.
I pray we make it through this. Roberts needs to get off the 🚽 toilet and stop the Cloward Piven social upheaval. But, I opine, he will let it play out to the detriment of the debt burdened Constitutional Republic.
Have a blessed Sunday evening.
Ciao from Brasil.
"And that said, I don’t like how abruptly office workers are being forced out—given twenty minutes to pack up their things and leave."
This is a standard thing in the private business environment. Companies operate on the expectation that a fired employee WILL attempt to f*ck something up on their way out, and they take steps to prevent that from happening. Sometimes a fired employee will get walked out the door and *someone else* will gather their personal belongings into a box that is subsequently given to them.
Government employees seem even more likely than private ones to do their best to wreak havoc on the way out. Especially when they despise the party that is currently in power (and most of them do). I fully support the 'walking them out the door' model for these people.
Thanks for this perspective, Celia. I am aware of this happening in private industry but wasn't aware it was standard. It does make rational sense. And certainly in context of firing federal employees who despise the people in charge. Unfortunately, it also creates a tsunami of grist for the grievance mill that churns out the Democrat talking points and the media narrative. Hysteria central. Oy.
I appreciate the fulsome response, Leah. There is too much here to respond to in a single comment, so I will do this piecemeal (and/or put together a larger post). I want to start with the non-response to the question about Trump's involvement in crypto. I was imprecise in my initial summary comment. The direct question is how you would have responded if a president you did not endorse (1) started up a crypto business (World Liberty Financial) during the campaign into which a Chinese foreign national invested $30 million post-election, and (2) issued meme coins (one named for himself and the other for the first lady) three days before the innauguration?
While there is minimal transparency around these events (which seems shocking in itself given the implicatioins of having our most senior elected officials potentially tainted by conflicts of interest), to the extent we can find a neutral perspective, I believe all of the following are true and my theoretical non-Trump President would be on his or her heels trying to walk this back.
- Donald Trump and his sons are active in World Liberty Financial (WLFI). They were marketed as having named roles on its behalf. Zach Witkoff (son of Trump friend and Middle East Special Envoy, Steve Witkoff) is the co-founder.
- MSNBC reported earlier that documents filed at WLFI's inception indicate the Trump's may be the beneficiaries of up to 75% of its revenue.
- The largest investor in the "coins" that provide governance voice (but not direct share of earnings) is Chinese national Justin Sun. The company has collected $550 million in two offerings.
- ABC reported that Sun's $30 million investment shortly after the election triggered the provision qualifying a "Trump-related entity" to receive 75% of company revenue (I doubt these investments are "revenue" for these purposes, but just the interest on $550 million, which would be revenue, is material) https://abcnews.go.com/US/chinese-entrepreneur-sued-fraud-invests-30-million-trump/story?id=116499146
- In February the Trump SEC announced a move to resolve a 2023 law suit they had brought against Sun alleging fraudulent activity (price manipulation) in his crypto currency business, TRON.
Separately,
- Days before the innauguration, Trump announced and began marketing $Trump and $Melania meme coins
- There is no inherent economic value in the coins, but earnings are generated by and for the controlling entities via trading fees. We don't know how much of the fees generated in the early days accrued to Trump personally (shouldn't we know this?), but - as the fees are estimated to have reached $86-$100 million - we can assume Trump has garnered a material economic benefit. https://www.reuters.com/markets/currencies/trumps-meme-coin-made-nearly-100-million-trading-fees-small-traders-lost-money-2025-02-03/#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20entities%20behind,activities%E2%80%9D%20of%20the%20meme%20coin.
- We do know the value of the two coins peaked a few days after issuance at north of $27 billion, making the "paper" value of the coins retained by Trump (only 20% were issued) more than $20 billion.
- As for hard cash results, I don't have a Financial Times subscription, but Wikipedia reports that "A March 2025 Financial Times analysis found that the crypto project netted at least $350 million through sales of tokens and fees."https://www.ft.com/content/cb1def8f-53a6-478e-9b3e-33c383b29629
It isn't only that Trump (and Musk) have enormous potential conflicts of interest, but the Administration is actively gutting the regulatory infrastructure intended to monitor these kinds of complex and opague financial programs. Trump evolved from being a fierce skeptic of all things crypto to being the industry's loudest cheerleader. I think we should all be curious about that.
More to follow - but one thing you said really resonated with me. It isn't that you and I aren't curious and don't read what is being said from across the spectrum. But we judge the credibility of the various sources very differently. Since it's impossible to prove a negative, the search for truth is a challenge. Among the things I'd ask you to stay curious about are
(1) are the Doge claims of fraud and abuse uncovered holding up?
