The Conversation -- April 8, 2025
Joe Rennison, et al., of the New York Times: “Another chaotic day of trading on Wall Street ended with a late slide in stock prices, with little letup in the escalating trade tensions and economic anxiety caused by ... [Donald] Trump’s tariffs. The S&P 500 had posted a big gain at the start of trading, rising as much as 4 percent, but the rally faded and stocks slumped in late trading, ending 1.6 percent lower for the day and adding to a string of losses since Mr. Trump announced sweeping tariffs ... last week. Those tariffs are scheduled to take effect at midnight Wednesday, the White House reaffirmed on Tuesday, including raising the tax on goods from China to at least 104 percent. Tuesday’s drop put the benchmark index on the verge of a bear market, defined as a drop of 20 percent or more from its last high. After Tuesday’s drop, the index sits 18.9 percent below its mid-February record, having tumbled more than 12 percent just in the days since Mr. Trump announced his new tariffs.” The AP story is here.
Blink, Blink? Ana Swanson & Alan Rappeport of the New York Times: “The Trump administration signaled on Tuesday that it was ready to negotiate deals with countries targeted by sweeping tariffs, saying that 70 governments had approached the United States to try to roll the levies back and that officials would begin talks with Japan, South Korea and other nations. But ... [Donald] Trump and his advisers have been clear that these entreaties will not stop the next round of tariffs from going into effect just after midnight Wednesday, including another 50 percent duty on China. As a result, tariffs on Chinese goods will be at least 104 percent. In a social media post on Tuesday, Mr. Trump said he had 'a great call' with South Korea’s acting president, Han Duck-soo, about trade and tariffs, and that South Korean officials were heading to the United States for talks. He also expressed optimism that a trade war with China could be averted. 'China also wants to make a deal, badly, but they don’t know how to get it started,' Mr. Trump wrote. 'We are waiting for their call. It will happen!'”
Tyler Pager of the New York Times: “Elon Musk slammed ... [Donald] Trump’s top trade adviser [Peter Navarro] as 'dumber than a sack of bricks' on Tuesday, exposing a remarkable rift in the president’s inner circle over the wide-ranging tariffs that have upended the global economy.... The squabble escalated on Monday when Mr. Navarro said on CNBC that Mr. Musk was not a 'car manufacturer' but a 'car assembler' because Tesla, Mr. Musk’s electric vehicle company, relied on parts from around the world. Mr. Musk fired back on Tuesday, calling Mr. Navarro a 'moron' and 'dumber than a sack of bricks' in a post on X.... Later in the day, Mr. Musk doubled down, posting that he wanted to 'apologize to bricks.'... He also used a slur to refer to Mr. Navarro, calling him 'Peter Retarrdo.' The feud between Mr. Musk and [Mr.] Navarro, who has been the architect of many of Mr. Trump’s trade plans, has been simmering for days as the administration’s new tariffs have caused huge losses across global financial markets.... Mr. Musk’s words — though aimed at Mr. Navarro — were a rare criticism of Mr. Trump’s policies from one of his most influential advisers. Mr. Musk ... is estimated to have lost roughly $31 billion since Mr. Trump announced sweeping tariffs on foreign countries on April 2....” An NBC News story is here. ~~~
~~~ Marie: If Navarro is a moron & dumber than a sack of bricks because of the tariff policies he has recommended to Trump, it follows that Trump -- who took the dumb advice -- must be a moron, too.
Rob Copeland, et al., of the New York Times: “Wall Street billionaires are not used to being on the outside looking in. But that is where they find themselves after ... [Donald] Trump ignored their appeals to call off his tariff plans which they fear could endanger the economy. With the backdrop of rapidly mounting stock market losses, corporate titans have worked every angle — phone calls, social media and even a typically staid shareholder letter — to try to change Mr. Trump’s mind. The day after the president announced his most sweeping round of tariffs last week, chief executives from major banks, including Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase, had a private meeting with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick organized by a lobbying group in Washington. But Mr. Lutnick was not persuaded to reverse course, three people briefed on the sit-down said. Over the weekend, megadonors to Mr. Trump’s re-election effort tried a different tack, pleading their case in calls to Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, people familiar with the calls said. Those efforts also came up empty. By Monday, hedge fund billionaires — many of whom had been loud and proud boosters of Mr. Trump’s second term — were going public with their cries.”
