Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
LetMyPeopleVote
LetMyPeopleVote's Journal
LetMyPeopleVote's Journal
November 14, 2025
https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/mciver-vindictive-prosecution-motion-comey-james-trump-rcna243713
Deadline Legal Blog-McIver's vindictive prosecution motion loss shows how Comey and James could win theirs
The claims raised by James Comey and Letitia James are stronger than the ones rejected in the New Jersey congresswoman’s case on Thursday.
McIver’s vindictive prosecution motion loss shows how Comey and James could win theirs
— Jess (@jessflight12.bsky.social) 2025-11-13T20:01:41Z
https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/mciver-vindictive-prosecution-motion-comey-james-trump-rcna243713
Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-N.J., lost her bid to dismiss her criminal charges on the grounds that they’re unconstitutionally vindictive. The ruling against her on Thursday highlights how difficult these motions are for defendants to win, while also showing how James Comey and Letitia James could still win their vindictive prosecution claims in Virginia.
In June, McIver was charged with assaulting federal officers at an immigration facility in Newark, New Jersey, while she was conducting oversight with other Democratic politicians amid the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.
Rejecting McIver’s claim of vindictive prosecution, U.S. District Judge Jamel Semper ruled that the congresswoman hadn’t shown “personal animus” by the prosecution, despite statements from interim U.S. Attorney Alina Habba that “we could turn New Jersey red” and from President Donald Trump that the “days of woke are over.”
The Biden-appointed judge reasoned that none of those statements are “particularized to Defendant herself,” and further that they “are not specific to this Defendant or responsive to her policy positions on immigration, and are therefore not personalized in a way that the requested relief contemplates.”
If we apply that reasoning to Comey’s and James’ cases, we see that the president’s barrage of statements against those defendants has been quite “particularized” to them. The pending motions to dismiss on vindictive prosecution grounds from both the former FBI director and the New York attorney general lay out Trump’s animus toward them in great detail.
In June, McIver was charged with assaulting federal officers at an immigration facility in Newark, New Jersey, while she was conducting oversight with other Democratic politicians amid the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.
Rejecting McIver’s claim of vindictive prosecution, U.S. District Judge Jamel Semper ruled that the congresswoman hadn’t shown “personal animus” by the prosecution, despite statements from interim U.S. Attorney Alina Habba that “we could turn New Jersey red” and from President Donald Trump that the “days of woke are over.”
The Biden-appointed judge reasoned that none of those statements are “particularized to Defendant herself,” and further that they “are not specific to this Defendant or responsive to her policy positions on immigration, and are therefore not personalized in a way that the requested relief contemplates.”
If we apply that reasoning to Comey’s and James’ cases, we see that the president’s barrage of statements against those defendants has been quite “particularized” to them. The pending motions to dismiss on vindictive prosecution grounds from both the former FBI director and the New York attorney general lay out Trump’s animus toward them in great detail.
November 14, 2025
Trump asks Justice to examine Democrats' ties to Epstein; Bondi complies
The president suggested that the relationships between the disgraced financier and several prominent Democrats deserve more scrutiny than his own connections to Epstein.
https://x.com/washingtonpost/status/1989434435553357898
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/11/14/trump-justice-epstein-democrats/
President Donald Trump called on the Justice Department on Friday to examine the relationships between deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and several prominent Democrats, including former president Bill Clinton, and Attorney General Pam Bondi quickly tapped federal prosecutors in Manhattan to take on the job.
It is not clear how the New York prosecutors will respond to the assignment. In a post on Truth Social, Trump pointed to three men — Clinton, former treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers and LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman, who is a prominent Democratic donor. All three had long-standing relationships with Epstein, which have been reported on for years.
In July, the Justice Department said it had examined its files on Epstein, and “we did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.” That statement would not bar a fresh investigation but points to some of the hurdles any such inquiry might face.
Trump also said the Justice Department should look at Epstein’s ties to JPMorgan Chase “and many other people and institutions.”,,,,
Hours after Trump’s request, Bondi said on social media that Jay Clayton, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, would lead the investigation. She called him “one of the most capable and trusted prosecutors in the country.”