(2) Is Gates' involvement as a private citizen really equivalent to Musk's current role? You say Musk "doesn’t lobby government leaders to stomp on civil liberties," but he uses his outsized voice on X to promote irresponsible and undocumented accusations against his enemy of the day (indeed how does he have time to do anything given the level of social media output?).
(3) Is this administration really a fan of free speech? It sure looks like Trump is determined to threaten anyone who challenges him and he's moving to deport folks without alleging or proving any activity other than speech he finds objectionable.
If you're assessment around J6 and the pandemic end up being 20% correct, I will buy at the restaurant of your choice. In this regard, I hope Trump is successful in these deep investigations as I think the findings will sorely disappoint the conspiracy claims. As for RFK - in the spirit of sharing alternative sources, here is a link to a source whose credibility I suspect we will not agree on :). I tried to read RFK's book on Fauci, but - similar to this analysis, kept finding the copious footnotes didn't really support the points referenced.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/scientist-reacts-to-rfk-jr-on-joe-rogan/vi-AA1ylyyl?cvid=3f8820131b0b49cef3389f453aecc689&ei=15
Regarding your numbered questions:
1) My sense has been the information is being distorted by both sides, but yes, I do think that a tremendous amount of consequential waste and fraud is being exposed and will continue to be. As I mentioned in my comment replying to Yet Another Nature Love, Elon's discovery of "magic money machines" scattered throughout the federal bureaucracy is about as outrageous a fraud as it gets.
2) Elon's work with DOGE is a very specific role in a legitimately established department under Trump's executive authority, with a defined mission. Gates uses his wealth, connections, and influence to impose his personal ideals and pet projects on citizens the world over. Elon creates and sells things to people who choose to buy/use them; Gates works with elites in government to force his products and ideas on unwilling masses. I don't support Elon's hypocrisy when he gets in a snit and bans people from X, but if he wants to use his platform to amplify his views and criticize his opponents, I don't think he is any further out of line than Gates operating with world leaders behind the scenes to impose his personal agenda for managing other people's health and wellbeing (which always seems to be add to his own profits).
3) I think most Americans don't understand the differences between free speech rights for citizens versus legal resident aliens versus illegal aliens. There are laws that delineate them and so far, by my reading, Trump as not operated outside his Constitutional authority or the statutory limits. We can certainly have the debate about the fairness and morality of his deportations, but that's not the same question as their legality. And based on the polling data it seems most Americans are fine with the deportations. It's likely hard for people to get caught up in knots over the exit plan when Biden's administration cared not at all about following the law when finding ways to twist and circumvent it in their scheme let the 10-20 million illegals in.
Thanks. I need to hear more about the "magic money machines." Skeptical of the claim for now based on the track record Doge has so far on its claims. I think our different perspectives on Gates track back to our perspectives on credible sources. As you say, "priors" have such a big effect. At some point, one makes a choice as to who to believe and it gets very hard to move beyond that. By the end of the pandemic I think most engaged people got pushed to that point.
If you're willing to hear the claims from the horse's mouth, I recommend this interview, which is where (I think?) Elon first mentioned the "magic money" publicly. If you don't want to watch the whole thing, I recommend the first 12-15 minutes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDREZmpkIz8
Thanks for this explication, Dave. I have to confess I do not know much about crypto, though I am aware that Trump has done a 180 on it. Some of the people I follow are big into crypto and my understanding it that they are fans of the potential for it act as a firewall against government regulation/manipulation of people via their finances, which sounds like a very good thing for protecting free market economies and individual liberties.
Based on your description, your concern about lack of transparency around Trump's WFLI Chinese investor sounds reasonable. I most definitely wanted more investigation and airing of Biden's suspected influence peddling with the Chinese (and others), and I remember being outraged by Clinton's receipt of millions in illegal campaign donations from China that, as I recall, occurred just before he used his executive power to declassify and send the CCP some of our nuclear missile technology. So yes, Trump making a private deal with a Chinese national warrants a full airing of facts. But Trump changing his mind on crypto and creating his own seems like a good thing for securing the future of digital currencies—1000 times better than a government trying to force everyone onto their own.
Re: meme coins, I don't feel particularly bothered by that. If people are privately investing and no tax dollars are being misappropriated, I'm not going to stand in their way. From what I know, meme coins are inherently risky and IMO a waste of money, but if Trump fans "invest" in such a shaky commodity (or whatever meme coins are), I don't think its a scandal for Trump to cash in on his political popularity. He's not receiving a salary from tax payers and other politicians certainly have found ways to enrich themselves while on the taxpayers' dime.