Aris Folley & Sylvan Lane of the Hill: “Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) expressed deep frustration with ... [Donald] Trump’s tariffs during a Tuesday hearing featuring the top White House trade negotiator. 'Whose throat do I get to choke if this proves to be wrong?' Tillis asked U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer during his appearance before the Senate Finance Committee. Tillis, a critic of tariffs and protectionist policies, questioned whether the Trump administration had a coherent strategy to rebalance trade after announcing roughly $600 billion in new import taxes last week.... Tillis is one of seven Republican senators who signed on to a bill from Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) that would cut back the president’s authority to unilaterally impose tariffs.”
Adam Cancryn & Maya Ward of Politico: “During the first two turbulent months of ... Donald Trump’s term, the White House has shrugged off scrutiny of its most controversial policies with a simple assertion: The American people voted for this. Now, Trump allies and GOP voters spooked by the tariff-induced market crash are beginning to respond en masse: No, we didn’t. Trump won in November because many voters saw him as an antidote to their economic malaise; as a candidate, he frequently promised to lower Americans’ everyday prices. But as president, he has chosen instead to plunge the country into fresh financial chaos, while insisting the market losses as a result of his tariffs are 'medicine' Americans need to take. 'Trump was elected in part to lower inflation and juice the economy,' said GOP pollster Whit Ayres. 'Higher prices and slower growth are exactly the opposite of what Americans voted for.'”
Andrew Duehren of the New York Times: “The Internal Revenue Service has agreed to help homeland security officials find immigrants they are trying to deport, according to court records, committing to sharing information in what would be a fundamental change in how the tax collector uses its tightly regulated records. In a court filing, the Trump administration said that the I.R.S. and Immigration and Customs Enforcement had reached the agreement on Monday and that the two agencies had not yet shared any information. Under the terms of the deal, a partially redacted version of which was submitted in the case, ICE officials can ask the I.R.S. for information about people who have been ordered to leave the United States or whom they are otherwise investigating. Federal law tightly controls taxpayer information, protecting home addresses, earnings and other data from disclosure even to other agencies within the government. I.R.S. officials have for weeks warned that the Trump administration’s plan to use the I.R.S. to help with deportations could be illegal. The top I.R.S. lawyer was demoted as the agreement came together, and was replaced by a former Trump nominee.” The AP report is here.
Adam Liptak of the New York Times: “The Supreme Court on Tuesday blocked a ruling from a federal judge in California that had ordered the Trump administration to rehire thousands of fired federal workers who had been on probationary status. The court’s brief order said the nonprofit groups that had sued to challenge the dismissals had not suffered the sort of injury that gave them standing to sue. The practical consequences of the ruling may be limited, as another trial judge’s ruling requiring the reinstatement of many of the same workers remains in place. Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, but she gave no reasons. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said the court should not have ruled on such an important issue in the context of an emergency application. The order was the latest administration victory in the Supreme Court in a case arising from ... [Donald] Trump’s recent blitz of executive orders. Like others, though, it was technical and tentative. The justices said their order would remain in place while the case moved forward.” The AP story is here.
Chicken Supreme Tops the Menu at Johnny's Cafe. Adam Liptak of the New York Times: “The court led by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. over the last two decades has not been known for its modesty or caution. Its signature move has been bold assertions of power backed by sweeping claims about the meaning of the Constitution.... But as the first wave of challenges to ... [Donald] Trump’s blitz of executive orders has reached the justices, a very different portrait of the court is emerging. It has issued a series of narrow and legalistic rulings that seem calculated to avoid the larger issues presented by a president rapidly working to expand power and reshape government.... The justices’ new approach appears to have multiple goals: to stay out of the political fray, to maintain their legitimacy and, perhaps most important, to avoid a showdown with a president who has relentlessly challenged the legitimacy of the courts.”
Zach Montague of the New York Times: “A federal judge in Washington rejected the White House’s effort to keep The Associated Press from routinely covering ... [Donald] Trump, siding with the wire service and finding that it had faced political retaliation over its editorial decisions.... [The White House had] cited the wire service’s refusal to adopt the administration’s renaming of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.... The order dealt a blow to Mr. Trump, who, in a departure from decades of tradition, has moved to leverage access to White House events as a way of asserting more direct control over coverage of his administration. The dispute has raised profound questions about the independent news media’s role in shaping public opinion and the lasting implications of the president’s effort to determine how he is portrayed. Judge Trevor N. McFadden of the Federal District Court for the District of Washington wrote in his opinion that the Trump administration must 'immediately rescind their viewpoint-based denial' of The Associated Press from the White House press corps.” The CBS News report is here. MB: Trump appointed McFadden. ~~~
~~~ Marie: Once again, raspberries to all of the White House press corps for failing to support the AP by boycotting the briefing room. Special shout-out to the reporter who asked, as the first question of Trump the Tariff Terrorist on AF1 Sunday, "How was your golf tournament today?" (See Jon Stewart video, embedded Tuesday.)
