The Great Divide

Commentary by Joel Postman

These are likely the most politically polarized times of the last 100 years. A popular suggestion is that we need to end the divisiveness and seek common ground. There is, however, a tragic and fatal flaw in this notion.

The dialogue no longer consists of varying views on a particular policy, legislation or political maneuver. More often than not, the conversation starts with anger, name-calling, an outright lie or the assertion of a morally abhorrent point of view. There are not always good people “on both sides.”

This is an environment in which common ground cannot be achieved, and in fact, the intent of this approach is to avoid doing so. These are not genuine arguments in the traditional sense. They are not entered into in good faith. Thus, this ends the dialogue in which a reasonable person would engage.

_______________________________________________

Your Comments Here and There

Scroll down this page with the trackbar on the far right to read Monday’s column on the Trump tariffs, “Where’s the Deal,” in the right column and Sharon Lintner’s “From Tariffs to Tyranny” in the left column.

In Tuesday’s center column, we are calling out DOGE chief and special government employee Elon Musk’s assault on our democracy. Combine Musk’s takeover of the US Treasury, his accusation with no proof of widespread corruption at the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and his slander of anyone who disagrees with him voiced on his personal social media plaything, X-Twitter, and it is evident he is pushing the nation’s tech oligopoly into authoritarian-dictatorship territory without the checks and balances that were put in place by the nation’s Founding Fathers.

In short, we are calling out Musk’s threat to our democracy in the neutral center column.

Be sure to voice your opinion in an email to editors@thehustings.news and please indicate your political leanings in the subject line.

_____
TUESDAY 2/4/25

Musk Steals Our Democracy

By Todd Lassa

Trump tariffs of 25% on our USMCA partners Canada and Mexico were front and center as World’s Richest Man Elon Musk took over the payment system of the United States Treasury and accused the US Agency for International Development (USAID) Monday of not cooperating with requests for information on how it spends taxpayer dollars. The Trump White House – or was it Musk himself? – handed control of USAID to Secretary of State Marco Rubio as he was flying from Panama, where the administration wants to retake control of the canal, to El Salvador to negotiate over that country taking back undocumented immigrants to our country.

The Alliance for Retired Americans, whose Social Security and Medicare payments are now visible to DOGE, along with the American Federation of Government Employees AFL-CIO, and Service Employees International Union, AFL-CIO, have filed suit against Treasury and its secretary, Scott Bessent, to stop the handover to Musk and his group of 19-24-year-old insurgents.

Meanwhile, the White House has named Musk, who was not elected to anything or been subject to confirmation hearings or security clearances but did contribute a quarter-billion-dollars to the Trump campaign a “special government employee,” status that’s good for 130 days, according to NPR’s Morning Edition.

In just the 16 days since Trump’s inauguration, the special government employee has granted Marko Elez, a 25-year-old engineer who has worked for two of Musk’s companies, direct access to the Treasury Department systems “responsible for nearly all payments made by the US government,” WIRED reports, citing two sources.

After Rubio met with Panamanian officials, he said of USAID; “Everything they do has to be in alignment with the national interests and the foreign policy of the United States.”

The Trump White House seeks to retake the Panama Canal because the president says it’s under Chinese control. (It’s not – China operates two ports at the canal.) While tariffs against Canada and Mexico were put on-hold Monday, presumably so Trump could re-negotiate a USMCA treaty that does more to change the North American Free Trade Agreement signed under President Clinton than rearrange countries’ names so that “US” is first, the 10% tariff on Chinese goods has stuck. China responded with targeted tariffs of 10% on coal, crude oil, farm equipment and some SUVs, Minnesota Public Radio’s Marketplace reports. China also has placed export controls on such vital metals as tungsten and is investigating Google as a monopoly.

Meanwhile, China’s Belt and Road Initiative is gaining power and influence in much of the African continent, which is where USAID has concentrated much of its non-military assistance since it was established in 1961.

This raises the question of whether Musk, who grew up in Apartheid South Africa, thinks he knows what he is doing, whether his financial interests are guiding his work as DOGE chief and special government employee (Forbes reports that USAID spent $1 million on terminals from his satellite Internet provider Starlink last year) or whether he is misinformed because he is listening to President Trump?

For the last half-year at least, anti-Trump Republicans and Democrats have been warning of a technoligopoly and of the danger to our democracy of a second Trump term.

The technoligopoly took over in the time between the presidential election and the inauguration. It turns out that since the inauguration, we have not been able to keep our democracy.

_____
TUESDAY 2/4/25

This Is Wrong

Commentary by Stephen Macaulay

What Donald Trump is saying about our economic relations with Canada are complete, unmitigated bullshit.

Too bold or strident?

Hardly.

This man, with his evident lack of understanding of how trade works, is going to cause all manner of pain to everyday working Americans, many of whom voted for him, and everyday working Canadians who didn’t.

Truth Social: “We pay hundreds of Billions of Dollars to SUBSIDIZE Canada. Why? There is no reason. We don’t need anything they have.”

All nonsense.

The billions of dollars in question are related to things that Americans buy from Canada.

Here’s how it works:

Someone makes something you want. There is a price on that. You pay the price.

They get the money. You get the product.

If the U.S. buys more from Canada than it sells to Canada, then that is because Americans want more Canadian products and Canadians want fewer American products.

The situation as it exists isn’t some sort of situation where Canada is dumping products or selling them for less than cost.

It is simply that AMERICANS BUY MORE STUFF FROM CANADA.

This is a choice. They are not, in his words, “ripping us off.”

“We don’t need anything they have.”

While someone might argue that buying a minivan built in a factory in Windsor, Ontario, might not be a necessity, odds are that petroleum that goes into existing minivans is something that we need. Sure, we are producing more oil than any other country — 13.2 million barrels of oil per day (funny Biden didn’t get credit for that, which he deserves, which is good or bad depending on you view of CO2 emissions) — but some of the 5.2 million barrels that Canada pumps is necessary because some US oil refineries are setup to process it. Do the people who work in those US refineries need their jobs? Do people in the Midwest who pump the resultant gas into their tanks need that fuel?