I'll reply to your numbered questions in a different comment.
Thanks, Leah. You’d feel the same way about Biden having put out a meme coin?
I think so. I don't care about people in power making legal profits as long as they aren't selling influence or selling out U.S. interests, or otherwise breaking their oath of office. This meme coin thing sounds like a vanity project, not an abuse of power or breach of law. Generally I think it's smart to pick your battles. For example, I was beyond frustrated back in the Clinton era that the idiot House Republicans focused their impeachment efforts on Monica Lewinsky, as sordid as that whole affair was. There were far more obvious and compelling crimes they could have pursued, like the quid pro quo campaign money for our rocket technology (I misspoke in my previous comment: it was declassification of rocket tech, and it was projected to have advanced the CCP's missile capabilities by about 20 years, creating concern about the ability of China to launch nukes).
That's fair. Just want to be sure we both apply criteria consistently across the different players. For me, the meme coin thing is terribly unseemly - just a grift and too easily manipulated in ways that move into the realm of illegality.
If it crosses the line into illegality then prosecutions are in order. I want to live in a nation of laws where everyone is subject to the same protections, enjoys the same opportunities.
Just appreciating that you are still here, Dave, and reading with a critical eye, and responding in such a civil manner, with plenty of information and new questions. More than I could do.
Mahmoud Khalil, a green card holder, is being deported because the Secretary of State views his presence in the US as either: (1) a national security threat, or (2) counter to US foreign policy, under immigration law. His deportation has nothing to do with free speech. He need not have been convicted of a crime to be deported. Take a listen to this discussion by an expert prosecutor of terrorists who was previously the Assistant US Attorney @ SDNY, Andy McCarthy.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-mccarthy-report/id1396508525?i=1000698940332
I understand the legal argument, but the practical question here is why did the Secretary of State conclude he was (1) or (2)? The simplest answer is that Trump has decided the protests last year are still a great issue for him to leverage. Because Khalil is an unsympathetic character to most people, you can use strong man tactics to take him down and then people get used to letting you do whatever you want - like rounding up possible Venezuelan gang members and shipping them to El Salvador.
No. The protests stepped over the line in many cases, for far too long. The Universities did a terrible job of containing the protests and in holding the students activists to established protest rules on campus. This jeopardized the safety Jewish students on campus. Worse, the federal government under Biden did nothing, zero. Why ? To bow down to their political masters, the progressive left. Why ? Because the progressive left believes that Jews and Israel are oppressors. If the protests were behind ropes and only involved words, the Jewish students would not have been bothered. That’s not what happened.
Khalil was the leader of a campus group called Columbia University Apartheid Divest. He led the negotiations on behalf of this group to force Columbia to divest from investing in Israel. US foreign policy under Trump is to support Israel. Khalil’s actions frustrate US foreign policy. That is all that is needed for the Secretary of State to deport. And that’s from what we know. We don’t know what evidence students from Columbia provided to the government. We don’t know what evidence the government obtained from Israeli Mossad prior to coming to the US.
Some of this is political, sure. Trump 1.0 was a big supporter of Israel. The electorate knew that and voted for Trump 2.0 to push back against the madness of the past 4 years under Biden as it relates to Israel, especially since the war with Hamas began 10/7. This war is Biden’s fault and Trump is 100% right to do what is necessary to: (1) allow Israel to win the kinetic war against Hamas, and (2) prevent the abuses on US campuses from continuing.
Recently Trump watched the 47 minute video compiled by IDF captured from the GoPro cameras of Hamas on 10/7. This told the bloody reality of the killings. He also met with the hostages and listened to their story. Trump is motivated by more than just politics on this one. Enough is enough.
Agree with you on the mishandling of the protests. I'd be curious to know how often Secretaries of State have utilized this provision. It just seems like a stretch that this individual is an obstacle to execution of our foreign policy.
Hi Mr. President, this is Bibi, thank you for taking my call. As you know, Google recently announced the purchase of Wiz, an Israeli cyber security firm, for $32 billion cash. We think about $4 billion of that will come to the Israeli treasury, which will help with those fighter jets we just ordered from Lockheed Martin. Sadly, one of our other Tel Aviv start ups is experiencing a challenge. It’s in the middle of phase 2 clinical trials for a cancer drug and Columbia University is threatening to remove its funding. Wants its money back. Is there anything you can do to help us Mr. President ? The clinical trials are for a cancer drug that will have wide ranging implications for the treatment of this horrible disease.
Certainly an argument for the some of the overbearing demands made in the letter from the Administration to Columbia on March 13.
The constitution does not provide for independent departments controlled by congress in the executive branch. That will end when it gets to SCOTUS.
