Welcome to a new era in American democracy. For years many would say “It can’t happen here” referring to an ultra-extremist takeover or Nazism. Then immediately after the election some said “It has happened here.”
Now the new mood among many is “It has happened here. So what?”
But if a time comes when “it” has “happened here” for real — with a massive change in government, institutionalized and embedded rejection of traditional, political and societal and social norms, and flourishing extremism, will there come a time when those who yawned “So what?” will belatedly become alarmed when it’s too late?
He looks a poll showing a decreasing number of Americans across the board (Republicans, Independents and Democrats”) who’d be concerned if a President Donald Trump suspend some laws and constitutional provisions and writes:
The American people just don’t seem to be in a mood to uphold much of anything, whether its norms against murder in the streets, the independence of the Justice Department, disqualifying politicians who commit business fraud, rape, and coup attempts, or the importance of upholding the Constitution.
I would never suggest that living in America has been a paradise, but I think this really is a case of people not knowing what they have until it’s gone. If there’s widespread rage on the frontend here, there will be another kind of outrage on the backend when people see what it’s like when everything breaks and radicals take away the things they take for granted.
[…]But the real challenge here is that someone has to preserve our right to vote out these people when we grow disenchanted. That’s where the importance of the Constitution really matters, because if no one will enforce the law there’s no way to ensure we’ll have another free and fair election.
Heroes may be required.
One thing we’ve all seen over the past 10 years: the easiness with which societal, political and institutional norms and traditions can be shattered. And how many are also willing to ignore laws if applied to their political tribal sports team.
When Donald Trump sued ABC News over defamation it seemed like it would be one more Trump lawsuit that made a lot of noise and wouldn’t go anywhere. And if you had to take bets, basing it on previous media behavior, you’d bet on it going to trial, and appeals.
ABC News is set to pay $15 million to settle a defamation lawsuit brought by Donald J. Trump.
The agreement was a significant concession by a major news organization and a rare victory for a media-bashing politician whose previous litigation efforts against news outlets have often ended in defeat.
Under the terms of a settlement revealed on Saturday, ABC News will donate the $15 million to Mr. Trump’s future presidential foundation and museum. The network and its star anchor, George Stephanopoulos, also published a statement saying they “regret” remarks made about Mr. Trump during a televised interview in March.
ABC News, which is owned by the Walt Disney Company, will pay Mr. Trump an additional $1 million for his legal fees.
The outcome is an unusual win for Mr. Trump, who has frequently sued news organizations for defamation and frequently lost, including in litigation against CNN, The New York Times and The Washington Post.
Several experts in media law said they believed that ABC News could have continued to fight, given the high threshold required by the courts for a public figure like Mr. Trump to prove defamation. A plaintiff must not only show that a news outlet published false information, but that it did so knowing that the information was false or with substantial doubts about its accuracy.
“Major news organizations have often been very leery of settlements in defamation suits brought by public officials and public figures, both because they fear the dangerous pattern of doing so and because they have the full weight of the First Amendment on their side,” said RonNell Andersen Jones, a professor of law at the University of Utah.
“What we might be seeing here is an attitudinal shift,” she added. “Compared to the mainstream American press of a decade ago, today’s press is far less financially robust, far more politically threatened, and exponentially less confident that a given jury will value press freedom, rather than embrace a vilification of it.”
In other words: another norm has bitten the dust.
ABC News did not elaborate on Saturday about its precise reasons for settling. “We are pleased that the parties have reached an agreement to dismiss the lawsuit on the terms in the court filing,” a network spokeswoman said. A lawyer for Mr. Trump declined to comment on the agreement.
Mr. Trump sued ABC and Mr. Stephanopoulos in March, after the anchor asked Representative Nancy Mace, Republican of South Carolina, who has spoken publicly about being raped as a teenager, why she had continued to support Mr. Trump after he was found “liable for rape” in a 2023 civil case in Manhattan.
In that case, a federal jury found Mr. Trump liable for sexually abusing and defaming the writer E. Jean Carroll, but it did not find him liable for rape. Still, the judge who oversaw the proceeding later clarified that because of New York’s narrow legal definition of rape, the jury’s verdict did not mean that Ms. Carroll had “failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape.’”
Why did ABC News settle? There are all kinds of theories:
Stephanopoulos would have fought on but corporate bigwigs wanted to settle it ASAP.
ABC News’ corporate officials were playing follow-the-leader as other big corporations are rushing to Trump to curry his favor and donate to big bucks to his inauguration.
ABC officials might have felt that if the case was pursued and went all the way up to the Supreme Court ABC would not have stood a chance given the MAGA makeup of much of the court.
ABC had a lingering fear that the Trump administration could go after its broadcast license.
ABC officials felt that in the end the case would not one that they could win and that Stephanopoulos had indeed stepped in it.
Indeed, Trump has long talked about defamation laws and the press and it’s likely more defamation suits will come. David Enrich in The New York Times:
The legal threats have arrived in various forms. One aired on CNN. Another came over the phone. More arrived in letters or emails.
All of them appeared aimed at intimidating news outlets and others who have criticized or questioned President-elect Donald J. Trump and his nominees to run the Pentagon and F.B.I.