It is not clear how the New York prosecutors will respond to the assignment. In a post on Truth Social, Trump pointed to three men — Clinton, former treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers and LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman, who is a prominent Democratic donor. All three had long-standing relationships with Epstein, which have been reported on for years.
In July, the Justice Department said it had examined its files on Epstein, and “we did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.” That statement would not bar a fresh investigation but points to some of the hurdles any such inquiry might face.
Trump also said the Justice Department should look at Epstein’s ties to JPMorgan Chase “and many other people and institutions.”,,,,
Hours after Trump’s request, Bondi said on social media that Jay Clayton, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, would lead the investigation. She called him “one of the most capable and trusted prosecutors in the country.”
November 14, 2025
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-eyes-federal-epstein-investigation-targets-foes-not-rcna243939
I cut trump's tweet/truth social post from this post. If you want to read trump's tweet/truth social post go to the article. I try not to repost trump's disgusting social media posts when I can.
MaddowBlog-Trump eyes federal Epstein investigation that targets his foes, but not himself
The president wants the public to see the Epstein scandal as a hoax — except the parts related to people he doesn’t like.
Trump eyes federal Epstein investigation that targets his foes, but not himself
— Jess (@jessflight12.bsky.social) 2025-11-14T17:53:16Z
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-eyes-federal-epstein-investigation-targets-foes-not-rcna243939
The revelations dovetailed with Republicans on the same committee releasing a tranche of 20,000 documents it received from the Epstein estate in response to a congressional subpoena. An MSNBC report noted that some of the additional email correspondence between Epstein and his associates was “unflattering” to Trump. A related report in The New York Times summarized, in reference to the documents: “Mr. Epstein insulted Mr. Trump and hinted that he had damaging information on him.”
In the immediate aftermath of the reports, the usually talkative president had very little to say about the reporting (which includes allegations that have not been substantiated by MSNBC). The Republican published a handful of missives to his social media platform on the matter, but most focused on his appeals to GOP lawmakers to follow his lead on the scandal......
There’s no point in trying to summarize in a single blog post every error of fact and judgment in the president’s 116-word rant — the Russia scandal, for example, still isn’t a scam — but the bottom line comprises three key elements.
The first is that Trump wants federal law enforcement to initiate an investigation into a variety of prominent figures mentioned in the Epstein materials — but not himself. That’s a tough position to take seriously.
The second is that the president wants the public to see the underlying controversy as a hoax, except for the parts related to people he doesn’t like. How does Trump reconcile the obvious contraction? By ignoring it.
Finally, it’s worth emphasizing that the president continues to act as if he has decision-making authority at the Justice Department and the FBI. There is no modern precedent for a White House publicly declaring which of the president’s political foes deserve to be targeted with federal investigations, but in 2025 it has become an alarmingly common occurrence.
In late September, Trump used his platform to direct Attorney General Pam Bondi to go after three of his perceived political enemies. In October, he did it again, adding additional names to his enemies list. On Friday morning, he barked related orders.
In the immediate aftermath of the reports, the usually talkative president had very little to say about the reporting (which includes allegations that have not been substantiated by MSNBC). The Republican published a handful of missives to his social media platform on the matter, but most focused on his appeals to GOP lawmakers to follow his lead on the scandal......
There’s no point in trying to summarize in a single blog post every error of fact and judgment in the president’s 116-word rant — the Russia scandal, for example, still isn’t a scam — but the bottom line comprises three key elements.
The first is that Trump wants federal law enforcement to initiate an investigation into a variety of prominent figures mentioned in the Epstein materials — but not himself. That’s a tough position to take seriously.
The second is that the president wants the public to see the underlying controversy as a hoax, except for the parts related to people he doesn’t like. How does Trump reconcile the obvious contraction? By ignoring it.
Finally, it’s worth emphasizing that the president continues to act as if he has decision-making authority at the Justice Department and the FBI. There is no modern precedent for a White House publicly declaring which of the president’s political foes deserve to be targeted with federal investigations, but in 2025 it has become an alarmingly common occurrence.
