Trump’s mental decline continues

This is from Donald Trump on Truth Social tonight:

The Ronald Reagan Foundation has just announced that Canada has fraudulently used an advertisement, which is FAKE, featuring Ronald Reagan speaking negatively about Tariffs. The ad was for $75,000. They only did this to interfere with the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, and other courts. TARIFFS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY, AND ECONOMY, OF THE U.S.A. Based on their egregious behavior, ALL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS WITH CANADA ARE HEREBY TERMINATED. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DJT

On Ukraine, Trump is an obstacle

President Trump’s constant self-reversals on the war in Ukraine must be a great comfort to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who can see clearly that although Trump occasionally talks tough about punishing Putin for the war that he voluntarily started in Ukraine, the U.S. president’s heart is just not in the business of opposing the Russian.

Trump’s record speaks for itself.

On the eve of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, as Russian military forces were massed on Ukraine’s border with Russia to the east and on the frontier with Belarus in the north, candidate Trump praised as “genius” Vladimir Putin’s declaration two days earlier that the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of eastern Ukraine were “independent” of Ukraine. Putin was “savvy” because he was going to go into Ukraine to keep the peace. What?

Pro-Russian separatists had for a decade been fighting the Ukrainian military with the goal of tearing a huge part of eastern Ukraine away from the national territory and aligning it with Russia. And from 2014, the separatists in Ukraine had the assistance of Putin’s “little green men” — Russian troops operating on Ukrainian soil but wearing military uniforms without identifying markings. Putin’s declaration on Luhansk and Donetsk, made on Feb. 21, 2022, was his way of cementing independence declarations made by pro-Russian separatists in the two regions in 2014. The proclamations purported to establish a Donetsk People’s Republic and a Luhansk People’s Republic, both occupying Ukrainian land.

You may recall that before the 2022 invasion, Putin had threatened to resort to a “military-technical solution” in Ukraine if he did not receive from NATO an assurance that Ukraine would never join the alliance and if certain other demands about NATO’s posture were not met. NATO, including the United States, rejected Putin’s demands, and so we have a war.

On Feb. 24, 2022, Putin’s forces rolled west out of Russia and south out of Belarus in an operation that the Kremlin thought would have vanquished Ukraine in a matter of days, but the war has been raging from that day to this. Ukraine, reinforced by arms flowing in from Europe and the U.S., has proved a hard nut for Russia to crack.

The Russia-Ukraine war was just another trigger for candidate Trump to tout his imagined greatness as a deal-maker and settler of conflicts. On dozens of occasions during his third presidential campaign, he declared publicly and loudly that he would end the Ukraine war before even starting his new presidency or would do it on Day One. He won the election last November and took office on Jan. 20 of this year, and we are nearing the end of October with the war no closer to being ended.

In April, Time magazine asked Trump about his unfulfilled promise to have ended the war already, and he replied:
“Well, I said that figuratively, and I said that as an exaggeration, because to make a point, and you know, it gets, of course, by the fake news [unintelligible]. Obviously, people know that when I said that, it was said in jest, but it was also said that it will be ended.”

Asked what was taking so long, Trump responded:
Well, I don’t think it’s long. I mean, look, I got here three months ago. This war has been going on for three years. It’s a war that would have never happened if I was president. It’s Biden’s war. It’s not my war. I have nothing to do with it. I would have never had this war. This war would have never happened. Putin would have never done it. This war would have never happened. Oct. 6 would have never happened. Oct. 7 would have never happened. Would have never happened. Ever.

Also during the campaign, Trump repeatedly criticized Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky for his efforts to obtain U.S. weaponry to fight off the Russian aggression, accused him of bearing blame for the war and said that Ukraine, the victim of Russia’s aggression, probably would have to cede territory to Russia for there to be peace.

On April 14 of this year, Trump again blamed Zelensky for the war. “Listen, when you start a war, you gotta know you can win a war,” Trump said at a news conference at the White House. “You don’t start a war against somebody that’s 20 times your size and then hope that people give you some missiles.”