The small flurry of threatened defamation lawsuits is the latest sign that the incoming Trump administration appears poised to do what it can to crack down on unfavorable media coverage. Before and after the election, Mr. Trump and his allies have discussed subpoenaing news organizations, prosecuting journalists and their sources, revoking networks’ broadcast licenses and eliminating funding for public radio and television.
Actual or threatened libel lawsuits are another weapon at their disposal — and they are being deployed even before Mr. Trump moves back into the White House.
It is notoriously difficult for public figures like Mr. Trump to win defamation lawsuits. Under longstanding Supreme Court precedent — which Mr. Trump and some of his allies want to see weakened or overturned — plaintiffs must prove that a publisher knew a defamatory statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for its accuracy.
But that high bar has not stopped a wide range of politicians, business leaders and others from threatening or filing such suits — a strategy that often seems tailored to cause news outlets and individuals to rein in aggressive coverage of the public figures.
The strategy can pay other dividends as well.
On Saturday, ABC News said it had agreed to give $15 million to Mr. Trump’s future presidential foundation and museum to settle a defamation suit that Mr. Trump filed against the network and one of its anchors, George Stephanopoulos. Mr. Trump sued in March after Mr. Stephanopoulos inaccurately said the former president had been found “liable for rape” in a civil trial in New York, though the judge in the case later noted that the state has a narrow legal definition of rape. In fact, Mr. Trump had been found liable for sexual abuse.
The settlement followed months of attacks by Mr. Trump and his allies on ABC News, with the once and future president going so far as to say that the network should lose its federal broadcast license.
The deal set off criticism of ABC News by those who perceived the network as needlessly bowing down to Mr. Trump. And it led some legal and media experts to wonder whether the outcome would embolden Mr. Trump and others to intensify their assault on the media, at a moment when many news organizations are struggling with declining public trust and deteriorating finances.
Even before the settlement was reached, Elizabeth McNamara, a prominent media lawyer, said she expected that the trend “is only going to increase,” given the political environment.
[,,,]Over the past several weeks, lawyers for Mr. Trump and two of his most high-profile nominees — Pete Hegseth, the potential defense secretary, and Kash Patel, whom Mr. Trump has picked to run the F.B.I. — warned journalists and others of defamation lawsuits for what they had said or written.
Mr. Hegseth, until recently a Fox News host, was accused of sexual assault in 2017. While he denies the allegation, he struck a confidential settlement with his accuser.
In an interview on CNN this month, Mr. Hegseth’s lawyer, Timothy Parlatore, said the woman was free to speak publicly. But, he warned, “if she repeats these false statements, then she will be subject to a defamation lawsuit.”
Newsweek reports
that ABC is receiving backlash from Democrats and Republicans:
“People are not going to forget what ABC did,” the Republicans Against Trump X, formerly Twitter, account said.
Conservative political scientist Norman Jay Ornstein added: “Add ABC to the basket of cowards in our media.”
Democratic attorney Marc Elias wrote: “Knee bent. Ring kissed. Another legacy news outlet chooses obedience.”
Reporter Oliver Willis also chimed in, writing on Threads: “This is actually how democracy dies.”
Tech reporter Matt Novak said: “Not good for the rest of us when you do this s***, ABC.”
“But that’s probably half the point from management’s perspective,” he added Saturday.
“People are not going to forget what ABC did,” the Republicans Against Trump X, formerly Twitter, account said.
Conservative political scientist Norman Jay Ornstein added: “Add ABC to the basket of cowards in our media.”
Democratic attorney Marc Elias wrote: “Knee bent. Ring kissed. Another legacy news outlet chooses obedience.”
Reporter Oliver Willis also chimed in, writing on Threads: “This is actually how democracy dies.”
Tech reporter Matt Novak said: “Not good for the rest of us when you do this s***, ABC.”
“But that’s probably half the point from management’s perspective,” he added Saturday.
Legal experts also criticized the broadcaster for settling the lawsuit before depositions were due to take place.
Former prosecutor Joyce Vance said: “I’m old enough to remember—and to have worked on—cases where newspapers vigorously defended themselves against defamation cases instead of folding before the defendant was even deposed.”
“That, by the way, includes defamation cases brought by candidates for the presidency,” she then added.
Legal analyst Allison Gill, known online as Mueller, She Wrote, said: “This is so gross.”
“And it keeps happening. Why not depose him?” she asked. “The case wouldn’t cost more than $15M and ABC would have won if they bothered fighting.”
The analyst then added, “I don’t get it.”
Human rights lawyer Qasim Rashid said: “This is the cowardice of legacy media out to make profit, rather than uphold principle. The ongoing failure of legacy media is a stark reminder that independent and independently funded voices are now more critical than ever before.”
It’s another sign of how easy norms are shattered under Donald Trump – and perhaps another display of the weakness of American democracy’s highly touted “guardrails.”
ABC News talent and staff I’ve been talking to over the past few hours are stunned and furious about this settlement.