According to Trump’s thinking, no.

He went on: “We have unlimited Energy, should make our own Cars, and have more Lumber than we can ever use. Without this massive subsidy, Canada ceases to exist as a viable Country. Harsh but true! Therefore, Canada should become our Cherished 51^stState. Much lower taxes, and far better military protection for the people of Canada — AND NO TARIFFS!”

This is how a freedom-loving country behaves?

Either you do what we want you or you cease to exist?

This is how a country that gave rise to the Greatest Generation, women and men who sacrificed their lives for the freedom of others simply because it was the right thing to do, treats our closest ally and neighbor?

This is shameful.

In Trump’s response to The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board’s essay titled “The Dumbest Trade War in History,” he writes, in part:

“THIS WILL BE THE GOLDEN AGE OF AMERICA! WILL THERE BE SOME PAIN? YES, MAYBE (AND MAYBE NOT!). BUT WE WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, AND IT WILL ALL BE WORTH THE PRICE THAT MUST BE PAID.”

Yes, there it is, an admission that people visiting Kroger, Walmart, Mobil, and elsewhere are going to feel the pain of rising costs.

Do he and his billionaire enablers care about an additional 50 cents per gallon at the pump? Do they ever even go into a grocery store?

How do a whole bunch of people who have to scrimp to get by — and I’m not talking about the poor in the country, who seem to be entirely irrelevant to Trump — make America great?

It won’t be long before people, regular people, people who go to work every day in factories and warehouses and supermarkets and doctors’ offices, experience “THE PRICE THAT MUST BE PAID.”

What is not at all clear is why that price must be paid.

That’s because this is complete, unmitigated bullshit.

Note: Although there has been a 30-day “pause” on the threatened tariffs, the foregoing still stands. The consequences of tariffs on the American people would be bleak. And for those who are concerned about the well-being of friends, it wouldn’t be helpful for people in Canada and Mexico, either.

However, one thing has now been established: America cannot be trusted by other countries in the world. Treaties evidently have no meaning. Working relationships can be dissolved with the stroke of a Sharpie.

The United States has played a pivotal role in the world following World War II largely through its engagement with the rest of the world, politically, economically and militarily.

But what we are seeing now is a destruction of that by a group of people who clearly have no understanding of the way many of the countries have integrated.

In effect, the isolation that Trump is talking about isn’t going to Make America Great Again.

It will make America North Korea.

_____
TUESDAY 2/4/25

From Tariffs to Tyranny

Commentary by Sharon Lintner

Until now, there has never been a moment when I believed the United States could slip into tyranny.

At this point, we can't make this right, we can't change this. Our power and ability to prevent this from happening ended on November 5, 2024 and for the first time, I fear my own government.

Rapid fire chaos is creating a new level of anxiety for the working class. The tariffs will cripple our economy and cause an unnecessary loss of money for those who need it most. I fear this will be life-changing for the vast majority of people.

It's no longer "of the people, by the people, for the people," it's against the people.

_______________________________________________

Read our Substack newsletter here.

Email your COMMENTS to editors@thehustings.news and please indicate your political leanings in the subject line, so we can post your opinions in the proper column.

_____
MONDAY 2/3/25

Tariff Tuesday is Nigh

MONDAY 2/3/25

UPDATE -- Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said Monday morning she has reached a deal with the Trump administration to delay tariffs against her country, The New York Times reports. The 25% tariff on Canada and the 10% tariff on China are still on, so far.

Son of Smoot-Hawley – Tariffs threatened, tariffs delivered. They will be delivered on Tuesday and it looks like they are not to be dismissed as negotiable. Nor is President Trump about to be talked out of them by the more rational of his aides.

“This will be the Golden Age of America! Will there be some pain? Yes and maybe (maybe not). But we will make America great again, and it will all be worth the price that must be paid,” Trump wrote on his social media site, Truth Social (per The Hill) Sunday. “We are a country that is now being run with common sense – and the results will be spectacular!”

Tariff Tuesday will impose a 25% tax on goods from Mexico and Canada, including, for example, auto parts and components that typically cross borders several times before being put together in US-assembled cars and trucks.

Chinese goods face a 10% tariff Tuesday.

Except… The tariff on sour, heavy crude oil from Canada, refined primarily in the Midwest, will be 10%. Trump certainly doesn’t want to turn off Michigan and Wisconsin’s swing voters who swung for MAGA last November.

Canadian retribution … Our northern neighbor will impose a 25% tariff Tuesday on US orange juice, peanut butter, wines, spirits, beer, coffee, appliances, apparel, footwear, motorcycles, cosmetics, pulp and paper, Finance and Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc and Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joy announced Saturday.

“A detailed list of these goods will be made available shortly,” according to the Government of Canada -- as if the above list is lacking in detail.

Mexican retribution … Our southern neighbor will impose tariffs of 5% to 20% on pork, cheese, fresh produce, manufactured steel and aluminum,” The Guardian reports, citing various sources.

Chamber of doom … US Chamber of Commerce Senior Vice President and Head of International (his full title) John Murphy said in part in a release: “The President is right to focus on major problems like our broken border and the scourge of fentanyl, but the imposition of tariffs under IEEPA (International Emergency Economic Powers Act) is unprecedented, won’t solve these problems, and will only raise prices for American families and upend supply chains.”

Bipartisan oppo … In an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal, former Sen. Phil Gramm (R-TX), a non-resident senior fellow at The American Enterprise Institute, and Clinton administration Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, now a Harvard University professor and president-emeritus, called out what they see as the folly of the Trump tariffs and compared it with the Smoot-Hawley Tariffs of 1930, which most economists then – and now – blame for triggering the Great Depression.