Rachel Weiner & Ian Duncan of the Washington Post: “Three air traffic control managers with responsibility for Reagan National Airport have been pushed out of their roles in the wake of a violent altercation in the tower, the Federal Aviation Administration confirmed Tuesday. The changes come a week after a supervisor in the tower was arrested and accused of punching another controller in the face over a minor dispute about work, and they follow efforts by the FAA to reduce stress among staff still grappling with January’s catastrophic midair collision of a passenger plane and a military helicopter. The district manager and two assistant managers were offered reassignment elsewhere.”
Jon Stewart tries to understand the theory behind the tariff policy: ~~~
Another Tariffying Day ~~~
~~~~~~~~~~
Paul Krugman: “By now it’s obvious to anyone willing to see — which many people still aren’t — that Donald Trump is, in practice, waging war against American greatness. And the attack is taking place on multiple fronts.... In the long run, and maybe much sooner than that, the dire impacts of tariffs may be matched by the havoc Trumpism is wreaking in other areas.... The demolition of U.S. medical science may be even more damaging than tariffs. We don’t know how many Americans will die prematurely because public health is now being run by a man who rejects medical science, but it’s likely that the number will eventually run into the millions.... We may never know how many lives could have been saved, but won’t be, because of this wholesale assault on science. But the number won’t be small.... [Much of this is about anti-science ideology.] But — as with so many things in this administration — greed and self-dealing are also an important part of the story.... Even if research funding is restored, even if NIH and other agencies try to rebuild, U.S. science will have suffered huge long-term damage. So will the world trading system, which will never be the same even if the Trump tariffs are reversed, and the effectiveness of the federal bureaucracy, which will be impaired for many years even if DOGE’s depredations stop. So much wreckage, achieved in so little time.”
~~~ Thanks to RAS for the lead. If you prefer the original, here ya go.
Joe Rennison, et al., of the New York Times: “Wall Street weathered another chaotic day of trading on Monday, with false reports about a potential tariff reprieve briefly sending stocks higher before the White House rebuffed the idea and brought the prospects of a severe economic downturn back to the forefront. The S&P 500 swung from a loss of as much as 4.7 percent, to a gain of as much as 3.4 percent in morning trading, the biggest intraday swing for the S&P 500 since March 2020 and the Covid-19 pandemic. Volatility surged. The CBOE Vix Volatility index, known as Wall Street’s fear gauge, also rose to levels last seen during the pandemic-induced sell-off in March 2020. The S&P 500 ended the day with a drop of 0.2 percent and 17.6 percent below its February peak. The index is on the precipice of a bear market — a rare marker of extreme market pessimism when stocks fall 20 percent from their peak. The overarching concern for investors hasn’t changed. They are worried that steep tariffs imposed by the United States on huge swaths of imports, and the tit-for-tat response from China and other countries, will sink global growth and fuel inflation.” (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Fake News Caused a $2 Trillion Market Whiplash. Hadas Gold & Brian Stelter of CNN: “An errant post on X may have just shaken the stock market, showing how influential — and unreliable — the social media platform can be. Unsourced 'headlines' about a potential '90-day pause in tariffs' sent markets into a state of turbulence Monday morning as investors sought any indication of a reprieve from the Trump administration’s new levies. The problem: It wasn’t true. The White House swiftly denied the rumor shortly after it began to circulate online. The false posts may have originated from a real Fox News interview with National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett at around 8:30 a.m. ET. Hassett was asked whether ... Donald Trump would 'consider a 90-day pause in tariffs,' and he replied in part: 'The president is (going to) decide what the president is (going to) decide.'” The reporters then go through the ticktock of how X influencers -- and then CNBC anchors -- were claiming Hassert had said Trump was in fact considering a 90-day pause, and how the markets responded to the fake news.