Their anger primarily stems from the fact that they have faced repeated budget and compensation cuts in recent years, experienced layoffs, and yet the network —… https://t.co/m5RJCmR6Su
A jury unanimously found him guilty. 26 other women have accused him of sexual misconduct. Listen to the Access Hollywood tape. Look at what his wife Ivana said about Trump raping her. Then delete your account. https://t.co/3ycoP0KHVV
It’s worse than that. Once Trump knows they are weak, he will continue to exploit those weaknesses. They are in for a world of hurt, and that means our hurt will be even greater. Disney and ABC, Meta and Amazon, are bolstering a vicious autocracy. https://t.co/k8P27s1rgW
This is ABC selling out Stephanopoulos for telling the truth. Judge Kaplan himself said that it was in fact rape. You can read those words– why ABC execs couldn’t just days before Trump was to be deposed is pure capitulation and throwing Stephanopoulos under the bus. https://t.co/GRfJei2L51
Capitulation to Leader is a naive move: if they think this will buy them any goodwill going forward they don’t understand how bullies operate. https://t.co/3WzMcfS71R
ABC is paying protection money. “That’s a fine network you have there. Sure would be a shame if, say, your broadcast licenses were challenged. Maybe we could help ensure that wouldn’t happen?” https://t.co/zgNnivHerN
It has been said that it may be difficult for someone too close to a particular event or issue to objectively assess the situation.
About a year ago, I wrote
about a witty English writer, Nate White, who penned “the best description of Trump I’ve read.”
Answering the question, “Why do some British people not like Donald Trump?” White wrote a great “analysis.”
He begins with “[Trump] has no class, no charm, no coolness, no credibility, no compassion, no wit, no warmth, no wisdom, no subtlety, no sensitivity, no self-awareness, no humility, no honour and no grace…”
It only gets more objective, and better, after that.
I concluded the review of White’s accurate piece with the comment that “the British have a great sense of humor and are exceptional judges of character.”
Australians are not far behind.
Today, in the wake of the GOP “fiasco”
in – thus far — passing a Continuing Resolution to fund the government, Australian correspondent for News.com.au, Samuel Clench, has an equally sharp-witted assessment
of the man who on Wednesday “set to work killing [a bipartisan funding bill.]… threatening to ensure any Republican who voted in favour of the bill would be turfed out of office at the next election.”
Clench’s “short version”
[A]n unelected billionaire from South Africa, who has never held public office and is, in fact, ineligible to be the American president, appears to have seized effective control of the US government. And he’s done it under the very nose of the guy the American people actually chose, quite recently, to lead that government.
Musk gloated over his victory by tweeting “Your elected representatives have heard you and now the terrible bill is dead. The voice of the people has triumphed!”
According to Clench, Musk used the Latin phrase “VOX POPULI, VOX DEI,” meaning “the voice of the people is the voice of God.” Clench adds that the phrase appeared first in an eighth-century letter written by the Saxon scholar Alcuin to the emperor Charlemagne, in which Alcuin wrote: “Those people should not be listened to who keep saying the voice of the people is the voice of God, since the riotousness of the crowd is always close to insanity.”
Referring to Musk having “more money than a lone man could ever spend,” Clench writes:
If the government shuts down over Christmas, he’ll be fine. He can hop on his private plane, fly off to some delightful hotspot and enjoy a holiday while workers are not being paid their salaries, and millions of people can’t visit their families because the public airports have stopped functioning.
He adds:
• The sheer callousness of Elon’s attitude, regarding this nightmare scenario, is galling to an extent almost beyond words.
• This is a person who seems to care more about adulation from the sewers of the internet than how his actions affect people in their real lives.
• He’s a guy who ignores information from official sources, but believes whatever patently nonsensical crap shameless rage-baiters and engagement farmers like LibsofTikTok, Catturd, or EndWokeness tweet at him.
• And all of a sudden he is the guy dictating government policy, and dictating to Congress, and overriding the person he spent more than $US200 billion to get elected as president.
How does Trump feel about Musk being his “co-president”?
Clench writes, “It’s hard to imagine Mr. Trump putting up with this interference, from Elon, for long. In his mind, he’s already rewarded the man for his financial support, by appointing him to co-lead a new government department aimed at cutting waste.”
Yet, “[w]hat actually happened was this: Elon lobbied Republicans to ditch the bill, while Mr. Trump said nothing. Once it became apparent that Elon had succeeded in killing it, Mr. Trump belatedly came out to echo his position.” Clench adds, “That is not authority. It’s a last-minute scramble to save face.”
Clench concludes:
[Trump] surrounds himself with loyalists, and those loyalists do believe vehemently in what they say, and they are going to try to use the power that comes with his office to achieve their aims. So we end up with people like Elon, and Stephen Miller, running the government while Mr. Trump watches cable television until 11am every morning.
That is the style of government Americans elected. Now they get to enjoy the consequences.
And that is the view from Australia, from a website owned by News Corp Australia, owned by…Rupert Murdoch.
Microgrids enhance how energy is generated and distributed by creating localized systems capable of operating independently or alongside the main grid. These networks — powered by renewable sources like solar or wind and backed by advanced battery storage — offer unmatched resilience and efficiency. In 2025, microgrids are capturing attention as businesses and governments seek solutions to rising demands, unpredictable power outages and the urgent need for decarbonization.
Advances in smart technology — including AI-driven management — have made microgrids more accessible and cost-effective. With growing support from sustainability incentives and the ability to integrate clean energy seamlessly, they can quickly become fundamental to the industry.
What Are Microgrids?
A microgrid is a self-contained system that can operate independently or connect to the main power grid. It typically includes multiple types of distributed energy resources, such as solar panels, wind turbines, fuel cells and advanced batteries. These components generate, store and distribute power locally to ensure reliable and efficient delivery.