From my own substack:
"Last January, RMG Research, a firm founded by Scott Rasmussen and based in Clearwater Florida, surveyed a representative sample of 2,380 federal government managers in order to ascertain their attitudes towards the incoming Trump Administration. The results offer convincing evidence of the existence of the Deep State.
Support or Resistance: Federal government managers were asked whether they would support or resist the Trump administration. The results showed that 44% of federal managers said they would support the administration, while 42% said they would resist it, and nearly a quarter (23%) indicated they will "strongly resist".
Response to Lawful Orders: The poll also asked federal managers what they would do if Trump gave them a lawful order that they considered to be bad policy. Only 17% of Democratic managers who voted for Vice President Kamala Harris said they would follow the order, while 64% said they would ignore the order and do what they thought was best."
Any President is elected based on his campaign promises. He is entitled to hire loyalists to pursue those policies. The deep state is real and must be quashed. Let Congress legislate, not unelected bureaucrats.
Dick Minnis
removingthecataract.substack.com
Part 2
I forgot to mention in my first response the imbalanced impact of the Trump meme coin on its investors. A few people made millions and hundreds of thousands got fleeced. Then this reporting (from another source worth considering) hit this morning - https://popular.info/p/trump-and-pump
In your response, Leah, I very much appreciated your reflection on Trump's less appealing aspects and I follow (though am not willing to justify) the argument that the ossified structure we have built might only be addressed with crude means. The problem isn't that the government is so broken it cannot be fixed in humane and rational ways. The problem is that our POLITICS are so broken that, absent radical reform, no leaders or groups of leaders will ever arise or be incentivized to do the long, hard work of fixing the government.
I have written on this topic at great length in my 5 part series "How Did We Get Here - What To Do Now." As outlined there, there are major reform movements directed at correcting the way we elect our representatives that show great promise for remaking our legislatures into bodies that are capable and rewarded for fixing the government. The need for a stronger executive is not our problem. The problem is that we have had a non-functioning legislative branch, and all branches must be working strongly for our system to thrive.
In that series I also, reluctantly, make the case that Trump - far from being a corrective - is more likely to break things so badly that revolution, not reform, will be the only path forward. Understand, I am not arguing in favor of the things you have found so distasteful and alarming about our social and economic trajectory. I am saying that trajectory was a natural outcome of a broken electoral system that only rewards extremism. Trump is not the solution to that - he is a symptom and an acceleration of it. I remain convinced that a highly functioning democracy is humanity's only great hope. We are not that today and Trump is not leading us in that direction.
Certainly, transparency will be a prime attribute of a highly functioning democracy - but that is not what Trump is bringing. He wishes to make transparent anything that places his opponents in a negative light while readily using the levers of power for his own aggrandizement. The aspects about him that you find distasteful are the warning signs that this is true. The country got mesmerized with the idea that the ends (smaller government, less ideology) justified the means (elect a selfish bully). That idea never works out well.
You said the following in your reply, "It’s not at all clear to me that Trump 2.0 is a more virulent form of authoritarianism. Nobody’s civil liberties are being threatened (much less abridged), no one in Trump’s administration is colluding to censor inconvenient truths on social media, or to prosecute political rivals on brazenly trumped-up charges."
I strongly disagree with that statement. The method is different, but the effect is the same. Trump has targeted individual law firms and universities for punishments (and the implied threat of marshalling all MAGA supporters to enact broader retribution). He makes unsubstantiated claims of bad faith or fraudulent acts, ensures their magnification in social media and then puts out executive orders outlining punishments justified on that flimsy foundation. He wants judges to be impeached for exercising their constitutional duties if doing so interferes with his project, and he encourages rash over-reaction (send a whole bunch of people to El Salvador prisons) without the minimum level of due diligence to avoid unjust abduction.
I have no doubt there are things in the underbelly of our massive government that are in bad need of rooting out and fixing (I also have no doubt that a massive government is not avoidable for a nation of our size in the complex world in which we live today - notwithstanding the dreamy hopes of libertarians). But, unless we start with wise and compassionate leadership at the top, any rooting out done will be to no avail. The guts of the system will eventually reflect the character of its leadership.
"The need for a stronger executive is not our problem. The problem is that we have had a non-functioning legislative branch, and all branches must be working strongly for our system to thrive."
I concur. And one of the main ways the legislative branch has abdicated its proper role and thrown everything off balance is by creating larger and larger bureaucracy by statute but then leaving the bureaucrats to create their own regulations which carry the force of law. Of course they expand their own power. Thanks heavens SCOTUS overturned Chevron.