Trump has gone back and forth, again and again, in assigning blame for the war, even, of course, faulting Joe Biden, on whose watch as U.S. president the 2022 invasion took place. In his criticisms, Trump has been tougher on Biden and Zelensky than he has been on Putin. Remember his and Vice President JD Vance’s berating of the Ukrainian leader as ungrateful in the Oval Office on Feb. 28 of this year. Shortly after that acrimonious meeting, U.S. arms transfers to Ukraine were stopped, then quickly restarted. Trump’s pique actually figures into whether the U.S. president will support a country righteously fighting for its very life.

On Aug. 15, Trump hosted Putin in Alaska for a summit on the war. The U.S. president received the Russian graciously at an American military base, according the war-starter the courtesies appropriate for an honored guest. Putin was even allowed to lay flowers in honor of World War II Soviet pilots buried at Fort Richardson National Cemetery. The whole event was yet another instance of Trump flopping in front of Putin, who is the driving force behind a war of aggression and a man indicted by the International Criminal Court on war crimes charges.

The Alaska summit ended inconclusively, but Trump then spoke of Ukraine’s needing to give up land for a peace agreement to be realized. And here we saw, again, one of Trump’s great weaknesses: a tendency to be swayed by the disputant with whom he has most recently spoken.

On Aug. 18, just three days after the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska, Zelensky was to be at the White House again to meet with Trump. But this time, Western Europe was not going to allow Zelensky to walk into a trap as he had at the White House on Feb. 28. A delegation of NATO, European Union and other leaders from Europe rushed to Washington to support Zelensky. That meeting, too, was inconclusive.

Then came another flip. Trump and Zelensky met at the United Nations in New York in September after Trump’s address to the General Assembly. And after his meeting with Zelensky, Trump wrote on Truth Social that Ukraine could “win all of [its territory] back in its original form.”

Zelensky was back at the White House on Oct. 17, without the European posse, and that meeting did not go well, news reports say. Before the meeting, Trump had spoken of granting a request by Zelensky for Tomahawk cruise missiles to allow Ukraine to strike key targets deep inside Russia and make the war much more costly and difficult for Moscow. All seemed to be moving in Ukraine’s desired direction — until Putin called Trump before Zelensky’s visit to the White House.

Whatever Putin said to Trump moved the U.S. president’s position, and he began hedging on Tomahawk deliveries before meeting with Zelensky. The meeting proved to be inconclusive and apparently was confrontational. Immediately after, Trump was back to the line that Ukraine, the victim in the fight, needs to concede territory to Russia, the aggressor in the fight, for the war to stop. It was yet another frustrating and utterly unproductive reversal by Trump.

Our president’s principal formula for peace appears to involve Kyiv’s giving up Ukrainian land that Russia has occupied by force. That idea is a nonstarter for Zelensky. Ukraine is the victim. Russia is the aggressor. Russia should stop the war and leave Ukrainian territory. The formula is simple, and it is the most sensible for the world beyond Russia, because a Russian victory in Ukraine will embolden Putin and thereby endanger all of Europe. After all, Putin’s great dream is to reconstitute a grand Russian empire. Yet Trump just cannot seem to wrap his head around this idea.

He cannot seem to grasp the concept that it is best to stop Putin in Ukraine so that NATO minus one (the U.S.) does not end up fighting Russia after a Putin victory in Ukraine. I say “minus one” because it is not clear at all that the U.S. under Donald Trump would stand with its allies in a conflict started by an expansionist Russia. Such a scenario would have been unthinkable before Putin appeaser Donald Trump became U.S. president. Now we have Trump apparently being more enthusiastic about putting U.S. troops on the streets of American cities than he is about sending weapons to Ukraine to help it fight for its freedom.

What is this mysterious hold that Vladimir Putin has over Trump? Why won’t our leader deal with Putin as the offender that the Russian is? For the sake of world peace, I hope that sooner rather than later we get an answer to this mystery. Something is rotten in it, and it stinks dangerously.