Traditional grids rely on centralized power plants and extensive transmission networks. Meanwhile, microgrids are decentralized and designed to serve specific areas like buildings, campuses or communities. This localized setup minimizes loss and enhances resilience during power outages.
Advancements in battery technology, artificial intelligence and Internet of Things (IoT) systems will make this network smarter, more efficient and affordable. This will pave the way for broader adoption by businesses and communities seeking sustainable and reliable solutions.
Key Impacts on Microgrids in 2025
Microgrids ensure reliable power during grid outages and extreme weather events. Unlike traditional energy systems, it can disconnect from the main grid, whether local, state, or national and operate independently. This unique capability, called “islanding,” keeps essential services and organizations running when the primary grid fails.
As climate-related disruptions become more frequent, microgrids are indispensable in maintaining operational continuity. Harnessing renewable sources like solar panels and wind turbines enhances reliability and reduces costs through local production and efficient storage systems.
Beyond reliability, microgrids pave the way for more sustainable and intelligent energy practices. Their ability to integrate renewables supports decarbonization efforts, which helps businesses align with sustainability goals and meet growing regulatory demands. Meanwhile, advancements in AI and IoT transform how they operate to enable smarter energy management.
These technologies allow for real-time monitoring and optimization and ensure power generation, storage and usage are as efficient as possible. Microgrids keep the lights on and represent a forward-thinking investment in cost savings, sustainability and technological innovation for businesses of all sizes.
Benefits for Organizations
Microgrids are quickly becoming pivotal for companies because they offer many benefits beyond reliable energy. Institutions face increasing challenges from rising costs, extreme weather events and pressure to adopt sustainable practices, so they provide a practical, forward-thinking solution. Here are some key benefits businesses can expect when adopting microgrid systems:
Uninterrupted operations during outages: Microgrids can operate independently from the main grid, ensuring critical organizational functions continue even during blackouts or extreme weather.
Reduced energy costs: Integrating renewable sources and generating power locally can lower electricity bills and give consumers more control over expenses.
Enhanced sustainability: They support decarbonization efforts by incorporating clean sources, which helps companies meet sustainability goals and improve their environmental footprint.
Improved energy independence: A localized system makes businesses less reliant on fluctuating grid power and pricing.
Strengthened brand reputation: Adopting a microgrid demonstrates a commitment to sustainability to attract eco-conscious consumers, investors and partners.
Access to financial incentives: Many governments offer tax breaks, grants and subsidies to organizations that invest in renewables and microgrid technology.
Smarter energy management: Microgrids with AI and IoT technologies allow businesses to optimize real-time usage, improve efficiency and reduce waste.
These advantages make microgrids an invaluable asset for institutions looking to future-proof their operations while staying competitive in a rapidly evolving market.
Innovations Driving Microgrid Adoption
Emerging technologies take efficiency to new heights because they offer businesses smarter, safer and more reliable energy solutions. AI-powered management systems enhance power utilization by analyzing real-time data to optimize production, storage and consumption. These networks ensure maximum efficiency and minimize waste, which helps companies cut costs while maintaining reliable power.
Blockchain technology also makes waves by enabling secure, transparent transactions within microgrid networks. This allows businesses to trade surplus energy seamlessly, creating decentralized markets that are efficient and sustainable. Combined with advancements in battery storage, they are becoming more capable of meeting the demands of modern institutions.
A critical yet often overlooked aspect of microgrid performance lies in the design and materials of cables. Recent advancements have enhanced cable ampacity to ensure they can handle higher current loads without overheating. Proper heat dissipation is essential because when cables retain too much heat, they risk degrading insulation and, in extreme cases, causing fires.
These innovations make modern cables safer and more durable, significantly reducing these risks. Businesses gain added safety and efficiency when paired with smart energy management systems, which can monitor and address potential overheating issues. Together, these technologies transform how microgrids operate and offer companies a forward-thinking solution that prioritizes performance and reliability.
Market Trends and Forecasts
The microgrid market can experience significant growth in 2025 as businesses and governments turn to resilient, sustainable solutions to meet evolving demands. This surge is due to increasing challenges, particularly in regions with outdated or insufficient power infrastructure. Microgrids are becoming a top choice for industries such as manufacturing, health care, technology and remote operations like mining pits, where reliable power is critical.
Governments bolster this growth through tax incentives, grants and renewable energy policies. At the same time, private investments in advanced technologies like AI, battery storage and smart energy management drive down costs and improve efficiency. As a result, microgrids emerge as a practical, forward-thinking solution that empowers organizations to tackle reliability, cost and sustainability challenges head-on.
Challenges to Consider
Despite their many advantages, microgrids have challenges, including high upfront installation costs and the technological complexity of integrating them into existing systems. A significant barrier to adoption is the lack of standardized regulations, which creates uncertainty for businesses and can lead to unpredictable compliance costs. This regulatory ambiguity often deters investment, as companies are wary of committing to systems that might require costly modifications later.
However, institutions can overcome these obstacles with strategic planning. Conducting a detailed cost-benefit analysis to understand long-term savings, partnering with experienced microgrid developers and taking advantage of tax credits and government grants can help offset initial expenses. Staying informed about regulatory developments and aligning their energy strategies with industry best practices allow businesses to confidently overcome these complexities and unlock their full potential.