I said we’re going to try and get groceries down right? An old-fashioned term, but a beautiful term. Eggs. Because prices got so high people couldn’t live. I mean, the prices for groceries, the prices for standard, standard groceries, standard things were going through the roof. They couldn’t live. And now those prices are coming down, so call them groceries. -- Donald Trump, responding to a question about tariffs Monday ~~~
~~~ S.V. Date of the Huffington Post: “... Donald Trump offered no reassuring words Monday and instead provided yet more evidence that he understands little to nothing about international trade, but is nevertheless convinced that he does. From claiming that the European Union was created specifically to 'screw' the United States to conflating trade deficits with domestic budget deficits to, yet again, misstating how tariffs are applied and on whom, Trump made clear to anyone watching his Oval Office question-and-answer session that he has no intention of ending or even pausing the turmoil he has set off.... [University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers said that the financial markets' responseto Trump's tariffs is a result of] 'the fear that this is a White House run by a muddled old man, who hasn’t appointed any grownups in the room, and who won’t listen to outside advice. The way these tariffs were set up is absurd and reveals there’s no rhyme or reason to what he’s doing.'... 'Trump believes that the only thing that causes trade deficits is other countries stealing from America. Nobody seems able to persuade him otherwise,' said Avik Roy, a former top policy adviser to ... Mitt Romney.”
Megan Messerly & Sam Sutton of Politico: “Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent flew to Florida Sunday to encourage ... Donald Trump to focus his message on negotiating favorable trade deals — or risk the stock market cratering further, according to two people familiar with the conversations, granted anonymity to share details of them. Bessent, who landed with the president at the White House on Marine One Sunday night, told Trump that markets would remain in peril unless he started putting more emphasis on talking about his endgame with tariffs — winning deals with other countries.... Even as the Treasury secretary has confined his advice to messaging, it appears to be moving Trump to allow more room publicly for negotiations — including the possibility of cutting back on some of the aggressive international trade barriers he announced last week.... Bessent’s advice appears to have encouraged Trump to tamp down his most absolutist statements and formally open the door for negotiations with some countries.” ~~~
~~~ Marie: As I read this article, I was reminded of Thomas Cromwell, Henry VIII's long-time advisor, who -- if the PBS series "Wolf Hall" is somewhat accurate -- used flattery and gentle coaxing to influence Henry, just as Bessent does Trump. The PBS series hasn't run its course in the U.S. yet, but I suspect we will eventually learn that Cromwell's clever cajolery had its limits: despite his years of service and despite being a favorite of Henry's during that time, Henry had Cromwell beheaded in 1540. Good luck, Scotty!
Paul Blumenthal of the Huffington Post: “... Donald Trump and his economic team justified last week’s sweeping 'Liberation Day' tariffs with multiple conflicting explanations that, when considered together, make no sense at all. The administration wants the public to believe three different things, all of which are in tension. First, Trump’s tariffs are designed to launch a renaissance for American manufacturing replaced by overseas imports, bringing back long lost working class jobs.... Second, that the tariffs are meant to raise massive amounts of revenue to replace the progressive income tax. And third, Trump’s advisers and various online sycophants also claim that the purpose is to use the tariffs as pressure on foreign nations to cut bilateral trade deals with the U.S.... Each [of these goals] is in conflict with the other. It can either be one thing or the other thing, but not all three things or even two out of three.” MB: This is currently (8:00 am ET Tuesday) the banner headline at the HuffPost, but it is something Krugman explained (with little fanfare) last week (first linked here April 2).
David Lynch of the Washington Post: “... Donald Trump faces a major obstacle in trying to transform the U.S. economy into a self-reliant colossus: himself.... Trump’s use of unilateral presidential authority, rather than congressional legislation, to enact new import taxes, his contradictory policies, and his history of changing course may discourage business executives from even starting.... Clouding the outlook is profound uncertainty about the president’s policies. Within hours of each other, different cabinet secretaries have provided warring guidance over Trump’s tariff plans.... [Trump's] abrupt announcement of major shifts in long-standing U.S. international economic policies, meanwhile, have left many in the business community wondering about what else might change.”