Gramm and Summers wrote that “tariffs don’t have a predictable effect of reducing trade deficits, and trade deficits aren’t necessarily an adverse economic development. Indeed, trade deficits often arise as foreign investors choose the US as a preferred destination for their capital.”

DOGE grabs purse strings … While everyone’s attention was focused on the impending tariffs, Treasury Sec. Scott Bessent late Friday handed over full access of the federal payment system to lieutenants of the quasi-governmental Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) chief/SpaceX/Tesla CEO/X-Twitter-owner and World’s Richest Man Elon Musk. This hands Musk and DOGE a “powerful tool” to monitor and potentially limit government, according to The New York Times.

Before Bessent handed Treasury’s combination code to Musk, top Treasury official and career civil servant David Lebryk had resisted handing access over to DOGE. Lebryk was put on leave, and then suddenly retired last Friday, sources told the NYT.

So, yes, this does appear to be a significant maneuver by the Trump White House in trying to fulfill its quest of replacing non-partisan career civil servants with acolytes of the president.

But wait, there’s more … If nothing else, the Trump White House earns kudos for its efficiency in making its grab for maximum power with minimum checks and balances. Also on Friday evening, the new administration forced out “dozens” of FBI officials, including chiefs of several field offices as well as agents who worked on the investigations of Trump’s federal criminal cases, according to The Hill, which reported earlier Friday that five executive assistant FBI directors were told they were being demoted.

“It is deeply alarming that the Trump administration appears to be purging the most experienced agents who are our nation’s first line of defense,” Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, the ranking Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said in a statement.

--Compiled and edited by Todd Lassa

_____
MONDAY 2/3/25

Where’s the Deal?

Commentary by Stephen Macaulay

In the runup to the 2016 presidential election, one of the things Donald Trump repeatedly railed against was the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

It was awful. Horrendous. The worst-ever.

Also, NAFTA was signed by Crooked Hillary’s husband, so that may have had something to do with it.

Trump assured everyone that when he made it to the Oval Office he would create a better deal. A fantastic deal. A deal the likes of which no one ever, in the history of mankind, had ever witnessed.

He negotiated the USMCA, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement.

There was a clue in the name that has been overlooked.

The North American trade bloc was a wonder of the world, economically speaking. By facilitating the movement of goods across the borders, there were levels of availability and efficiency the likes of which no one ever, in the history of mankind, had ever witnessed.

Still, it was a bad, bad deal, Trump told us. He’d do better. Much, much better.

In the new deal Trump, the man who brought back a phrase from 1940, “America First,” insisted that the name of the treaty put the United States first.

Forget “North America.” It is literally “America First.”

Suddenly there was a fracture in what had been somewhat seamless.

So here’s a question for all those who think Donald Trump is a businessman par excellence: If he is the Best Dealmaker of All Time, why is a deal he made and that went into effect in July 2020 a bad deal, at least so far as Donald Trump is concerned?

Trump is applying the tariffs to goods coming into the US from Canada and Mexico because of a trumped-up “national emergency.”

The claim is that there are fentanyl and illegal aliens pouring over the borders.

So the US is ignoring a trade agreement crafted under Donald Trump. It is simply applying 25% tariffs on products from Canada and Mexico.

That’ll show ‘em!

According to Trump, this will also have the effect of bringing in all manner of revenues into the coffers of the government.

What he doesn’t say is that those revenues are going to come out of the pockets of Americans who buy everything from avocados to Chevy Silverado pickup trucks.

Americans will be First when it comes to paying for the breaking of the seamless trade between the three countries.

Remember when Trump claimed that he was going to lower prices for consumers, something that the criminal Biden organization was incapable of doing?

According to the Yale Budget Lab, (including the 10% increase in China tariffs) the prices of imported natural gas will increase 9.8% (did any one mention that it is winter in the US?), motor and vehicles and parts by 6.9% (analysis from Kelley Blue Book has it: “New-vehicle prices increased for the fourth straight month in December and, at $49,740, were near the all-time record set in December 2022” — yes, let’s increase that!), electricity by 4.7% (this might trouble Elon a bit), cereal grains by 4.2% (eggs are still increasing in price; now cereal). . .and on it goes.

According to the non-profit Tax Foundation, which was founded in 1937 by a group of corporate executives from the likes of General Motors and Standard Oil, so certainly not some sort of left-wing group, the consequences of the tariffs on Canada and Mexico amounts “to an average tax increase of more than $670 per US household in 2025.”

In addition to which, the tariffs will have the effect of reducing full-time employment of 286,000 US jobs because of the alleged “national emergency” that Canada and Mexico represent for the U.S.

Donald Trump is going to raise prices for Americans. His actions will increase inflation. Gas prices will go up. Food prices, up. Want to build a new garage? You might want to skip it because the wood will be more expensive, as will the car that goes in it. And on it goes.

This is a deal for the American people?

Macaulay is pundit-at-large.

_______________________________________________

Read our Substack newsletter here.

Email your COMMENTS to editors@thehustings.news and please indicate your political leanings in the subject line, so we can post your opinions in the proper column.

_____
MONDAY 2/3/25

Real News & Civil Commentary

Here at The Hustings we are looking to promote civil, echo chamber-free commentary and discussion of current political news and issues. Our center column is devoted to factual news and news aggregate, and we call ourselves out whenever we publish a mistake or a factual error.

You can do your part in moving on past “news” on social media to news on civil media, by submitting your COMMENTS to editors@thehustings.news and please indicate your political leanings in the subject line.

Lately, we are very interested in your opinions about Senate confirmation hearings for Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., President Trump’s nominee for Health and Human Services secretary, as well as Trump’s since-rescinded freeze on federal funding assistance on myriad programs already approved by Congress, and his buyout offer to federal government employees. Scroll down with the trackbar on the far right (no political pun intended) to read these center-column news items.

There also is much to be discussed about Trump’s firing of 17 inspectors general last week, as well as his pardon of more than 1,500 January 6^th Capitol rioters, including several convicted for violent acts against police during the insurrection.