Maximizing the Competitive Edge with Microgrids
Adopting a microgrid is a strategic move that can lower costs, enhance sustainability and set organizations apart in an eco-conscious market. With advancements making them more accessible, now is the perfect time to invest in a solution that delivers resilience and a competitive edge.
Many Syrians are celebrating their sudden freedom from tyrant Bashar al-Assad while Israeli troops are quickly occupying his military installations overlooking the Golan Heights, but the jubilation may be short-lived.
Barely 48 hours since the dominant opposition force Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) captured Damascus, Geir Pedersen, UN Special Envoy for Syria, warned, “Syria is now at a crossroads with great opportunities for us, but also with grave risks. And we need really to look at both.”
Referring to numerous reports of Israeli troop movements into the Golan Heights and bombardments of targets inside Syria, Mr. Pedersen insisted: “This needs to stop.”
“We know that, of course, HTS is now the dominant group in control of Damascus, but it’s important also to remember that they are not the only armed group in Damascus.”
Importantly, Syria remains extremely volatile outside Damascus. “The conflict in the northeast is not over; there has been clashes between the Syrian National Army, the opposition groups and the [Syrian Democratic Forces]. We are calling obviously for calm also in this area,” Pedersen said.
About Israeli incursions into Syria, he added that the message from the UN was that “what we are seeing is a violation of the disengagement agreement in 1974.” That agreement concluded the Yom Kippur War and established a 235-square-kilometer demilitarized buffer zone between Israel and Syria monitored by UN peacekeepers.
The extent of HTS leader Abu Mohammad al Jolani’s control over other factions inside Damascus and outside or near the buffer zone is still unclear, although his group led the opposition forces’ advance into Damascus via Aleppo, Hama and Homs.
Meanwhile, HTS is still seen as a terrorist group by the UN Security Council under its resolution 2254 adopted in December 2015. The resolution calls on all UN members “to prevent and suppress terrorist acts committed specifically by” the Al-Nusra Front, which is HTS’s predecessor.
Jolani also has a $10 million bounty on his head placed by the US but the terror listing might be changed.
“You have to look at the facts and to see what has happened during the last nine years. It is nine years since that resolution was adopted and the reality so far is that the HTS and also the other armed groups have been sending good messages to the Syrian people,” Pedersen said.
“They have been sending messages of unity, of inclusiveness and frankly speaking, we are also seeing in Aleppo and in Hama, we have also seen, you know, reassuring things on the ground.”
At a meeting in Doha, Qatar last weekend, Turkey, Russia, Iran and many Arab States hoped that Damascus’s new rulers would act on their initial promising declarations in favor of a peaceful transition of power.
In a statement on Tuesday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced full US recognition and support for a future Syria government that results from a Syrian-led and Syrian-owned political transition consistent with Security Council resolution 2254.
But that might be a long way off since Syria’s civil war is far from over. In the north, a Turkish proxy militia called the Syrian National Army (SNA) has captured the towns of Manbij and Tel Rifaat, which had been under US-backed Kurdish control since 2016.
Turkey is determined to push back the Kurd-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) armed by the US but branded by Ankara as terrorists affiliated to violent Kurdish rebels in Turkey. The rebel group, called PKK, is designated as terrorist by the US and European Union.
HTS’s Jolani and his affiliates ruled over Idlib close to Turkey’s border but have at times fought both the SNA and SDF. Jolani cannot establish a stable government throughout Syria without finding a way to make peace with both.
That might mean helping to settle Turkey’s conflict with the Syrian Kurds, who gained significant political and military power in recent years by helping Washington to destroy the Islamic State (ISIS) emirate in Syria.
The US still has about 1,000 troops in Syria to help its Kurdish allies to fight ISIS remnants.
Ankara is a US treaty ally within NATO but views Washington’s military support for those Kurds with great anxiety because it sees them as an enemy of the Turkish state bent on carving an independent Kurdish entity in Syria, which could offer safe have to Turkey’s Kurdish rebels.
Iraq and Iran are also worried because that could be a first step to uniting Kurd minorities in Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran to create a militarized independent Kurdish state backed by the US.
Is the man now increasingly called “President Elon Musk” now running the Trump administration show with Donald Trump either a)an echo b)unable to meeting alone national, foreign government and business bigwigs” in meetings without him?
It certainly seems that way. Let’s give a big hand (with the middle finger up) to Trump Chaos returning
to Washington.
And, with a little help from “President Musk”, short-circuiting a Trump presidential honeymoon before Trump has even been sworn in. As The Bulwark’s William Kristol writes,
the world’s richest man wants to burn it all down.
On Twitter, Tik Tok, and Democrats in many interviews Musk is being referred to as “President Musk.” In the first Trump administration Trump was President. In the incoming Trump administration Trump will apparently be co-President.
A bipartisan deal, hammered out between House Speaker Mike Johnson with Democrats, was seemingly all set. Then Musk came out against it in posts and phone calls. Then after that Trump came out against it. Meanwhile, mega-MAGA Steve Bannon suggested Johnson was a Democrat. ‘
And the House Republicans folded, breaking their bipartisan deal with Democrats. Rolling Stone:
Elon Musk, self-described “First Buddy” of President-elect Donald Trump, went all out to thwart a last-minute funding deal to avert a government shutdown. The move was a direct challenge to Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson, who rolled out the sweeping plan on Tuesday night.