In late September, Trump used his platform to direct Attorney General Pam Bondi to go after three of his perceived political enemies. In October, he did it again, adding additional names to his enemies list. On Friday morning, he barked related orders.
I cut trump's tweet/truth social post from this post. If you want to read trump's tweet/truth social post go to the article. I try not to repost trump's disgusting social media posts when I can.
November 14, 2025
Bondi follows Trump's directive, taps prosecutor to examine Epstein's Democratic ties
Source: MSNBC-Maddow Blog
With this week’s disclosures in the Jeffrey Epstein scandal adding fresh fuel to the political fire, Donald Trump took an extraordinary step on Friday morning: The president directed the Justice Department and the FBI to launch a new investigation into the case of the convicted sex offender.
Trump, however, had a narrow set of targets in mind.
Indeed, the Republican said he wanted Attorney General Pam Bondi and federal law enforcement officials to investigate his perceived Democratic foes and critics, including former President Bill Clinton and former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, over their alleged ties to the late millionaire pedophile.
Despite the frequency which Trump was referenced in this week’s releases of Epstein emails, the president avoided any reference to himself while demanding a new law enforcement probe.
Four hours later, Bondi did as she was told, announcing via social media that she was tapping a federal prosecutor — U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton, a former Wall Street lawyer who chaired the Securities and Exchange Commission during Trump’s first term — to “take the lead” on the matter.
https://x.com/AGPamBondi/status/1989411168067440722
Read more: https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/bondi-follows-trumps-directive-taps-prosecutor-examine-epsteins-democr-rcna244031
November 14, 2025
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/jd-vances-effort-blame-immigrants-housing-prices-self-defeating-mess-rcna243904
MaddowBlog-Why JD Vance's effort to blame immigrants for housing prices is a self-defeating mess
The vice president claimed low-income immigrants are entering the U.S., becoming “servants” and buying up excessive amounts of real estate. Seriously?
JD Vance claims millions of struggling immigrants are entering the U.S. and becoming “servants.â€
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2025-11-14T15:31:23.033Z
He also thinks they’re getting mortgages and buying up excessive amounts of real estate, driving up home prices.
It’s as if he’s not even trying to make sense anymore. www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddo...
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/jd-vances-effort-blame-immigrants-housing-prices-self-defeating-mess-rcna243904
For that matter, given the Trump administration’s eagerness to bring in foreign workers to fill positions across the president’s assorted properties, the vice president’s argument isn’t likely to do Donald Trump any favors.
But as part of the same on-air appearance, Vance added a related thought as part of his broader anti-immigrant pitch.
“A lot of young people are saying housing is way too expensive,” the vice president said. “Why is that? Because we flooded the country with 30 million illegal immigrants who were taking houses that ought, by right, go to American citizens.”
At this point, we could talk about the fact that Vance’s “30 million illegal immigrants” claim is demonstrably silly, as he really ought to know. We could also note how outrageous it is to see the Ohioan routinely try to blame every societal challenge on those born outside the United States......
The American public is apparently supposed to believe that millions of struggling, low-income immigrants are entering the United States and becoming “servants.” We’re apparently also supposed to believe that these same immigrants are somehow qualifying for mortgages and buying up excessive amounts of American real estate, driving up home prices.
I’m mindful of the fact that the White House is struggling with affordability — to the point that Team Trump is rallying behind 50-year mortgages — but Vance might want to workshop his talking points a bit more.
But as part of the same on-air appearance, Vance added a related thought as part of his broader anti-immigrant pitch.
JD Vance: "A lot of young people are saying housing is way too expensive. Why is that? Because we flooded the country with 30 million illegal immigrants who were taking houses that ought by right go to American citizens."
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2025-11-13T21:44:29.950Z
“A lot of young people are saying housing is way too expensive,” the vice president said. “Why is that? Because we flooded the country with 30 million illegal immigrants who were taking houses that ought, by right, go to American citizens.”
At this point, we could talk about the fact that Vance’s “30 million illegal immigrants” claim is demonstrably silly, as he really ought to know. We could also note how outrageous it is to see the Ohioan routinely try to blame every societal challenge on those born outside the United States......