As you move south on this page, be sure to check out “Shocking FOP Support for Trump” and “Inauguration to Avoid” in the left column, and “Our Leader at Davos (Virtually)”, “Pardons, Promises and Presidential Powers” and “The Return of the Gilded Age?” in the right column.

_____
WEDNESDAY 1/29/25

Tariffs Saturday?

Bipartisan Pushback – Physician and Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) joined Democrats in heavy grilling over anti-vaxxer Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (pictured) on the second day of confirmation hearings for President Trump's nominee for HHS secretary (NYT). Cassidy, who could provide a crucial fourth Republican vote against RFK Jr.'s nomination, did not indicate how he would vote. Senate hearings also were held for controversial nominees Tulsi Gabbard, for director of National Intelligence and Kash Patel, for FBI director.

FRIDAY 1/31/25

President’s Favorite Word – On Saturday we could find out just how beautiful President Trump’s favorite word, tariff, is. That’s when the White House will, or maybe will not, impose tariffs of 25% on goods crossing the border from Canada and Mexico (per NPR’s Morning Edition).

These tariffs may very well turn out to be yet another The Art of the Deal-style negotiating tactic Trump is using to call out what he says is unfair trade, as well as illegal drugs and immigrants crossing the border, even after his first administration negotiated the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) from the 1990s.

That's what US businesses are hoping. Describing negotiations as a “fluid” situation, Trump aides are working on “several offramps” to avoid enacting such tariffs, The Wall Street Journal reports, citing unnamed sources.

If the tariffs are triggered, they will raise prices on everything from guacamole to gasoline, NPR notes. Automobiles, even if built in US plants have parts and components that come from Mexico and Canada, and typically cross the borders several times before final assembly, also will be hard-hit. Speaking to Wall Street analysts Tuesday for General Motors’ fourth-quarter and full year earnings report, CEO Mary Barra said that plant flexibility allows the automaker to shift production of its highly profitable full-size trucks between Mexican, Canadian and US plants.

“What we won’t do is spend large amounts of capital without clarity,” Barra told analysts.

If nothing else, we should get some clarity on tariffs this weekend.

--TL

__________________________________________

THURSDAY 1/30/25

Trump Blames DEI for Crash – Less than 15 hours after an American Airlines flight carrying 64 passengers and crew from Wichita, Kansas, collided with an Army Black Hawk helicopter over the Potomac River as it approached Reagan National Airport, President Trump was ready to call out cause of the tragic accident.

“We don’t know what caused this crash, but we have some pretty strong opinions,” he told reporters in his first appearance in the White House briefing room since his return to office.

“I changed the Obama standards from mediocre at best, to extraordinary,” during his first administration, Trump said, referring to standards for hiring air traffic controllers. After Trump left office in 2021, “Biden changed them back to lower than before.” But among Trump’s myriad executive orders since returning to the White House last week was an EO that would once again raise those standards, he said.

How?

Trump was referring to diversity, equity and inclusion programs for all federal agencies, including the Federal Aviation Administration “eliminated” by one of his first EOs. Such DEI policies, Trump suggested, allowed the FAA to hire air traffic controllers with hearing, vision and even psychological disabilities.

New administrator … Meanwhile, Trump has named Chris Rocheleau as interim FAA administrator, according to The Wall Street Journal, filling a vacancy opened when Mike Whitaker, who had served in the position for less than a year, stepped down just prior to Trump’s inauguration.

History lesson … The FAA has dealt with air traffic control staffing issues for over 43 years. Barely half a year into his first term, the president for whom Reagan National Airport is named fired air traffic controllers en masse over a dispute with their labor union. Prior to the dispute, air traffic controllers in the US were hired in staggered years. But with the need to hire replacements for 11,345 striking Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization members all at once in August 1981 came the end of the staggered retirements.

•••

More Hearings – Two more Trump White House nominees, like RFK Jr., face perhaps the toughest Senate hearings since Pete Hegseth was confirmed as Defense secretary last week. Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) is nominated to become President Trump’s National Intelligence director, so she appears before the Senate Intelligence Committee Thursday, while Kash Patel, nominee to become FBI director, answers to the Judiciary Committee.

•••

Chaos is Working – The Trump White House’s executive order that would have clawed back up to $2 trillion in funding for programs the administration does not like, since rescinded following a federal judge’s temporary suspension issued Tuesday, has set Washington back on its heels. But the Democratic Party appears to be on top of Trump’s unconstitutional executive order, despite all the ensuing chaos.

“It’s called impoundment, and it is illegal,” Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), vice chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, told NPR’s Steve Inskeep on Morning Edition Thursday. The president cannot single out certain allocations passed by Congress, though it has been tried in the past, she said. But instead of fighting it in court, the Trump administration is trying to stoke confusion.

“His administration has made it clear they don’t think the (impoundment) law should be there,” Murray said. “So instead of fighting it in court, what they’re doing is saying ‘we’re just going to – we don’t believe it’s a good law, so we’re not going to do it.’”

•••

Menendez Gets 11 Years – Bob Menendez, Democratic senator for New Jersey from 2006 to 2024, was sentenced to 11 years in prison for his conviction last year on bribery, fraud and illegal foreign-agent charges, The Wall Street Journal reports. The 71-year-old career politician told a packed New York federal courtroom Wednesday; “I have made more than my share of mistakes and bad decisions, but I believe in my half-century of public service I have done far more good than bad.” --TL

_______________________________________________

WEDNESDAY 1/29/25

UPDATE – President Trump has reversed his controversial order that froze federal funding assistance for programs already approved by Congress in a memo released Wednesday, signed by acting Office of Management and Budget Director Matthew Vaeth. The reversal came after behind-the-scenes pushback from congressional Republicans, according to The Hill. (Scroll down to "Frozen funds.")