Now, it appears Musk has successfully killed the stopgap measure in its cradle — before it was even brought to a vote.
In a manic posting spree on Wednesday, the world’s richest man bombarded his platform X, formerly Twitter, with attacks on a proposed funding bill, which would’ve kept the government funded through March 14 and had bipartisan support. He also amplified misinformation about what’s in the 1,500-page bill — as did his non-governmental commission, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which is recommending cuts to government spending and regulations to the incoming Trump administration.
Trump himself opposes the resolution, according to a joint statement shared Wednesday by Vice President-elect J.D. Vance. Various hard-right GOP representatives also vowed to vote against it. Should Johnson fail to get a spending plan passed by Dec. 20, the federal government will enter a partial shutdown ahead of the holidays. But that apparently sounded ideal to Musk and his social media clique.
“YES,” Musk commented on an X post from a user who wrote, “Just close down the govt until January 20th. Defund everything. We will be fine for 33 days.” In his own post, Musk wrote, “No bills should be passed [by] Congress until Jan 20, when @realDonaldTrump takes office. None. Zero.” (Upon Trump’s inauguration, Republican majorities will control both chambers of Congress.) Elsewhere, Musk reshared a meme of himself hacking at the bill with a sword, captioned “KILL THE BILL.” In yet another post, he wrote: “Any member of the House or Senate who votes for this outrageous spending bill deserves to be voted out in 2 years!”
Musk personally thanked a number of GOP representatives who announced via X that they were voting “no” on the bill, including Reps. Barry Moore, Anna Paulina Luna, Wesley Hunt, Eli Crane, Randy Weber, Michael Cloud, Jeff Van Drew, Warren Davidson, Keith Self, Kevin Kiley and Andy Ogles, many of whom blasted it as an “omnibus” package of excessive spending and Democratic giveaways.
The funding bill, H.R. 10445, contained provisions for allocating roughly $100 billion to relief efforts to aid Americans recovering from natural disasters in the past two years, some $30 billion in aid to farmers, and federal funding to replace the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore. It would also have criminalized revenge porn, given the District of Columbia greater control over the area surrounding the defunct Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium as they seek to bring the Washington Commanders back into the city, addressed transparency issues in hotel prices and live event ticketing, and implemented health care reforms, including some intended to lower prescription drug costs.
More controversially, the bill included a pay raise for members Congress, justified as a cost of living adjustment, a provision which drew criticism from both sides of the aisle.
Where does this leave Johnson? Trump says he supports Johnson — if he acts “decisively and tough” on the spending bill. That is, if Johnson does what President Elon Musk and Trump want.Fox News:
President-elect Donald Trump told Fox News Digital that House Speaker Mike Johnson will “easily remain speaker” for the next Congress if he “acts decisively and tough” and eliminates “all of the traps being set by Democrats” in the spending package.
Fox News Digital spoke exclusively with the president-elect Thursday morning, just hours after the bipartisan deal to avoid a partial government shutdown was killed.
“Anybody that supports a bill that doesn’t take care of the Democrat quicksand known as the debt ceiling should be primaried and disposed of as quickly as possible,” Trump told Fox News Digital.
Vice President-elect JD Vance met with House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., Wednesday night. The two spoke about the potential continuing resolution for about an hour. Vance said the two had a “productive conversation,” and said he believes they will “be able to solve some problems here” and will continue “working on it.”
So the clock is ticking on a government shut down. If it turns bad, it’s unlikely Democrats will work to rescue GOPers from any public backlash and acquiesce to Republican demands. Now Trump is calling for the total elimination of the debt ceiling and says if it doesn’t pass it’ll be a “Biden shutdown.” The problem: history has shown that when Republicans shut down the government and blame Democrats it does not work. It boomerangs on those that actually shut the government down.
Could Democrats vote the way Trump wants and eliminate the debt ceilin
g? Democrats would also like to see the debt ceiling scrapped. Still, it looks unlikely.
“We’ll have to see how much damage this does, but it’s already clear that assuming the worst happens — and it’s hard to see how it won’t — this will be the dumbest shutdown ever. I’d say that the incoming Musk administration (so far Musk, not Trump, appears to be calling the shots) is trying to hold itself up for ransom, but it doesn’t even rise to that level. This isn’t like 1995, when Newt Gingrich shut down the government in an attempt to extract cuts in Medicare and Medicaid — a move that seemed (and was) a foolish act of petulance, but at least had a ghost of motivation.”
“No, Musk is demanding — apparently successfully — that Republicans in Congress renege on a deal they had already agreed to, a continuing resolution that would keep the federal government going for the next few months. Why? Because, Musk says, of the outrageous provisions in that CR.”
“Except none of the items Musk is complaining about are actually in the bill.”
On December 17, Fox News and others had no problem with the bipartisan bill to keep the government open – until President Musk told Trump to kill it.https://t.co/Kuh681leWL
Acosta: Who’s in charge? Is it Elon Musk? Is it Donald Trump?