The American public is apparently supposed to believe that millions of struggling, low-income immigrants are entering the United States and becoming “servants.” We’re apparently also supposed to believe that these same immigrants are somehow qualifying for mortgages and buying up excessive amounts of American real estate, driving up home prices.
I’m mindful of the fact that the White House is struggling with affordability — to the point that Team Trump is rallying behind 50-year mortgages — but Vance might want to workshop his talking points a bit more.
November 14, 2025
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/new-justice-dept-memo-complicates-administrations-controversial-boat-s-rcna243984
It’s reached the point that some U.S. allies, including officials in the United Kingdom, have curtailed intelligence sharing with the
Hegseth fired all of the JAG heads when he took office so that he could find idiots who greenlight matters that were clearly illegal. https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220067494
That prediction has become true.
Maddowblog-New Justice Dept. memo complicates the administration's controversial boat strikes policy
The administration keeps insisting that its military strikes against civilian boats in international waters are legal. There's reason for skepticism.
New Justice Dept. memo complicates the administration’s controversial boat strikes policy www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddo...
— Philly Joe (@joehick58.bsky.social) 2025-11-14T19:57:00.305Z
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/new-justice-dept-memo-complicates-administrations-controversial-boat-s-rcna243984
It’s reached the point that some U.S. allies, including officials in the United Kingdom, have curtailed intelligence sharing with the
Trump administration, reportedly because they don’t want to be complicit in the extrajudicial slayings of civilians.
As for the U.S. military personnel responsible for carrying out these deadly strikes, The Washington Post reported last month that “some” junior officers have been looking for legal assurances “before taking part in strikes,” fearing personal legal liability. It’s against this backdrop that The New York Times reported:
.....It dovetailed with a related Washington Post report, which said that the DOJ memo concluded that “personnel taking part in military strikes ... would not be exposed to future prosecution.”.....
What’s more, the memo’s conclusion remains a tough sell. After the White House pitched a related line to Congress in early October, claiming that Trump had “determined” the U.S. is in “armed conflict,” Geoffrey Corn, a retired judge advocate general lawyer who was formerly the Army’s senior adviser for law-of-war issues, argued that drug cartels are not engaged in “hostilities” — which would mean the White House was crossing a legal line.
“This is not stretching the envelope,” Corn told the New York Times. “This is shredding it. This is tearing it apart.”
Nevertheless, there’s little to suggest the administration intends to curtail its deadly campaign. On the contrary, Hegseth on Thursday announced something called “Operation Southern Spear,” which he said will target “narco-terrorists” and shield “our homeland from the drugs that are killing our people.”
As for the U.S. military personnel responsible for carrying out these deadly strikes, The Washington Post reported last month that “some” junior officers have been looking for legal assurances “before taking part in strikes,” fearing personal legal liability. It’s against this backdrop that The New York Times reported:
A secret Justice Department memo blessing President Trump’s boat strikes as lawful hangs on the idea that the United States and its allies are legally in a state of armed conflict with drug cartels, a premise that derives heavily from assertions that the White House itself has put forward, according to people who have read it. ... In reaching that conclusion, the memo contradicts a broad range of critics, who have rejected the idea that there is any armed conflict and have accused Mr. Trump of illegally ordering the military to commit murders.
.....It dovetailed with a related Washington Post report, which said that the DOJ memo concluded that “personnel taking part in military strikes ... would not be exposed to future prosecution.”.....
What’s more, the memo’s conclusion remains a tough sell. After the White House pitched a related line to Congress in early October, claiming that Trump had “determined” the U.S. is in “armed conflict,” Geoffrey Corn, a retired judge advocate general lawyer who was formerly the Army’s senior adviser for law-of-war issues, argued that drug cartels are not engaged in “hostilities” — which would mean the White House was crossing a legal line.
“This is not stretching the envelope,” Corn told the New York Times. “This is shredding it. This is tearing it apart.”
Nevertheless, there’s little to suggest the administration intends to curtail its deadly campaign. On the contrary, Hegseth on Thursday announced something called “Operation Southern Spear,” which he said will target “narco-terrorists” and shield “our homeland from the drugs that are killing our people.”