Trump Offers Federal Employees Buyouts – The Trump White House offered a buyout for nearly all federal employees, NPR’s Morning Edition reports. The art of this deal is that career bureaucrats will get paid through September if they resign now. President Trump is looking to replace non-partisan federal bureaucrats, many with years to decades of experience, with workers who agree with his vision for the country.

Frozen funds … The buyout offer comes hours after Judge Loren AliKhan, a Washington-based federal judge appointed by President Biden, issued an emergency administrative stay to block President Trump’s temporary freeze of about $3 trillion worth of federal funds, grants and loan disbursements that was to take effect at 5 pm Eastern time Tuesday. The judge’s order blocks the freeze until Monday, February 3. The Democracy Fund had filed a lawsuit to stop the executive order.

As with the federal buyouts, the president appears to lack the authority for such moves.

Trump’s federal funding freeze was aimed specifically at DEI programs, “woke gender identity” and the Green New Deal according to The New York Times, though opponents feared it would block state health agencies from Medicaid reimbursement. State officials believed pre-school community health centers, food for low-income families, housing assistance and disaster relief were at-risk, according to the report.

Just prior to Judge AliKhan’s ruling, Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller appeared on CNN’s The Lead with Jake Tapper and said the order would not affect any government services, entitlements or individual benefits, but was directed at left-wing chiefs of non-governmental agencies (NGOs) who were funneling such funds into immigration and “child trafficking.”

“Either Donald Trump gets political control over this government and ends waste, abuse and fraud on the American people,” Miller told Tapper, “or, we let bureaucrats autopilot federal spending.”

What does this mean? … Every Republican and Democrat knew going into last November’s presidential election that a second Trump term would mean 1.) A better-organized White House full of cabinet secretaries and aids happy to carry out whatever policies Trump thought reasonable; and 2.) Far greater presidential authority at the expense of the legislative and judiciary branches.

All anyone can remember from the weeks after Trump’s first inauguration in 2017 is his “Muslim ban” of travel into the US by certain foreign nationals.

In The Atlantic, Jonathan Lemire writes that the strategy for a flurry of Trump EOs was determined at an early January gathering at Mar-a-Lago, where incoming Chief of Staff Susie Wiles suggested staggering the orders out over the first few weeks in office.

A unanimous source who had attended the meeting said Trump responded: “No. I want to sign as many as possible as soon as we show up. Day One.”

Trump was a very green political novice when he became president eight years ago, but he learned a lot about the way the federal government runs from his first administration’s seasoned Washington aides, advisors and cabinet secretaries – the ones who were to keep Trump’s authoritarian tendencies in-check.

Last year, he won his non-consecutive re-election by promising to blow up the federal government, and now with a flailing, leaderless Democratic Party warning of a constitutional crisis, Trump prevails. His political victory is certain even if just a couple of these executive orders survive federal courts.

--Compiled and edited by Todd Lassa

_____
WEDNESDAY 1/29/25

The Amazing Disappearing Spine

Commentary by Stephen Macaulay

In the multiple times Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) has been on Meet the Press with Kristen Welker, he has rolled over her like a rolling pin making the crust for a pecan pie. She asks a question. He provides an answer, more often than not, an answer that is not even remotely associated with the question.

Any attempt on her part to follow up is dismissed with a combination of annoyance and contempt.

Somewhere, Tim Russert is rolling in his grave.

Despite Graham’s hard line of supporting whatever Donald Trump says — a line without a bit of deviation — he keeps getting booked on the show. Wash, rinse, repeat.

He says whatever it is he wants to say, which is generally what he presumably thinks Donald Trump wants him to say.

She asks questions that get unanswered.

And then she thanks him for being on the show with enthusiasm that borders on gushing.

But to her credit, on January 26 she asked Graham a question and got an unexpected answer. Not simply unexpected in that the answer had something to do with the question, but because what he said.

Welker: “Do you believe that President Trump was wrong to issue these blanket pardons to the January 6^th defendants?”

First Graham makes a bit of a swerve: “Number one, he had the legal authority to do it.”

Note she didn’t ask if it was legal but whether it was right, a difference with distinction.

Here is where not only where Graham answers the question, but where he shows that he has a spine: “But I fear that you will get more violence. Pardoning the people who went into the Capitol and beat up a police officer violently I think was a mistake, because it seems to suggest that's an okay thing to do.”

He knows that beating up police officers in the Capitol is wrong, and he said it.

Then the spine collapses: “Kamala Harris wanted to raise bail money for people burning down Minneapolis. You know, Biden pardoned half his family going out the door.”

Banged them both! The boss would be pleased about that. (And to be clear, notice he said Harris “wanted to,” not that she did. As for the Biden pardons, there were five pardons to siblings and spouses for "ANY NONVIOLENT OFFENSES against the United States which they may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 2014, through the date of this pardon." Which can’t be said about those who took part in the January 6^th attack on the Capitol were convicted of.)

Graham concluded his answer by repeating: “But as to pardoning violent people who beat up cops, I think that's a mistake.”

The final question Welker posed was about the Trump Administration’s firing of 18 inspectors general. Legally there is supposed to be 30 days’ notice.

Welker: “Do you think he violated the law?”

Graham: “Well, technically yeah. But he has the authority to do it. So, I’m not, you know, losing a whole lot of sleep that he wants to change the personnel out. I just want to make sure that he gets off to a good start. I think he has. I’m very supportive of what he wants to do with America …”

So let’s see.

Trump violated the law.

But he has the authority? Um, in what country would that be?

Section 3, Article II of the U.S. Constitution has it that the president must “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

It is the president’s job to make sure that the laws are upheld, not violate them.

And so the spine collapses again.

Macaulay is pundit-at-large for The Hustings.

_______________________________________________

Voice your COMMENTS on President Trump’s attempt to freeze funding approved by Congress.

Let us know what you think about Trump’s buyout offer for most federal employees.

EMAIL editors@thehustings.news and please indicate your political leanings in the subject line.