Lee: It appears that Elon Musk is trying to take the role as an unelected president. And in fact, Donald Trump, it appears, is following his orders. pic.twitter.com/L6gnb84NVD
Elon Musk, who got exactly zero votes and is constitutionally ineligible to be the actual president, bought himself the United States of America and now feels entitled to call the shots on keeping the government open.
Ha! Trump wants to lift the debt ceiling for one reason and one reason only – so he can borrow shitloads of money to afford his new giant tax break for billionaires and corporations.
In other words, saddle regular Americans with mountains more debt so the rich can get richer. https://t.co/Kj8uWXWAO3
If you’re just catching up: the Republican Party, taking orders from the world’s richest man, is on course to shut down the government over the holidays, stopping paychecks for our troops and nutrition benefits for low-income families just in time for Christmas.
I’m telling you. Trump is going to blow a gasket when he realizes he just made Elon Musk president, and Trump is going to be about as relevant as JD Vance. https://t.co/cYVkoCTJVu
Even worse. Govt employees don’t get paid, threatening rent, mortgages and more, but will get $ retroactively when the govt reopens. Contractors— like the guards at desks at bldgs, the cleaning crews, etc— will not be reimbursed. The pain, at the holidays, is horrible and… https://t.co/q0xUy2tPNW
Former GOP Rep. @AdamKinzinger
on the chaos on Capitol Hill:
“President Musk this morning made it clear – with all his vast government experience, which is basically, he became rich on the federal government – that he doesn’t want Republicans to pass this. And seemingly, Vice… pic.twitter.com/5mqHiJHkCK
Can the richest man in the world with tens of billions in government contracts serve as both house speaker and shadow president? https://t.co/8W7ltkbSBz
Unless it’s to get rid of the debt ceiling permanently, there should no Dem votes to raise it prematurely now. A lot of talk about mandates, landslides and trifectas. Let those claiming absolute power use some of it to deal with the debt ceiling next year.
Musk told Trump that he didn’t like the bill so Trump went on Fox and said that he doesn’t support it so now the provisions to help the storm victims and the farmers will be stripped out before the House votes for a continuing resolution. The storm victims and the farmers all…
Clark: What’s really hard is you are already struggling to pay your bills, and all of a sudden the aid for your small business that you thought was coming is going to not come because Elon Musk and Donald Trump decided to inject this chaos and hardship into your life. pic.twitter.com/SVV8CllfOl
GOP Sen. Mike Lee says the next Speaker of the House should be Elon Musk or Vivek Ramaswamy and then we’ll finally have a “Government of the people, by the people, for the people”????? pic.twitter.com/BL8r7zD4LN
Since Elon Musk is the President now, I want to see his birth certificate.
— Jim Stewartson, Antifascist ???????? (@jimstewartson) December 19, 2024
So Trump is scared shitless of President Musk, who calls all the shots and holds all the power. Got it. pic.twitter.com/rTAlXH5TVq
— Andrew—New YouTube Channel @LiveFromTheResistance (@AmoneyResists) December 19, 2024
“Trump has sewn himself into a sack with Elon Musk, a few billion dollars, a cat and a snake, and had the sack tossed into the Tiber. That’s the story here. And it will go on for a while.”https://t.co/wlUcYqgffg
via @TPM
Under normal circumstances in a healthy political environment, the fact that an incoming president is poised to fire another FBI director without cause would be the basis for a major, presidency-defining controversy. Under our current circumstances, this is barely causing a ripple — and a GOP-led Senate is likely to confirm Trump’s radical and unqualified choice to lead the bureau.
He is the second director “driven out by Trump
.” The first was James Comey.
Patel, who would need to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate, has never worked at the FBI and only spent three years at the Justice Department earlier in his career in the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section. If confirmed, he has pledged to shut down the FBI’s headquarters building in Washington and drastically redefine the bureau’s role with intelligence-gathering.
Make no mistake, Trump is poised to assume office as an authoritarian who has molded himself after Vladimir Putin and Viktor Orban. Wray just made that path a smoother one for Trump.
Most Trump nominees announced so far have been little- or un-qualified for the job they are supposed to assume. They’re wealthy, though.
Ambassador to China: David Perdue, multi-millionaire
Ambassador to France: Charles Kushner, father-in-law to Ivanka Trump and pardoned by Trump
Ambassador to Greece: Kimberly Guilfoyle, Fox News host
Ambassador to Turkey: Tom Barrack, billionaire
Ambassador to the United Kingdom: Warren Stephens, billionaire
Attorney general: Pam Bondi, former Florida attorney general
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services administrator: Dr. Mehmet Oz, a celebrity heart surgeon and television personality
Counselor to the president: Alina Habba, personal lawyer
‘Crypto czar’: David Sacks, venture capitalist and multi-millionaire
Director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Dave Weldon, Christian conservative and Florida physician infamous for his involvement in the Terri Schiavo case
Food and Drug Administration commissioner: Marty Makary, millionaire and ally of anti-vaxxer Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration chief: Jared Isaacman, billionaire
Secretary of Agriculture: Brooke Rollins, right-wing think tank president
Secretary of Commerce: Howard Lutnick, billionaire
Secretary of Defense: Pete Hegseth, FOX News personality, womanizer and alcoholic
Secretary of Health and Human Services: Robert F. Kennedy Jr., millionaire anti-vaxxer
Secretary of Homeland Security: Kristi Noem, governor of South Dakota infamous for shooting her dog as a youth
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development: Scott Turner, former NFL player
Secretary of the Interior: Doug Burgum, governor of North Dakota, multi-millionaire and venture capitalist
Secretary of Labor: Lori Chavez-DeRemer, one-term U.S. Representative
Secretary of Secretary: Linda McMahon, billionaire
Trump probably doesn’t realize it or understand it, but the goals of some of his policies conflict with each other. In fact, if some of his policies are put into effect, others will not be possible. Important parts of Trumps ideology include tariffs and deporting immigrants. Yet at the same time, he wants to cut inflation and spur economic growth. The first two policy goals are antithetical to the last two.