The peace, the grift and the vendetta

President Trump is justly celebrating the apparent end of the war in the Gaza Strip in a peace agreement that his administration brokered. Just over a week past the second anniversary of the horrific attack from Gaza into Israel that triggered this war, Hamas and its allied fighting groups in that part of Palestine have largely been defeated — although not yet eliminated — by the Israeli military. After tens of thousands of civilian casualties in Gaza and the razing of much of the territory’s built environment, the Palestinian survivors there can begin piecing together something resembling a recovery.

Next to come: the stabilization and redevelopment of Gaza under a 20-point Trump plan to be overseen by the “Board of Peace” (read “Board of Grift”) which Trump, of course, will lead. The stabilization and redevelopment plan is beautifully explained by the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations.

But a great danger remains. The seeds of further conflict lie in the Trump peace plan and in the ruins of Gaza. The plan calls for an “International Stabilization Force” drawn from Arab and other supportive countries gradually to take over security in Gaza as Israel withdraws its troops in stages. The plan also calls for the disarming of Hamas and the other Palestinian fighting groups in Gaza and for the destruction of their weaponry. But Hamas does not agree to be disarmed and disbanded. And it views the Board of Peace as a neocolonialist structure.

The rumps of Hamas and the other fighting groups remain embedded in Gaza, and all kinds of weaponry, including explosives, remain cached all over the territory. Will the International Stabilization Force, or ISF, become the new enemy and target of Gaza’s militants? That remains to be seen, but it seems to me to be highly likely. If the remnants of these groups do fight on, little progress will be possible in Gaza beyond the trucking in of emergency food and medical aid. Obviously, the absence of fighting is a requirement for large-scale reconstruction to occur.

But if Gaza’s fighting groups do finally agree to stand down and disarm, watch for a Trump-facilitated grift in Gaza on a scale “like nobody’s seen before,” to borrow one of the grifter in chief’s favorite hyperbolic formulations. We already know from Trump’s own mouth that he has his eyes on Gaza as a Mediterranean resort destination. (He seems to have dropped, at least for the present, the mad idea of clearing Gaza of its Palestinian population.) In his dual role as U.S. president and head of the Board of Grift, Trump will be able to steer redevelopment work and other moneymaking opportunities in the new Gaza to his friends and political donors. And you can be sure that the Trump family will be dipping its beak into the river of money that will be flowing into the rebuilding of Gaza’s housing stock, roads, hospitals, clinics, bakeries, shops, water supply systems and sewage plants.

The new resort-flavored Gaza will need a specific type of seafront profile. It will need corniches and marinas and luxury hotels (the Trump family’s special area, lest we forget).

Who will sit on the Board of Peace alongside Trump to make all of this come to pass has not been announced beyond the lamentable Tony Blair. And his participation now seems in doubt after Trump said over the weekend that it was unclear whether Blair would be acceptable to all others involved with the board. Trump’s announcement of Blair’s name at the announcement of the Board of Peace drew an intense backlash. Blair has been severely out of favor for backing the falsely grounded 2003 invasion of Iraq when he was British prime minister.

But who are the others to sit on the Board of Peace? Trump will be looking for certain kinds of people to be with him, because he will need those people to be onboard with the entity’s alter ego, the Board of Grift. This much we can take for granted: He will have no use for people who are likely to raise awkward concerns about fiscal transparency, accountability and fairness, because transparency, accountability and fairness are anathema to any enterprise in which Trump is involved.

Meanwhile, on the home front, the great peacemaker is making war on his chosen targets via the U.S. military and the Department of Justice. National Guard troops are being sent into large, Democrat-run cities, which of course did not support Trump in the election, to intimidate them on the pretext of crime emergencies in those jurisdictions. Although National Guard troops are still to be seen roaming aimlessly in D.C. after Trump inanely declared the city to be totally crime-free, the president has shifted his attention elsewhere, and cowing Chicago seems to be his present obsession. Expect him to resume his domestic aggression as soon as he has finished making peace overseas.