Elizabeth Dwoskin, et al., of the Washington Post: “Over the weekend, as Elon Musk launched into a barrage of social media posts criticizing [Peter Navarro,] one of the lead White House advisers for ... Donald Trump’s aggressive tariff plan, Musk was ... making personal appeals to Trump. The attempted intervention, confirmed by two people familiar with the matter..., has not brought success so far.... Musk’s break with Trump over a signature administration priority marks the highest-profile disagreement between the president and one of his key advisers.... Musk has also disagreed with other members of Trump’s coalition on issues such as H1-B visas for skilled immigrants and on DOGE’s approach to government spending.” ~~~
~~~ Cat Zakrzewski, et al., of the Washington Post: “Trump’s tariffs are increasingly alienating some of the corporate titans, influencers and even Republican lawmakers who served as his boosters, as the president plows ahead with a trade strategy that has prompted wild swings in the markets. The criticism is an early sign that the economic turmoil caused by his trade war could leave lasting political scars for Trump, who doubled down on the strategy by threatening new tariffs against China on Monday morning. The chiding marks a departure from the general acquiescence among Trump’s allies during the first 2½ months of his shock-and-awe presidency.... The cracks in Trump’s clout were most visible in corporate America, as the executives who once touted Trump’s policies as good for business raced to measure the impact of the tariffs on their portfolios and supply chains.” ~~~
~~~ A Downside to Bullying. Josh Barro: "Trump’s efforts to squelch dissent have been very intentional, and on a lot of fronts, I’m sure he’s happy about the results — like with the law firms and the universities he has brought to heel. But he’s likely to regret shutting up the corporate leaders — the honest feedback that he’s discouraged them from providing is feedback that might have saved him from a political disaster. The thing about the increasing meekness of the corporate executive class is that it reflects their singular focus on making profits for their companies — why risk offending the president if he’ll retaliate in a way that hurts the bottom line? But that same singular focus on profits also means that corporations will need to react to the tariffs in ways that will gravely hurt Trump's political fortunes. We may not hear an outspoken CEO on television criticizing Trump for killing jobs, driving up prices, and making it difficult to do business in America. But that CEO will still react to the economic cost of the tariffs in the normal way: by cutting jobs, raising prices, and seeking business opportunities outside of America." ~~~
~~~ Some Serious Trumpy Remorse. Robert Tait of the Guardian: “A libertarian group that has been funded by Leonard Leo and Charles Koch has mounted a legal challenge against Donald Trump’s tariff regime, in a sign of spreading rightwing opposition to a policy that has sent international markets plummeting. The New Civil Liberties Alliance filed a suit against Trump’s imposition of import tariffs on exports from China, arguing that doing so under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) – which the president has invoked to justify the duties on nearly all countries – is unlawful. The group’s actions echo support given by four Republican senators last week for a Democratic amendment calling for the reversal of 25% tariffs imposed on Canada.... The action from the alliance has the potential to be even more emblematic, given its past backing from Koch, a billionaire industrialist, and Leo, a wealthy legal activist who advised Trump on the nomination of three conservative supreme court justices during his first presidency, which has given the court a 6-3 rightwing majority.”
~~~ Washington Post Editors: “... Donald Trump is freezing the U.S. economy, intentionally or not, and the damage worsens with every day he stays his course.... Without congressional approval (something the Constitution requires), Trump is imposing the highest U.S. taxes on trade since 1909 — effectively the largest U.S. tax increase since 1968.... What happens in the next few days will decide how deep a now-seemingly-inevitable recession will become in the U.S. and beyond.... Meanwhile, businesses will stall big investment decisions until they have an idea of where tariffs will be in the days, weeks and months ahead.... Small businesses, unable to absorb cost increases or push for price concessions from suppliers, might start to default. And the tariffs threaten to disrupt complex supply chains, leading to potential shortages. In a frozen economy, companies feel compelled to lay off workers, because this is the cost they can most easily control. Unemployment stands to rise. Joblessness will, in turn, weaken consumer confidence.” ~~~
~~~ Marie: This is certainly a Bezos-approved editorial. (“We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets,” Bezos announced in February [WashPo link].) King Donald will not appreciate (or listen to) Jeff's kibitzing. ~~~
~~~ Michelle Goldberg of the New York Times: “After Trump’s victory in November, Peter Berezin, chief global strategist at BCA Research..., estimated that the chance of a recession had climbed to 75 percent. 'The prospect of an escalation of the trade war is likely to depress corporate investment while lowering real household disposable income,' said a BCA report. The surprising thing isn’t that Berezin saw the Trump tariff crisis coming, but that so many of his peers didn’t.... [Why?] People in finance, said Berezin, are more likely to be punished for being too cautious and pessimistic than for being too hopeful and aggressive.... Some investors also felt a cultural affinity with the new administration that further clouded their judgment. [That is, they hate 'wokeness.']” (Also linked yesterday.)