"The method is different, but the effect is the same. Trump has targeted individual law firms and universities for punishments (and the implied threat of marshalling all MAGA supporters to enact broader retribution). He makes unsubstantiated claims of bad faith or fraudulent acts, ensures their magnification in social media and then puts out executive orders outlining punishments justified on that flimsy foundation."
The method is the legitimating difference. It is hardly a small point that Trump is inside the bounds of the law. It's notable that, in contrast to Biden's actions, nothing you've listed is a violation of Americans' civil liberties. Universities do not have a Constitutional right to taxpayer funding; law firms do not have a Constitutional right to security clearances—especially when they abuse them to pursue lawfare against a presidential candidate and then former president. His claims are not unsubstantiated, as anyone who's been following the Leftist lawfare outside of mockingbird media sources knows. I get Trump's not making the argument in a PR campaign, but that doesn't mean there is no basis for the claims and investigations that are being launched or threatened.
Trump is wielding political power in a very blunt fashion, but so have many of his predecessors in their own time. The crucial point, to my mind, is that he is doing it within the bounds of law. Entirely unlike Biden, whose violations of the Constitution, breaches of his oath of office and of citizens' civil liberties went wholly unremarked upon . . . one might even say, were sanctioned, by the mockingbird media and Left commentariat.
Lastly, I am overall sympathetic to your concerns for America's future. It feels pretty precarious to me as well and it's possible your take on Trump will turn out justified. But if there is anything my forty years of fretting over the pendulum swings and political winds have taught me, it's that we're dealing with countless layers of a complex system in which so much is happening all the time behind the scenes on various levels, that there's no real way to predict how things will go. Unseen outcomes are the rule, not the exception.
To this point about the complexity, if you have time to watch this interview of a former Trump State Department official. I'd be very interested in your thoughts. The discussion here is not about Trump, but about the messy realities of power and security and the how it is managed in the geopolitical arena.
https://youtu.be/UOcm0yrTjQU?si=XqEN71CvzqxZK73j
Oh wow. This is it in a nutshell. Thank you!.
Forgot to say - I'll watch the video and give my reactions. Hope you'll watch video link I sent out at the end of my reply yesterday (the analysis of RFK's Joe Rogan appearance)
If Trump is doing everything within the bounds of the law, why have the courts had to interfere with more of his actions than any other president? Left-leaning courts don't explain the extent of his legal losses. The track record is similar when juries have been involved.
Again, this goes back to prior beliefs. If you are certain that J6 is all a conspiracy of the left (and the election was stolen), the courts must be corrupt. But if J6 was an anti-constitutional attempt to change a legitimate election, then the courts were, laboriously, doing what needed to be done (while Trump and his lawyers obfiscated and delayed at every possible turn).
We're about to enter into a whole new phase of the same thing. Trump is clearly going to push across the line over and over to test courts' resolve and take whatever expansion of power he can manufacture.
I agree it has a lot to do with priors and trusted sources. For the record, I don't think J6 was a conspiracy of the Left, per se. I think the violence was fomented to some yet-unknown extent, and the Capitol security deliberately reduced, to create a kind of false flag event, a pretext for propagandizing MAGA and Trump as domestic terrorists to eliminate him politically. I also think that courts are not intrinsically neutral arbiters (as witnessed by the AI review of court rulings mentioned in my essay), and activist district judges on the Left are currently over-reaching their authority with activist efforts to stop Trump enacting the will of the people—effectively a judicial coup. It sounds like Congress is gearing up to finally do their job vis a vis their role in creating and delineating the lower courts' power. So yay for the Legislative branch finally waking up, if they do.
Honestly, I don't know enough about economics and finance (or even accounting) so I don't think I can comment intelligently specifically on the numbers.
I will say that I doubt the projections are accurate, and likely not even realistically predictable. By that I mean that when they were running these numbers there was no way to know exactly how much fraud and waste would be found and ended, much less what those impacts would be. We still don't know. In fact, it feels like the ground is constantly shifting, and as the geopolitical scene changes how will that impact our financial picture, for better or worse?
What we really need is to get a clear idea of the truth about our financial situation—do an actual audit of the Federal Reserve and Fort Knox. Get a handle on the true numbers so we know what the real situation is. The fact that Elon just found 14 "magic money machines" throughout various agencies that were being operated like debit cards but with no network or tie to the overall system is terrifying. As one financial guru I follow put it: "We have just discovered that we literally don't know what our denominator is"—aka we don't know the total dollars supposedly in circulation. Our federal finances have been operating from a bottomless well.🤯🤯🤯 How long has this been going on? The implications could be huge.