With the fanatical compliance of U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, Trump has sicced a handpicked federal prosecutor on former FBI director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. And Bondi’s Justice Department is investigating Lisa Cook, a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors whom Trump is trying to fire. Her alleged crime is mortgage fraud. So is Letitia James’. Comey’s is allegedly lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee during testimony in September 2020 about leaks from the FBI to news media concerning FBI investigations.

But these three people’s real crimes are that they have either resisted Trump or have had some hand in legal cases against him.

Lisa Cook: Trump wants to appoint a lackey to the traditionally independent Federal Reserve Board of Governors, and one of his other lackeys, Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, came up with accusation that Cook had committed mortgage fraud. Trump declared her fired on that basis; she resisted and sued him and the Fed itself, for good measure. For now, the Supreme Court is allowing her to remain a Fed governor. But Pam Bondi’s Justice Department is beavering away at making a criminal case against Cook.

Letitia James: The attorney general of New York state had the temerity to sue Trump’s company for business fraud and win a judgment requiring the disgorgement of hundreds of millions of dollars of ill-gotten money. Trump declared that she should be prosecuted, and so she is being prosecuted.

James Comey: In March 2017, when Comey was director of the FBI and Trump was just settling into his first term as president, the agency began investigating whether members of Trump’s presidential campaign had colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 election in Trump’s favor. Trump was outraged, of course, and Comey was the target of his ire. Trump fired Comey in May 2017, citing a loss of confidence in the director. Trump has held that grudge like an heirloom, and when he recently declared — for the umpteenth time — that Comey should be prosecuted, the deed was all but done.

The U.S. attorney who is prosecuting Comey and James is Lindsey Halligan, a former personal lawyer to Donald Trump who was hastily appointed on an interim basis to the Justice Department’s Eastern District of Virginia, the famous “rocket docket.” She has had no previous prosecutorial experience. Her background is in insurance law, and she worked for a law firm before joining the Trump White House, from which perch she was sent to take charge of the very serious Eastern District, one of the most prestigious of the Justice Department’s districts and a preferred venue for terrorism and other national security cases.

Halligan was appointed specifically to secure an indictment of Comey because her predecessor, Trump-appointee Erik Siebert, had declined to take that action on the grounds that the case was inadequate and was then forced out by Trump. After securing the Comey indictment, Halligan got one for James, the New York attorney general. If anyone wonders why she was able to indict whereas her predecessor would not act, just remember the famous declaration by former New York Court of Appeals chief judge Solomon Wachtler: any prosecutor can get a grand jury to “indict a ham sandwich.” The prosecutor simply feeds the grand jury cherry-picked evidence to get the desired outcome.

So as Trump wraps up his whirlwind peace mission in the Middle East and heads back to the home front, he will be wringing the neck of the white dove and burning the olive branch.

He is coming home to cast off the mantle of peace and snatch up the sword that he dropped when he set off abroad. But we want no dictators or kings here in these United States, so he is returning to meet his match in that segment of the American populace that sees him for what he is and has righteously decided that he will not have his way here.

***

The next No Kings day is this Saturday, Oct. 18, 2025. Find D.C.-area events here. National website here.

Democrats, stand firm on shutdown!

As of midnight, we have been in a partial shutdown of the federal government because of an impasse in the U.S Senate over a continuing resolution to fund the government until Nov. 21. The measure cleared the Republican-controlled House on Sept. 19 on a vote of 217 to 212. In the Senate, under that chamber’s special rules, the measure needed 60 votes to pass, but Republicans do not have that number in their own conference and so need Democratic votes to pass the measure. Competing Republican and Democratic versions failed in the final hours before the shutdown deadline of midnight on Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year.