Justin Jounvenal & Ann Marimow of the Washington Post: “The Supreme Court on Monday removed a temporary block on the Trump administration’s use of a controversial wartime authority to deport alleged members of a Venezuelan gang, ruling the five immigants who challenged the policy did so in the wrong court. 'The detainees are confined in Texas, so venue is improper in the District of Columbia,' the justices wrote of the challenge in U.S. District Court in D.C. 'As a result, the Government is likely to succeed on the merits of this action.' The 5-4 ruling did not touch on the underlying legal questions of the challenge. It leaves open the possibility the migrants could refile their case in Texas or other jurisdictions where they are detained. But for now, it opens the door for the Trump administration to deport more Venezuelan migrants under the act, although it also said the government must give prospective deportees notice and an opportunity to challenge their removal. And it appears to take the central legal issues of the case away from U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg, whose temporary restraining order blocking the deportations prompted impeachment calls from Trump and his allies. The court’s three liberal justices dissented, joined in part by Justice Amy Coney Barrett....
“The ACLU called the justices’ ruling that migrants are entitled to challenge the government’s claim that they are gang members 'a huge victory.' 'We are disappointed that we will need to start the court process over again in a different venue but the critical point is that the Supreme Court said individuals must be given due process to challenge their removal under the Alien Enemies Act,' lead ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt said in a statement.” Thanks to Ken W. for the link. (Also linked yesterday.) The AP's report is here. ~~~
~~~ Marie: Notwithstanding the ACLU's brave face, now would be a good time to check out yesterday's Comments and read Akhilleus' recitation on James Madison's & Montesquieu's opinions on all that. Madison, citing Montesquieu, wrote in Federalist No. 47, "‘Were the power of judging ... joined to the executive power, the judge might behave with all the violence of an oppressor.’” Ain't it something that Madison foresaw the predilections of the Great Oppressor AND the Supreme Boys way back 237 years ago, and Montesquieu saw them coming 40 years before that. It does seem that plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. ~~~
~~~ AND There's This. Adam Liptak of the New York Times: “Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. on Monday temporarily blocked a trial judge’s order directing the United States to return a Salvadoran migrant it had inadvertently deported. The chief justice, acting on his own, issued an 'administrative stay,' an interim measure meant to give the justices some breathing room while the full court considers the matter. The order came just hours after the administration asked the court to block the trial judge’s order instructing the government to return the migrant, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, by 11:59 p.m. on Monday. Judge Paula Xinis of the Federal District Court in Maryland had said the administration committed a 'grievous error' that 'shocks the conscience' by sending Mr. Abrego Garcia, to a notorious prison in El Salvador last month.” (Also linked yesterday.) The AP's report is here. ~~~
~~~ Marie: Well, it seems there are consciences and consciences. Looks as if CJ Johnnie's conscience is not easily shocked. Apply Montesquieu Rule here.
David Badash of the New Civil Rights Movement: “A former U.S. Department of Justice pardon attorney delivered sworn testimony before Congress on Monday, accusing her former agency ... of 'corruption and abuse of power.' She claimed that armed U.S. Marshals were sent to her home to deliver what she described as a 'warning' from the DOJ, cautioning her about the risks of testifying. Liz Oyer 'told U.S. media outlets that her firing came shortly after she declined to recommend restoring gun rights to actor Mel Gibson, a supporter of ... Donald Trump,' Reuters reports. She reportedly was fired by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche [-- formerly one of Trump's personal attorneys --] on March 7.... 'At no point did Mr. Blanche’s staff pick up the phone and call me before they sent armed deputies to my home,' she said in her testimony. 'The letter was a warning to me about the risks of testifying here today. But I am here because I will not be bullied into concealing the ongoing corruption and abuse of power at the Department of Justice.'” The AP's story is here.
Helene Cooper of the New York Times: “The Trump administration fired Vice Adm. Shoshana Chatfield, U.S. officials said on Monday, as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth continued his purge of military leaders who have been targeted by conservatives. Admiral Chatfield, who served in the Navy as the U.S. representative to NATO’s military committee, has joined a list of female leaders and people of color who have been fired.... In a December letter to Mr. Hegseth, a conservative watchdog group included Admiral Chatfield in a list of 'woke ideologues' who the group said should be purged. Before moving to NATO, Admiral Chatfield was the first woman to lead the U.S. Naval War College in Newport, R.I.”