_____
WEDNESDAY 1/29/25

What’s Left

Feeling uneasy, even depressed about the new administration as President Trump deports immigrants to Colombia and calls on federal employees to “snitch” on colleagues promoting DEI? If so, you probably identify most with this, the left column, or with Pundit-at-Large Stephen Macaulay, who comments from his never-MAGA point-of-view in the right column.

If you are a pro-MAGA conservative, you are welcome here as well. You should be reading comments and commentary in this left column. That’s what The Hustings is for: Free, open and civil discussion of political news/aggregate in the center column without echo chambers and we invite you to comment, whether as a therapeutic method of dealing with, or as a celebration of, the return of President Trump. Read the whole page and you will not be subject to “silo” news and commentary like the echo chambers forced by social media sites at X/Twitter, Bluesky, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok & etc. that show you facts and opinions only from those you follow.

Please be sure to read today’s right column for a roundup of recent center-column news/aggregate/analysis and for left and right commentary on the same.

Add your civil COMMENTS with an email to editors@thehustings.news and please indicate your political leanings in the subject line (whether you are left or right does not have to match your opinion on a particular issue).

_____
MONDAY 1/127/25

…meanwhile…

80 Years – World leaders including Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Polish President Andrzej Duda gathered Monday with survivors for the 80^th anniversary of the liberation of the World War II concentration camp in Auschwitz/Burkenau, where Nazis killed 1 million Jews. Politicians have not been invited to speak, (per Newsweek) as organizers instead chose to focus on the observance and testimonies of the survivors, youngest of whom are in their 80s.

TUESDAY 1/28/25

Retribution On – Acting Attorney Gen. James McHenry has issued letters firing more than a dozen Justice Department officials who investigated Donald J. Trump during the Biden administration, Fox News reports.

“Today, Acting Attorney Gen. James McHenry terminated the employment of a number of DOJ officials who played a significant role in prosecuting President Trump,” a Justice Department official told Fox News Digital. “In light of their actions, the Acting attorney general does not trust these officials to assist in faithfully implementing the president’s agenda.”

The sackings are “consistent with the mission of ending the weaponization of government,” the official told Fox News Digital.

NPR reports there is no known precedent for such action and that as longtime civil servants the sacked DOJ officials could sue the federal government.

--TL

_______________________________________________

MONDAY 1/27/25

[Read our (free) Substack newsletter here.]

One Week Closer to Authoritarianism? --President Trump was not, despite what he had quipped he would be in a conversation with Sean Hannity more than a year ago, a “dictator” for Day One. But he spent the first week of his second term consolidating his power, perhaps most acutely with his late-Friday firing of up to 17 inspectors general who investigate waste, fraud and abuse, including for the Pentagon, State Department, Veterans Affairs and the Interior, USA Today reports.

So much for draining the swamp.

Friday night usually is when such news is made to be lost in a weekend of NFL games and movie premiers, but this time it was simply part of the Trump firehose-full of executive orders and presidential comments, including the comment in which he called into question the future of the Federal Emergency Management Administration.

Lest firing inspectors general or killing off FEMA could become the lead issues for Sunday morning shows, Trump on Saturday floated a proposal that in light of the ceasefire just begun, Palestinians should vacate Gaza. The president suggested the move could be “temporary or long term,” according to The Wall Street Journal, though it’s a good bet that his close ally, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, would much prefer the long-term solution.

“It’s literally a demolition site right now,” Trump said of Gaza. “So, I’d rather get involved with some of the Arab nations, and build housing in a different location, where they can maybe live in peace for a change.”

Meanwhile in Colombia, left-wing President Gustavo Petro turned back two US military airplanes from Washington carrying deported immigrants, calling the action “degrading.” Trump immediately retaliated by threatening 25% “emergency” tariffs and a travel ban aimed at Colombian officials, Semafor reports. Such a tariff would have affected 11,000 Colombian imports, including coffee and flowers, but Petro has since capitulated to The Art of the Deal and now will allow US airplanes full of deported immigrants to land, NPR’s Morning Edition reported Monday.

In his analysis of Trump’s first week back behind the Resolute Desk, The New York Times’ Peter Baker suggests that Trump’s policy U-turns do not necessarily violate presidential standards.

“Any time a president from one party takes over from one of the other,” Baker writes, “the shifts in policies can be head-snapping, and Mr. Trump has been particularly aggressive in reversing the country’s direction ideologically and politically.”

For populist-conservatives looking to make America great again, Trump in his second term has made quick work reaching toward the goal. For progressives, the “one step forward, one step back” of Obama-Trump-Biden-Trump amounts to the sort of zero-sum gain Democrats could find themselves making for decades to come.

Appointees are a go … In case you missed it, the Trump White House began its weekend late last Friday confident it would get the cabinet it wants. Most important was the Senate’s 51-50 confirmation of former Fox & Friends Weekend host Pete Hegseth as Defense secretary, with Vice President Vance casting the tiebreaker. In addition to Sens. Lisa Murkowski’s (R-AK) and Susan Collins’ (R-ME) “nay” votes, one other Republican senator indicated he won’t fall in line with every party line vote: Mitch McConnell, of Kentucky, who stepped down as minority leader last year and has not indicated whether he will run for re-election again in 2026.

That’s probably what it takes for the former Senate majority leader who paved the way for Trump’s three Supreme Court appointments, then accused Trump of provoking the January 6^th Capitol attack to deal with likely MAGA retribution in Kentucky’s 2026 midterm primary election.

Saturday the Senate confirmed South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem as secretary of Homeland Security by a 59-34 vote.

--Compiled and edited by Todd Lassa

_____
MONDAY 1/27/25

Our Leader at Davos (Virtually)

Commentary by Stephen Macaulay

During the Donald Trump Q&A with a suite of bankers at the World Economic Forum in Davos (he was in the U.S.; they weren’t), there were a number of comments made by the president that were they said by any other president would trigger warning sirens.

Know that these quotes are taken from the official White House transcript.