What’s the holdup? Changes to Medicaid are involved, but the main issue is that Democrats insist that an extension of expiring subsidies for Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) health insurance premiums be included in the continuing resolution. Republicans promised to engage in a discussion of the ACA premium subsidies and other health-care-related matters at a later date. Democrats held out. No continuing resolution was passed by the deadline of midnight Tuesday looking into Wednesday, and now, on Wednesday, we’re in a partial government shutdown that could drag on.

Bravo, Senate Democrats! Do not give an inch in this fight; the outcome here is crucial to the health of about 24 million Americans.

The federal subsidies for premiums on health insurance purchased through the ACA marketplace were to have expired several years ago, but these subsidies were twice extended via major bills passed in Congress during the Biden administration. To be clear, these subsidies are funded by taxpayer money, and some critics of the program loudly disparage the subsidies as socialism. But they are no more socialistic than the federal government subsidies that are included in every Farm Bill to help keep American agriculture in business. Nor are they any more socialistic than the $28 billion fund set up during the first Trump administration to help farmers who lost export sales as a direct consequence of the tariff wars that Trump started.

As far as I am concerned, the federal subsidies for ACA health insurance premiums are a righteous use of public money.

And as for Republicans’ saying they are willing to discuss ACA subsidies at a later date but not now, that is a crock. The emergency is now. Annual open enrollment for health insurance begins on Nov. 1, but in a matter of days from now, health insurers will be sending their customers notifications about the premiums those companies will charge for coverage in 2026. To set their pricing plans for 2026, the companies need certainty now, not in two weeks or later.

The question of ACA premium subsidies must be resolved now, not later. If no extension of subsidies is passed in the short-term spending bill — or continuing resolution (so named because it continues federal funding at existing levels in the absence of a proper appropriations bill) — health insurance premiums for the approximately 24 million Americans now covered via the ACA will rise steeply. The consequence will be that millions of Americans will no longer be able to afford health insurance and will drop out of coverage.

One cannot reasonably forecast how many people now covered by insurance purchased through the ACA would give up the coverage because they decided they just could no longer afford it, but surely the number would be in the multiple millions. The great danger, of course, is that people with chronic ailments such as heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure, respiratory diseases and various mental illnesses will suddenly stop taking their maintenance medications. Use your imagination. No good can possibly come of such a situation.

But despite the public harm caused unaffordable health insurance premiums, Republicans would have made progress on one of their cherished objectives: destroying the Affordable Care Act. You may recall the Republican reaction to the legislation when it was signed into law by President Barack Obama in March 2010, with then-Vice President Joe Biden being caught on a hot microphone telling Obama, “This is a big fucking deal!” Republicans were dead set against it, and I always thought that their opposition was in large measure rooted in racism.

The right-wing white Republican establishment despised Obama — not just for himself but also for what his election signaled about the future direction of the country — and that establishment recognized that a program that would help millions and millions of uninsured Americans to afford health coverage would be a legacy achievement for the nation’s first black president. The very thought of it incensed those Republicans no end, and they set out to destroy what was by then well known as “Obamacare.”

Enter this appalling man by the name of Donald Trump. In addition to his regular 2016 campaign boast that he would build a southern border wall for whose construction Mexico would pay, he repeatedly pledged to repeal the Affordable Care Act and replace it with something better. I do not recall that he ever clearly articulated what was wrong with the ACA, but he would produce something better than it, he declared.

When this malignant racist became president in January 2017, he began his legislative assault on the ACA, the proudest domestic work of his black predecessor, via his pet Republican conferences in the House and Senate. He failed, most spectacularly when Sen. John McCain — a Republican, we should remember — gave that famous thumbs-down on the Senate floor in July 2018, driving the fatal stake into the heart of the GOP’s best attempt at repealing Obamacare.

Republicans have not given up on their hope of seeing the death of Obamacare. What they have given up on is any pretense that they intend to offer an alternative. They never had one in the days of Trump 1.0 when they were pretending that they had such a plan; and there is no longer any talk of producing something better. Under Trump 2.0, the Republican agenda across the federal government is simply to dismantle and destroy, and nothing is being created that is not a tribute to the diseased ego of Mad King Trump.