Worst. Client. Ever. Devlin Barrett & Glenn Thrush of the New York Times: Department of Justice “litigators, their ranks increasingly depleted, often find themselves in court with few facts to defend policies they cannot explain, according to current and former officials. Career lawyers representing the government have a long tradition of arguing for the goals of Republican or Democratic administrations, regardless of their personal views. What is different now ... is that they increasingly feel trapped between ... [Donald] Trump’s partisan political appointees, who insist on a maximalist approach, and judges who demand comprehensible answers to basic questions. The most vivid example of this squeeze came on Saturday when one of the department’s senior immigration lawyers, Erez Reuveni, was suspended indefinitely after speaking candidly about the administration’s mistaken deportation of a Maryland man to a notorious megaprison in El Salvador.... A second senior immigration lawyer involved in the Abrego Garcia case, August Flentje, was also placed on administrative leave for his failure 'to supervise a subordinate.'... 'Justice Department attorneys are being put in an impossible position: Obey the president, or uphold their ethical duty to the court and the Constitution, said Stacey Young, a former department lawyer....”
Vimal Patel, et al., of the New York Times: “More than 200 international students were abruptly stripped of their ability to stay in the United States in recent days, according to universities and media reports, sowing fear among students and confusion at schools scrambling to help students facing detention and possible deportation. The moves targeted students at a wide range of universities, from private institutions like Harvard and Stanford to public ones like the University of Texas at Austin and Minnesota State University-Mankato. The University of California had dozens of cases reported across its campuses.... In some cases, immigration officers have arrested international students related to their involvement in pro-Palestinian causes. In other cases, students had committed legal infractions, such as driving over the speed limit or while intoxicated, often years ago, several immigration lawyers said in interviews. But lawyers said the Trump administration had often given no reason at all, leaving them to guess why students were targeted.”
Emily Nunn of the New York Times: “Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. kicked off a tour through southwestern states on Monday by calling on states to ban fluoride in drinking water supplies, a move that would reverse what some medical experts consider one of the most important public health practices in the country’s history. The announcement came at a news conference in Utah, the first state to enact such a ban into law. The state’s new law is set to take effect in early May, despite concerns from public health experts who consider fluoridation of water core to preventing tooth decay.... The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which Mr. Kennedy oversees as health secretary, has listed fluoridation as one of the 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century. After the news conference, Stefanie Spear, Mr. Kennedy’s principal deputy chief of staff, said Mr. Kennedy would direct the C.D.C.’s community preventative services task force to study fluoride and make a new recommendation.” The ABC News story is here. ~~~
~~~ Marie: I realize that no administration in U.S. history has been less interested in truth in advertising, but I do think that for the duration, Mr. Kennedy's title should be Secretary of Sickness & Human Suffering.
That Was Quick. Kelly Cho of the Washington Post: “The U.S. National Park Service on Monday appeared to restore its original webpage on the history of the Underground Railroad after it was met with backlash for deleting a prominently featured photo of abolitionist and women’s suffragist Harriet Tubman, as well as segments of text describing the horrors of slavery. The changes, first reported by The Washington Post on Sunday, came after ... Donald Trump issued an executive order late last month directing the Smithsonian Institution to eliminate 'divisive narratives' — a move that spurred fears that his administration aimed to whitewash American history.... However, some of the other changes to webpages reported by The Post still appear to be in place.... In a statement to CNN, a spokesperson for the NPS said: 'Changes to the Underground Railroad page on the National Park Service’s website were made without approval from NPS leadership nor Department leadership. The webpage was immediately restored to its original content.'”