In response to a question regarding the EU regulatory regime, Trump talked about “a big project in Ireland” that he worked on during his “beautiful private life.” He said that when he learned that there would be a years-long delay to getting approval for his application from the EU:

“I realized right then, that’s a problem, and I didn’t even bother applying to do it, and — or if I did, I pulled it very quickly. I don’t wa- — I have to be very accurate, because I don’t want to be criticized -- ‘He did apply, actually.’ No, I want to be very accurate.

So, I don’t think I did, but if I did, I pulled it very quickly.”

He applied. No he didn’t apply. He might have applied. If he did apply, then he pulled it.

Now one might give him a pass because this happened when, he said, “I had a nice, simple life. You knew that.”

So he might not remember. (Who, incidentally, knew he had “a nice simple life”?)

But why use something he wasn’t clear about as an example?

And should a president, on a global stage, show his inability to, well, know what he’s talking about?

He then launched into a pout about the EU: “the EU treats us very, very unfairly, very badly. . .[E]ssentially, they don’t take our farm products and they don’t take our cars. Yet, they send cars to us by the millions.”

Let’s see. The EU buys some $10 billion in agricultural exports from the U.S.

Not nothing by any measure.

“They don’t take our cars.”

Let’s see. BMW builds its SUVs in South Carolina and ships them to Europe.

Ford has factories in Germany, Spain and Romania, so “They” are taking products from a US brand.

And, oh, his pal Elon’s Tesla Model Y was the eighth best-selling vehicle in the EU in 2024.

Then there’s this:

“They put tariffs on things that we want to do, like, for instance, I think they actually — in terms of these are noneconomic or nonmonetary tariffs, and — and those are very bad, and they make it very difficult to bring products into Europe, and yet they expect to be selling and they do sell their products in the United States.”

As the kids might put it: WTF?

During a discussion about energy, he got back to something that we haven’t heard about for a long time: “Good, clean coal.”

There is no such thing as “clean coal.”

At least not in the real world.

He criticized the “Green New Deal.” It is worth noting that the Green New Deal isn’t law, it was a resolution introduced by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Senator Edward Markey (D-MA).

Trump:

“I mean, the Green New Deal was such a total disgrace — what — what — how that was perpetrated. And it was conceived of by people that were average students — less than average students, I might add — and never even took a course in energy or the environment.”

Again: the President of the United States demeaning people because of their educational attainment. That’s a serious rhetorical move?

Consider: he has a B.S. in Economics. Ocasio-Cortez has a B.A. in International Relations and Economics. Markey has B.A. in Political Science and a J.D.

The people he criticizes are above average.

And how many courses in “energy or the environment” has he taken.”?

Then he moved on to criticizing Canada:

“We have a tremendous deficit with Canada. We’re not going to have that anymore. We can’t do it. It’s — it’s — I don’t know if it’s good for them. As you probably know, I say, “You can always become a state, and if you’re a state, we won’t have a deficit. We won’t have to tariff you, et cetera, et cetera.”

“But Canada has been very tough to deal with over the years, and it’s not fair that we should have a $200 billion or $250 billion deficit. We don’t need them to make our cars, and they make a lot of them. We don’t need their lumber because we have our own forests, et cetera, et cetera. We don’t need their oil and gas. We have our — we have more than anybody.”

Actually, the trade deficit is about 25% of his lowest estimate. Some $45 billion. But it doesn’t matter. He can just make it up.

And why the deficit?

Mainly because the US buys lots of oil from Canada.

We do need their oil and gas.

And there’s something about the need that has nothing to do with what is happening north of the border but south of it: refineries in the US have been built to process the sour, heavy crude that comes from Canada. They just can’t presto-change-o switch to other types of oil.

We also need their electricity: 1.5 million US homes are supplied with electricity from Ontario.

Then after talking briefly about Mexico he swerved to “honestly, good things are going to happen for the world, and good things are going to happen for the people that are dealing with us — allies and beyond allies.”

“Beyond allies”?

After making that statement he said:

“One thing — very important — I really would like to be able to meet with President Putin soon and get that war end — ended, and — and that’s not from the standpoint of economy or anything else. It’s from the standpoint of millions of lives are being wasted. Beautiful, young people are being shot in the battlefield. You know, the bullet — a very flat land, as I said, and the bullet goes — there’s no — there’s no hiding. And a bullet — the only thing going to stop the bullet is a human body. And you have to see — I’ve seen pictures of what’s taken place. It’s a carnage.”

That defies analysis.

This is, again, the President of the United States speaking at one of the most consequential economic conferences on the planet.

Macaulay is pundit-at-large for The Hustings.

_______________________________________________

What's Right -- Monday’s news/aggregate tackles the question of whether Donald J. Trump’s promise to Sean Hannity to be a dictator only on “Day One” is playing itself out as the 47^th president races to wipe out any vestige of the Biden White House with stacks of executive orders signed with that fat Sharpie.

Whether you object or you agree with Trump’s EOs and our center column news/analysis, we want to hear from you. Email your civil COMMENTS to editors@thehustings.news and please indicate your political leanings – right, whether pro-MAGA or never-Trumper or anything in-between, or left, whether moderate liberal or Bernie Sanders/AOC-progressive or anything in-between – in the subject line.

Scroll down with the trackbar on the far right (not a political position in this case) to read other recent center-column news/aggregate/analysis and commentary from the right and left, including …

•Strong reaction to Trump’s pardons of more than 1,500 January 6^th insurrectionists, and general public opposition to release of the most violent of those convicted.

•Right-column contributor Rich Corbett’s commentary above, “Pardons, Promises and Presidential Powers,” opposite Sharon Lintner’s left-column response, “Shocking FOP Support for Trump.”

•In the center column: Was DOGE chief Elon Musk’s “salute” to Trump supporters a Nazi salute, or something more innocuous?

•Pundit-at-Large Stephen Macaulay’s right column on the Trump inauguration; “Return of the Gilded Age?” opposite Hugh Hansen’s left column, “Inauguration to Avoid.”