So we return to the present test facing congressional Democrats. For leverage in the standoff, Trump has threatened to fire vast numbers of federal workers rather than furlough them during the shutdown, as would be normal. Democrats should ignore this threat. The ACA question is a red line from which they must not retreat. If they fold here, they will surrender any credibility and usefulness they could have had in the necessary resistance to the madman.

Video: White House prepped for Netanyahu

The leaders of Turkey and Pakistan also were expected to visit

One of the joys of living in my particular spot in Washington, D.C., is that a leisurely walk of under 30 minutes can deliver me to the White House or to any number of other important sites in the city. On the afternoon of Thursday, Sept. 25, I strolled over to the White House expecting to see a large demonstration against an expected visit by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to his pal Donald Trump.

I did not find a large demonstration. The visit is to be on Monday, in fact. I did find a great deal of extra fencing. Walk the perimeter with me to partake of some interesting sights and sounds.

Jimmy Kimmel’s comeback

I applaud the Walt Disney Company’s decision to reinstate “Jimmy Kimmel Live!,” starting on Tuesday, after Disney-0wned ABC suspended it indefinitely last week because of uncharitable remarks that Kimmel made about the Sept. 10 assassination of the conservative lightning rod Charlie Kirk.

Disney had issued the suspension in response to a conservative backlash that included ABC-affiliated Sinclair and Nexstar declaring that they would no longer carry Kimmel’s show on their many stations around the country. Behind much of everything, of course, lies money: These large television and entertainment companies almost always have business underway that needs federal government approval, and they have to be careful to present the correct posture before the highly vindictive Trump administration. It was almost natural, therefore, that Disney and its affiliates would do a bit of virtue signaling by dropping the hammer on Kimmel.

To be clear, the argument over Kimmel’s show is not a First Amendment matter. Disney is a private entity, not a government agency, so it cannot be accused of violating Kimmel’s constitutional right to free speech, because Kimmel has no such claim in respect of a private corporation. Disney is at liberty to terminate any presenter’s contract over speech that Disney does not like. But the public that pays Disney for the entertainment it provides also is entitled to withdraw its money from Disney products and spend it elsewhere, or just sit on it, if it does not like Disney’s decisions.

Disney immediately faced a different backlash for benching Kimmel. This one came broadly from the left in the form of loud and harsh criticism of the Kimmel suspension as corporate cowardice in the face of a Trump administration that is demonstrably committed to quashing criticism of federal government policy as well as of the font of federal policy, the stable genius that is President Donald Trump himself.

And the new backlash also took the important form of canceled subscriptions; Disney was frightened about losing money. After all, money rules. So the corporation again adjusted its calculations and decided that it was better that Kimmel and his program be restored.

Or, if I am to be charitable and optimistic in my outlook, it could be that the powers atop Disney genuinely decided that it was more important that media corporations begin to grow some backbone under the repressive pressure the federal government is exerting.

Whatever its real motivations, Disney did a good thing today in restoring Kimmel’s show. And I will now renew the Disney subscription that I canceled over the Kimmel suspension.

Kirk’s death and the continuing struggle

The assassination of Charlie Kirk is a dreadful crime, and the killer is likely to be executed for what he has done. But no one who opposes President Donald Trump for his anti-democratic excesses should ease up for even a moment in the campaign to spotlight and denounce those transgressions.

If you are pointing out dangerous actions and behaviors in reasonable words and are not encouraging the use of violence, you should consider yourself to be in the clear and should press on with speaking truth to this corrupt power.

Keep challenging Trump’s overreach and the GOP-led Congress’s cowardly dereliction of its duty to be a check on the executive branch. Continue telling that same Congress that we are watching for it to rouse itself and hypocritically rediscover its voice when the next Democratic president takes office and tries to effect his or her agenda. Keep telling Congress that the executive excesses on which it is silent today are establishing precedents that tomorrow’s presidents — Republican and Democrat — will be able employ to constrain disapproving voices, throttle the courts and to stifle the inconvenient rights of the sovereign people.