You look at people who are 150 years old who are fraudulently collecting Social Security payments. You see our Social Security system — 40 percent of the people who are calling are actually committing fraud. That means the 60 percent who need their Social Security checks are waiting in line. — Vice President JD Vance, during an interview on Fox & Friends, April 3
... that is an absurdity on its face.... Only 0.00625 percent of Social Security benefits are lost to direct-deposit fraud, with 0.0025 percent (40 percent) via Social Security’s 800 number. There’s a monumental difference between 40 percent and 0.0025 percent. But in the Trump administration’s scramble to serve up outrage and scandal about alleged fraud at Social Security, Vance went on national television and told a whopper. -- Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post
Blueprint for Crippling Universities. Susan Svrluga & Danielle Douglas-Gabriel of the Washington Post: “Critical of college admissions, diversity, equity and inclusion policies, and campus protests that he lambasted as pro-Hamas, Max Eden, then a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, wrote an outline that presaged what was to come in the new Trump administration. He singled out Columbia [University] as the top target. 'To scare universities straight,” Eden wrote in the Washington Examiner [published December 6, 2024], Education Secretary Linda McMahon 'should start by taking a prize scalp. She should simply destroy Columbia University.' Eden ... suggested canceling research grants and deporting international students who took part in protests. Though it’s unclear whether his plan had a direct impact, it bears a striking resemblance to the early actions the Trump administration has taken to transform America’s most prestigious colleges and universities.” ~~~
~~~ Marie: Complaining about dissent at universities is probably the stupidest, most ignorant criticism of formal education in Western thought. The purpose of universities is to teach critical thinking (and not only in the humanities). That's what underlies the principles of academic freedom and tenure. (Akhilleus wrote a couple of days ago, "Perhaps the most important observation Socrates made was that the unexamined life is not worth living, in other words..., accepting without question the diktats of those in charge and the superstitions of everyone else was a wasteful and sorry way to live.... [Socrates'] message was a great gift he was giving to his fellow Athenians. They, in turn, gave him a cup of hemlock and told him to drop dead." Which he did. And that's why, when European universities started up in the Middle Ages, hemlock was not on the cafeteria menu. Even more basically, rebellion against the status quo is a natural, biological rite of passage. It's what young people do. University protests provide an important, relatively safe and socially-approved outlet for that inevitable rebellious expression. To suppress it is dangerous. Are protesters shouting and carrying signs always engaging in higher critical thinking? Well, of course not. But the one leads to, moderates and complements the other.
Kelsey Ables of the Washington Post: “The National Weather Service has halted its automated language translation services until further notice, potentially hindering the millions of U.S. residents who speak a language other than English from accessing life-saving information at a time when climate change is exacerbating extreme weather events, experts say. The pause was 'due to a contract lapse' with an artificial intelligence firm providing the translation services, according to a message from the agency this month.... [The translation facility] may be at odds with the Trump administration’s policy approach. It has declared English the official language of the United States — revoking a Clinton-era order that required federal agencies to provide assistance for those with limited English ability.”
Reid Epstein of the New York Times: “Michael R. Bloomberg’s gun control group plans to spend $10 million to help elect Democratic attorneys general this year and in 2026, an investment it says is meant to help protect the rule of law and democracy while ... [Donald] Trump holds the White House. The group, Everytown for Gun Safety, will back Democratic candidates in 10 competitive states, including Virginia this fall and Arizona, Georgia, Minnesota, Nevada and Wisconsin, among others, next year, according to John Feinblatt, the organization’s president.”
~~~~~~~~~~
You Have the Right to an Attorney. Except in Rural Texas. Jolie McCullough of the New York Times: “The right to a criminal defense lawyer is so ingrained in the American idea of justice that fans of TV police dramas can recite these two lines from the Miranda rights by memory: You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. But in much of Texas, that right is routinely denied. Every year, more than half of rural Texans accused of misdemeanors are left to represent themselves — five times the rate of defendants in urban areas.... The New York Times reported last week that the court system in Maverick County, Texas, had repeatedly incarcerated people accused of minor crimes for months without filing charges, and seemingly lost track of some of the defendants in jail. The county rarely provided misdemeanor defendants with lawyers, who might have prevented those lapses.... Geoff Burkhart, the [Texas Indigent Defense C]ommission’s former executive director, said in an interview that some commission members, who he would not name, had privately questioned whether misdemeanor defendants needed attorneys at all.”
Wisconsin. One Small Victory for the Rule of Law. Patrick Marley of the Washington Post: “A former Wisconsin Supreme Court justice agreed Monday to give up his law license for three years after facing a string of ethics allegations stemming from his error-riddled review of the 2020 election for Republican state lawmakers. In a filing with the state Supreme Court, former justice Michael Gableman conceded that legal regulators had produced enough evidence to find he had violated state ethics rules for lawyers. He gave up his legal fight over the matter a week after a candidate backed by Democrats won a seat on the state’s high court and locked in a likely liberal majority for years. In a 10-count complaint in November, Wisconsin’s Office of Lawyer Regulation alleged Gableman had filed false information with a judge, repeatedly engaged in dishonesty, unfairly disparaged a judge and an attorney, failed to perform competent legal work, did not follow the directions of his client, released confidential information and lied to the lawyer who investigated him.... The state Supreme Court will have the final say on whether to suspend his license.” The AP story is here.
Share Article