Hegseth fired all of the JAG heads when he took office so that he could find idiots who greenlight matters that were clearly illegal. https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220067494
In an op-ed for The Washington Post, Sen. Jack Reed, the ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee and a former Army paratrooper, helped explain why:
Hegseth and trump want to convert the military into a force loyal only to trump. It sounds like trump and Hegseth plan to commit acts that a real JAG would block as being an illegal order or unconstitutional
Firing the military’s most senior legal advisers is an unprecedented and explicit move to install officers who will yield to the president’s interpretation of the law, with the expectation they will be little more than yes men on the most consequential questions of military law.
Hegseth and trump want to convert the military into a force loyal only to trump. It sounds like trump and Hegseth plan to commit acts that a real JAG would block as being an illegal order or unconstitutional
That prediction has become true.
November 14, 2025
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/nazi-streak-controversy-ingrassia-lands-news-gig-trump-administration-rcna243894
MaddowBlog-Despite 'Nazi streak' controversy, Ingrassia lands a new gig in the Trump administration
Paul Ingrassia's history of radicalism made him politically radioactive. The president rewarded him with a promotion anyway.
In a healthy White House, it would be disqualifying for a radical official to acknowledge his “Nazi streak.â€
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2025-11-14T14:01:00.890Z
In this White House, Trump personally rewarded Paul Ingrassia with a promotion. www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddo...
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/nazi-streak-controversy-ingrassia-lands-news-gig-trump-administration-rcna243894
But as the dust settled on the fiasco, there was one question that still needed an answer. When Trump chose Ingrassia for the OSC job, he was serving as the White House liaison for the Department of Homeland Security. Given the revelations about his record, would the president and his team show him the door or not?
Now we know. Politico reported:
....Let’s take stock. The president hired a right-wing lawyer with a record of extremism, then offered him a promotion. At that point, the right-wing lawyer’s record generated additional scrutiny, and the White House learned, among other things, about a message in which Ingrassia wrote, “I do have a Nazi streak in me from time to time, I will admit it.” This made him politically radioactive to Republicans on Capitol Hill.,,,,
In the wake of Tucker Carlson’s recent interview with Nick Fuentes, there’s been an intensifying public conversation about the right’s antisemitism crisis. By any fair measure, the White House’s latest reward for Ingrassia makes that crisis worse.
Now we know. Politico reported:
Paul Ingrassia, a conservative activist who withdrew his nomination to oversee a government watchdog agency last month after POLITICO reported he made racist comments in a group chat, said Thursday he is moving to a new job in the administration. The 30-year-old lawyer had been serving since February as White House liaison to the Department of Homeland Security. But in an email obtained by POLITICO, he told colleagues that he is leaving to become deputy general counsel at the General Services Administration.
....Let’s take stock. The president hired a right-wing lawyer with a record of extremism, then offered him a promotion. At that point, the right-wing lawyer’s record generated additional scrutiny, and the White House learned, among other things, about a message in which Ingrassia wrote, “I do have a Nazi streak in me from time to time, I will admit it.” This made him politically radioactive to Republicans on Capitol Hill.,,,,
In the wake of Tucker Carlson’s recent interview with Nick Fuentes, there’s been an intensifying public conversation about the right’s antisemitism crisis. By any fair measure, the White House’s latest reward for Ingrassia makes that crisis worse.
November 14, 2025
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-official-refers-eric-swalwell-justice-dept-adding-radical-list-rcna243774
MaddowBlog-Trump official refers Eric Swalwell to the Justice Dept., adding to a radical list
The Trump administration's campaign to weaponize mortgage fraud allegations against the president’s perceived political enemies has a new target.
Trump demands prosecutions of those who opposed or successfully prosecuted him. And his corrupt DOJ leadership team rushes to fulfill his criminal desires.
— @jimrissmiller.bsky.social 2025-11-13T22:37:50.063Z
Trump official refers Eric Swalwell to the Justice Dept., adding to a radical list www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddo...