Keep pointing out that under Trump, the executive branch is, more than ever, a center of power pursuing the interests of the occupant of the Oval Office to the detriment of the common good.

Trump’s supporters seem to have calculated that they will be safe because Trump is their man and they are his people, that he will forever focus on the enemy. But who is enemy and who friend in Trump’s eyes, and for how long? Supporters of aspiring authoritarians have erred fatally in this calculation repeatedly throughout history, failing to recognize that the dictator is a pathological personality who views even his supporters and allies as tools and will turn on them the moment this becomes convenient for him.

Suddenly, they, who were the heroic people in the authoritarian’s telling yesterday, become the enemies of the people. This pattern is already plain to see in Trump’s behavior since his first term. Who can count the number of people he has embraced as the finest to serve him in government and elsewhere, only to turn on them and attack them as villainous and incompetent, even treasonous, because they have indulged in independent thinking? Who can forget his attacks on his own supporters for wanting greater transparency in the Jeffrey Epstein sex crimes case, a matter on which Trump has exhibited an interesting level of touchiness?

All those immigrant groups that supported him in the election? They fancied themselves to be among the elect. They were wrong. They found out in his immigration enforcement sweeps.

Let us deplore the killing of Charlie Kirk and commiserate with his wife and children and the wider community that loved him. But let us not be diverted from our principal purpose by noises such as Trump’s linking of Kirk’s assassination to violent rhetoric on the left. Absolutely no one in American public political discourse of the past decade has unleashed more violent and incendiary rhetoric than Donald Trump has from his perch on the extreme right of American politics.

Since he declared for the presidency in June 2015, he has demolished the guardrails of self-restraint and decency and has dragged this country’s political culture toward levels of physical confrontation not seen since the civil rights struggles of the post-World War II era.

A 22-year-old man may have fired the shot that killed Charlie Kirk in Utah, but when 79-year-old Trump looks in the mirror here in Washington, D.C., he will see someone who bears part of the blame for that heinous assassination. His supporters should wake up and see who is leading them, and to where.

To the glory of Trump — enemy of labor

If you go to the headquarters of the U.S. Department of Labor here in Washington and stand well back across from the building in that mini park on Constitution Avenue to get a panoramic view of the edifice, you will see two enormous banners honoring American workers for the nation’s 250th anniversary next year. Each banner also bears the image of a U.S. president: on the left is Donald Trump; on the right is Theodore Roosevelt.

Roosevelt was a labor reformer even before he became governor of New York, and before he would become U.S. president. But before that, as a member of the New York State Assembly, he was at first a reliable anti-union vote. Then he had an epiphany when he began learning about ordinary people’s working conditions. His education included visiting workplaces and seeing firsthand the appalling conditions that prevailed.

Here is a description of Roosevelt’s work in labor reform, taken from a blog at the Theodore Roosevelt Center that credits a report at the Library of Congress as its ultimate source:
“As Governor of New York, Roosevelt further pushed for labor reform, especially through enforcement of existing legislation. He pushed for the passage of employers’ liability and sweatshop laws, essentially a continuation of the crusade he had picked up from his meetings with [the union leader] Samuel Gompers. Although he could not get [those] passed, he was able to sign a number of individual bills regulating tenement house manufacturing. Other bills he signed regulated the labor of women and children, as well as that of teachers and municipal employees. Finally, and perhaps most significantly, he passed and strictly enforced an eight-hour law.”

Under President Theodore Roosevelt in 1903, a Department of Commerce and Labor was formed. In 1913, under President William Howard Taft, the separate Department of Labor was formed, and the original “Commerce and Labor” entity continued as the singular Department of Commerce. The Department of Labor, to which Roosevelt could rightly claim parentage, says this about itself:
“The Department of Labor (DOL) administers federal labor laws to guarantee workers’ rights to fair, safe, and healthy working conditions, including minimum hourly wage and overtime pay, protection against employment discrimination, and unemployment insurance.”