Trump also does not take into account that the American population is aging and many of the elderly need fulltime help. We are not replacing our population with our birth rates declining. To maintain our economy and production ability, we need immigrants. Skilled, H1B immigrants are particularly important. Asylum for immigrants from totalitarian states is also part of our tradition.
Raising tariffs on imported goods will raise prices for consumers and be inflationary. Trump thinks that the exporting countries will absorb the costs, but they will actually be borne by American consumers. As the prices increase, so will inflation. Trump also believes that the funds collected from tariffs will allow tax cuts (mainly for the wealthy). But there will not be adequate amounts of money generated with tariffs to significantly reduce taxes without increasing the national debt, which is already higher than it should be related to our GDP.
Deporting immigrants will also spur inflation and will not provide jobs for Americans which is another of Trump’s goals. Immigrants tend to have low-paying jobs in the agriculture sector, landscaping, construction and meat preparation and packing. They also work as home health aides. Aside from construction, Americans will not take the jobs that become available. However, the prices of agricultural products and meat will rise, landscaping and construction will become more expensive, adding to inflation and there will not be enough home health aides.
Tariffs as a means of raising revenue go back to the 18th century, which is probably where Trump would like to see America. Not only should Trump not cut taxes when our national debt is so high, he should raise taxes on his billionaire friends and plug tax loopholes. There should be no increase for the average taxpayer. Closing the border aside from legal immigrants is a reasonable idea and some deportation of immigrants with no skills may be worthwhile. But we need immigrants to make up for our population losses. Tariffs should also be restricted to specific cheaper items that will compete with American goods.
www.robertlevinebooks.com
Buy The Uninformed Voter on Amazon, Barnes and Noble or your local bookstore.
Posted at 10:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Tags: 2024 election, American work force, deport immigrants, economy, immigrations, tariffs, Trump
The court decisions were a victory for Northwest consumers, who would have seen grocery store competition crumble. According to Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson, Albertsons and Kroger operate “more than 300 locations
in the Evergreen State, accounting for more than 50% of the state’s grocery sales.”
In a one-mile radius in my neighborhood, we would have had one specialty market (Trader Joes); one national chain (Safeway and QFC); and one membership store (Costco). There has never been a Sam’s Club in this neighborhood to compete with the baby Costco (a business center).
A two-mile radius adds a specialty market (an Asian market, Ranch 99); one employee-owned regional chain (WINCO); and one national chain (a baby Walmart). A Fred Meyer, part of Kroger, is in that extended radius; prices at QFC and Safeway are routinely 10% or more than those at Fred Meyer.
This historic win protects millions of Americans across the country from higher prices for essential groceries—from milk, to bread, to eggs—ultimately allowing consumers to keep more money in their pockets. This victory has a direct, tangible impact on the lives of millions of Americans who shop at Kroger or Albertsons-owned grocery stores for their everyday needs, whether that’s a Fry’s in Arizona, a Vons in Southern California, or a Jewel-Osco in Illinois.
Without waiting for the ink to dry on Tuesday’s decisions, Albertsons sued Kroger
“for breach of its contract agreement, alleging Kroger caused the merger to be blocked. Albertsons said that Kroger failed to exercise its ‘best efforts’ and to take ‘any and all actions’ to secure regulatory approval of the merger.”
Albertsons and Kroger argued that they needed to merge to compete with Walmart, Costco and Amazon
. This is fallacious. Costco is a membership store. Walmart is a department store with groceries, like Fred Meyer. QFC and Safeway are modern grocery stores that do not sell camping and sporting equipment, clothes or furniture. Amazon’s food sales are a fraction of the grocery stores.
Consolidation means higher prices for consumers, lower ones for farmers and suppliers
In 2021, The Guardian reported that “for 85% of the groceries analysed, four firms or fewer controlled more than 40% of market share
. It’s widely agreed that consumers, farmers, small food companies and the planet lose out if the top four firms control 40% or more of total sales.”
Four or fewer corporations control 93% of soda sales
Three cereal companies control 90% of breakfast items
Four or fewer control 80% of toothpaste and 80% of toilet paper sales.
Four or fewer control 80% of candy and 60% of snack bars
Four yogurt companies control 75% of sales
That’s why blocking this merger is somewhat like locking the barn door after the horses have escaped.
It’s an illusion of choice.
Be wary of graphs that exaggerate food sales. For 2023, “Amazon’s e-grocery sales
were approximately $36,400,000,000″ but its total sales were $574,800,000,000. Although we may think of Walmart as a “grocery store,” its revenue
for the twelve months ending October 31, 2024 was $673,819,000,000, which includes a LOT of items that are not groceries.