_____
MONDAY 1/27/25

Shocking FOP Support for Trump

Commentary by Sharon Lintner

Looks like Trump's daily agenda will be nauseating me for some time to come. The latest gut wrenching move that has me terrified of what the future holds is the pardoning of people convicted in the US Capitol attack.

In September 2024, the Fraternal Order of Police announced that their members voted to endorse Donald J. Trump for president.

I was shocked by their decision to endorse a man who is a convicted felon, a man who vowed to pardon those who engaged in assaults on fellow officers January 6, 2021.

In an attempt to find out if our local police force participated in the decision or vote to endorse Trump, I contacted the FOP, but I received no answer.

The police are public servants and should remain politically neutral. In our small town, taxpayers finance a $4-million per year police force that's paid for by people from all political parties, not just Republicans.

It not only angers me, it scares me that my money is funding a force which could openly support a man who has repeatedly encouraged violence.

_____
FRIDAY 1/24/25

On Trump and his 1/6 Pardons

Democrats are taking a hard line on President Trump’s near-blanket pardon of more than 1,500 rioters convicted for the January 6, 2021, attack on the United States Capitol, including Enrique Tarrio of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes. Republican reactions are mixed, with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) asserting that it’s the president’s right to sign clemencies and deflecting toward former President Biden’s last-minute pardons of family members The Hill reports.

In this edition, contributors Sharon Lintner and Rich Corbett offer their opinions on this controversial issue, in the left and right columns, respectively. To submit your COMMENTS email editors@thehustings.news and please use the subject line to indicate whether you lean left or right, so we may post those comments in the proper column.

Polls on the pardons … Latest NPR/PBS News/Marist poll finds 62% disapprove of Trump’s pardons of January 6^th rioters, though 64% of Republicans in the poll approve. A Fabrizio, Lee & Associates/GBAO poll for The Wall Street Journal reports that 57% are opposed to the pardons.

While Trump’s actions have a substantial list of Republican supporters in the House, it’s far from unanimous. Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-CA) said he does not agree “with the pardons of people that committed violence or even damage to property. If you climbed in through a window, I think probably you knew what you were doing was against the law. And I don’t think it was appropriate to pardon them.” (Per The Hill.)

NPR interviewed Pamela Hemphill, 71, who was an ardent Trump supporter in 2020 when she participated in the insurrection. But she has turned down clemency for her conviction in storming the halls of Congress that day.

“I broke the law that day, period,” she told All Things Considered. “Black and white. I’m not a victim. I’m a volunteer.” Hemphill added that accepting Trump’s pardon “would be a slap in the face to Capitol police officers, to the rule of law and to our whole nation.”

•••

It’s the Constitution, Stupid – In other Week 1 Trump 47 news, Federal District Judge John C. Coughenour signed a restraining order to block for 14 days President Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship for babies born on US soil. Ruling by the judge, who was appointed to the bench by President Reagan, sides with a lawsuit by Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon to block the EO (per The New York Times).

“This is blatantly an unconstitutional order,” Coughenour said in his ruling. Directed to Trump administration attorneys, the judge continued; “Frankly I have difficulty understanding how a member of the bar would state unequivocally that this is a Constitutional order. It just boggles the mind.”

•••

Hegseth Rising – Former Fox & Friends Weekend host Pete Hegseth appears headed for confirmation as President Trump’s pick for defense secretary after the Senate voted 51-49 Thursday to end debate on his nomination, according to The Hill. Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski (AK) and Susan Collins (ME) joined all Democrats in voting against the procedural move, and Murkowski, at least, has vowed to oppose Hegseth in the full Senate vote.

Trump can afford to lose three Republicans in the vote, expected Friday.

The canary will live … Hegseth was considered the test-case among Trump’s most controversial cabinet member choices, meaning that if he can win Senate confirmation, pretty much anyone else can. But hold on -- both Republicans and Democrats appear skeptical about the president’s nomination of former Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to be Health and Human Services secretary, The Hill reports.

Some Republicans are concerned about RFK Jr.’s support of abortion rights, while Democrats do not want an anti-vax, anti-fluoride HHS secretary (per The Hill). Meanwhile, there is some bi-partisan opposition to Trump’s nomination of former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) to become director of national intelligence, Semafor reports.

--Compiled and edited by Todd Lassa

_____
FRIDAY 1/24/25

Pardons, Promises and Presidential Powers

Commentary by Rich Corbett

Presidential pardons serve as a profound exercise of executive clemency, often reflecting the incumbent’s values and political commitments. Both President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden have utilized this power in ways that caused most law-abiding citizens to question, “where does the power to pardon end?”

During his 2024 campaign, President Trump pledged openly that he would pardon individuals convicted in connection with the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack. Fulfilling this promise, on January 20, 2025, he issued pardons for approximately 1,500 individuals involved in the events of that day. Many were peaceful protestors who likely merely trespassed the Capitol grounds, while others were convicted of assaulting law enforcement officers. The latter receiving the pardons were met with significant criticism from both political parties.

In contrast, President-elect Biden made a point when talking with CNN’s Jake Tapper about the possibility of then-President Trump making preemptive pardons for his adult children; “You’re not going to see our administration take that kind of approach to pardons.”

However, following the 2024 election, Biden issued a pardon for his son Hunter, after previously stating that he would not, and then in his final hours in office he issued preemptive pardons to several family members, including his siblings and their spouses, along with preemptive pardons for several high profile public figures who might be targets of prosecution.

President Trump’s mass pardons of January 6 participants underscored his allegiance to his supporter base, but attracted criticism from law enforcement and judicial figures. President Biden’s preemptive pardons of family members raise ethical questions about the appropriate use of executive clemency. Both presidents have many Americans, and hopefully their representatives, wondering if the pardon power is abuse of power, if broad preemptive pardons are even legal, or just how far-reaching a president’s power to pardon extends.

_____
FRIDAY 1/24/25