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-official-refers-eric-swalwell-justice-dept-adding-radical-list-rcna243774
With this in mind, few will be surprised by this new report from NBC News.
.....Indeed, Bill Pulte, the Trump loyalist who leads the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), has taken it upon himself to target one White House foe after another. NBC News’ report added, “Pulte previously sent criminal referrals to the Justice Department for two other prominent Democratic critics of Trump, New York Attorney General Letitia James and Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., as well as Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook — who was nominated by then-President Joe Biden — on allegations of mortgage fraud.”
All of Pulte’s targets have denied wrongdoing. What’s more, Pulte himself is at the center of his own scandal, after having fired internal watchdogs who reportedly raised concerns about improperly accessing the mortgage records of Trump’s foes.
.....The high-profile Democratic lawmaker, rumored to be eyeing a gubernatorial campaign in the Golden State, concluded, “As Mark Twain said, ‘Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.’ Mr. President, do better. Be better.”
Whether Trump’s Justice Department intends to do anything with Pulte’s referral remains to be seen. Watch this space.
A top housing official in President Donald Trump’s administration has referred California Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell to the Justice Department for a potential federal criminal probe, based on allegations of mortgage and tax fraud related to a Washington, D.C., home, according to a person familiar with the referral. He is the fourth Democratic official to face mortgage fraud allegations in recent months.
.....Indeed, Bill Pulte, the Trump loyalist who leads the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), has taken it upon himself to target one White House foe after another. NBC News’ report added, “Pulte previously sent criminal referrals to the Justice Department for two other prominent Democratic critics of Trump, New York Attorney General Letitia James and Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., as well as Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook — who was nominated by then-President Joe Biden — on allegations of mortgage fraud.”
All of Pulte’s targets have denied wrongdoing. What’s more, Pulte himself is at the center of his own scandal, after having fired internal watchdogs who reportedly raised concerns about improperly accessing the mortgage records of Trump’s foes.
.....The high-profile Democratic lawmaker, rumored to be eyeing a gubernatorial campaign in the Golden State, concluded, “As Mark Twain said, ‘Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.’ Mr. President, do better. Be better.”
Whether Trump’s Justice Department intends to do anything with Pulte’s referral remains to be seen. Watch this space.
November 14, 2025
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trumps-talk-sending-tariff-rebate-checks-makes-little-sense-rcna243292
MaddowBlog-Why Trump's talk about sending out tariff rebate checks makes so little sense
As the president pushes “dividend” checks from tariffs, there’s an accounting maxim he still doesn’t understand: “You can’t spend the same dollar twice.”
Why Trump’s talk about sending out tariff rebate checks makes so little sense www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddo...
— @jimrissmiller.bsky.social 2025-11-11T20:09:58.056Z
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trumps-talk-sending-tariff-rebate-checks-makes-little-sense-rcna243292
As this week got underway, Donald Trump held an event in the Oval Office ostensibly about the swearing in of an ambassador, although the president took the opportunity to emphasize one of his priorities.
....A day earlier, by way of his social media platform, Trump touted his idea of rebate checks worth “at least” $2,000 per person, adding that they’ll be “paid to everyone” except high-income earners. As part of the pitch, the president added that he also intends to use the same tariff revenue to “begin paying down our ENORMOUS DEBT, $37 Trillion.” (Not to be picky, but the national debt recently topped $38 trillion.)....
But putting that aside, the fact that Trump vowed to use tariff revenue simultaneously for “dividend” checks and for debt reduction underscores a problem he doesn’t seem to understand. There’s an old accounting maxim, “You can’t spend the same dollar twice,” and it’s time for the president to familiarize himself with the idea.
As regular readers know, Trump’s tariffs are generating revenue. He’s wildly exaggerated how much revenue, pointing to “trillions” of dollars, despite the reality of far more modest sums, but the money does exist. That’s not exactly surprising: Tariffs are, for all intents and purposes, taxes — and taxes generate revenue......
In late September, during his radical remarks to U.S. generals and admirals, Trump said, “We’ve taken in trillions of dollars. We’re rich again.” If he were right and the U.S. had actually taken in trillions of dollars since he began implementing his tariff scheme, we might have a very different kind of conversation. But in reality, tariff revenue was roughly $195 billion in the fiscal year that ended in late September. (That’s “billion” with a b, not “trillion” with a t.)
And while $195 billion might sound like an enormous amount of money, in the context of federal expenditures, that’s not even close to being enough to pay for all of the things the president has talked about.
In late July, Trump boasted online, “our Country is doing very well and can afford just about anything.” It’d be nice if that were true.
Trump: "We're gonna issue a dividend to our middle income people and lower income people of about ,000, and we're gonna use the remaining tariffs to lower our debt."
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2025-11-10T20:58:47.036Z
....A day earlier, by way of his social media platform, Trump touted his idea of rebate checks worth “at least” $2,000 per person, adding that they’ll be “paid to everyone” except high-income earners. As part of the pitch, the president added that he also intends to use the same tariff revenue to “begin paying down our ENORMOUS DEBT, $37 Trillion.” (Not to be picky, but the national debt recently topped $38 trillion.)....
But putting that aside, the fact that Trump vowed to use tariff revenue simultaneously for “dividend” checks and for debt reduction underscores a problem he doesn’t seem to understand. There’s an old accounting maxim, “You can’t spend the same dollar twice,” and it’s time for the president to familiarize himself with the idea.
As regular readers know, Trump’s tariffs are generating revenue. He’s wildly exaggerated how much revenue, pointing to “trillions” of dollars, despite the reality of far more modest sums, but the money does exist. That’s not exactly surprising: Tariffs are, for all intents and purposes, taxes — and taxes generate revenue......
In late September, during his radical remarks to U.S. generals and admirals, Trump said, “We’ve taken in trillions of dollars. We’re rich again.” If he were right and the U.S. had actually taken in trillions of dollars since he began implementing his tariff scheme, we might have a very different kind of conversation. But in reality, tariff revenue was roughly $195 billion in the fiscal year that ended in late September. (That’s “billion” with a b, not “trillion” with a t.)
And while $195 billion might sound like an enormous amount of money, in the context of federal expenditures, that’s not even close to being enough to pay for all of the things the president has talked about.
In late July, Trump boasted online, “our Country is doing very well and can afford just about anything.” It’d be nice if that were true.
November 14, 2025
Mike Collier to challenge Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick again -- as an independent
I voted for Mike twice when he ran against Patrick. Mike ran a weak campaign both times. This is a very dumb idea
https://x.com/TexasTribune/status/1988979700950093825
https://www.texastribune.org/2025/11/13/mike-collier-texas-lieutenant-governor-independent-2026
Mike Collier, a two-time Democratic nominee for lieutenant governor, announced on Thursday that he is again running to be the state’s second-in-command — but this time as an independent.
Collier, an accountant and auditor, lost his previous bids to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, the powerful Republican who presides over the state Senate, in 2018 and 2022. Running as an independent, he is branding himself as a protector of public education who also aims to “restore fiscal integrity” and return power to Texans from political insiders.
“Everything starts with our public schools,” Collier said in a statement. “But Dan Patrick is trying to dismantle them with vouchers and culture wars. I’m running to stop him and to fully fund our public schools, respect our teachers, and make sure every child in Texas has a chance to succeed.”
Patrick beat Collier by 5 points the first time the two went head-to-head and handily beat him four years later, claiming a third term with a 10-point margin.
Collier, an accountant and auditor, lost his previous bids to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, the powerful Republican who presides over the state Senate, in 2018 and 2022. Running as an independent, he is branding himself as a protector of public education who also aims to “restore fiscal integrity” and return power to Texans from political insiders.
“Everything starts with our public schools,” Collier said in a statement. “But Dan Patrick is trying to dismantle them with vouchers and culture wars. I’m running to stop him and to fully fund our public schools, respect our teachers, and make sure every child in Texas has a chance to succeed.”
Patrick beat Collier by 5 points the first time the two went head-to-head and handily beat him four years later, claiming a third term with a 10-point margin.
Profile Information
Member since: Mon Apr 5, 2004, 03:58 PMNumber of posts: 172,613