President Theodore Roosevelt has a highly positive legacy in relation to labor. But what about Trump? What does the record show so far of his attitude to labor?

President Donald Trump is featured on a banner at the headquarters of the U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, D.C., on Friday, Aug. 29, 2025. A corresponding banner out of the frame to the right shows President Theodore Roosevelt. A Department of Commerce and Labor was established under Roosevelt in 1903. The Department of Labor was established as a separate Cabinet-level entity in 1913. Photo by Gilbert Dunkley

In a word: enmity.

It is rich that his face is plastered on a banner at the Labor Department building honoring the American worker. Trump has a bad history with labor, starting in his business life, where he was sued by individuals and by small contractors who alleged that he stiffed them by refusing to pay for work they had completed. In his first term as president, he attacked the labor unions representing federal employees and also treated those employees — essentially his own workers — as enemies of the American people. The courts helped to restrain him that time around.

In his second term, he came loaded for bear. He returned to Washington accompanied by Elon Musk as his hatchet man. Musk set about sacking tens of thousands of federal workers. There is a civilized way to reduce headcount, and the abrupt and cruel way it has been done in a matter of months this year by the Trump administration is not it. The result has been lives upended and multiple government agencies thrown into chaos, their work undercut and their remaining employees feeling terrorized.

And Trump’s tariffs are coming for the American private-sector worker. Watch what tariff-induced inflation will do to consumer demand, the profitability of companies, the cost of living, and, ultimately, the level of unemployment.

Trump is no friend of American workers. He is a fool flailing about pretending to be doing work when in fact he is causing destructive chaos. That his face appears on a banner honoring this country’s workers for the nation’s 250th anniversary is an insult to American labor.

Look for Trump’s image to continue to occupy top billing as the celebration of the nation’s 250th anniversary advances. For him, the event is not about the country’s endurance as an experiment in democracy. It is simply about the glory of Donald Trump.

Hating Trump in D.C. over the years #1

Photos by Gilbert Dunkley

Part of a protest encampment outside Union Station in Washington, D.C., seen on Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2025.
A protester in front of Union Station in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, Aug. 21, 2025, demands the elimination of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The D.C. region’s Metrorail and the intercity rail service Amtrak are among the bus and rail services using Union Station. President Trump has sent National Guard troops to Union Station as part of what he has called a crackdown on crime in the nation’s capital. On Aug. 27, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced that the federal government was taking control of the management of Union Station from the nonprofit Union Station Redevelopment Corp.
A protest encampment outside Union Station, a major transportation hub in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, Aug. 21, 2025.
A denunciation of President Donald Trump’s federal intervention in the local governance of Washington, D.C., hangs from a balcony at an apartment building in downtown Washington, D.C, on Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2025.
The north side of the White House in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2025. Visible in the picture are the two towering flagpoles that President Donald Trump had erected on the White House grounds on June 18, 2025, one on the North Lawn (foreground), the other on the South Lawn, on the Ellipse side of the mansion.
A sign at a permanent protest post maintained in the pedestrian plaza on the north side of the White House in Washington, D.C., as seen on Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2025.
A view of a permanent protest post outside the White House on Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2025.
In Lafayette Square, just north of the White House, on Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2025.
Outside the White House on Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2025.
Outside the White House on Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2025.
In Lafayette Square, just north of the White House, on Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2025.
Seen outside the White House on Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2025.
An anti-Trump sticker on a street sign in the Dupont Circle neighborhood of Washington, D.C., on Friday, Aug. 22, 2025.
Large street display near Dupont Circle in Northwest Washington in 2025 before Donald Trump and Elon Musk fell out.
An anti-Trump sticker seen in Northwest Washington on March 9, 2018.

Shameful U.S. silence on the genocide in Gaza

A nation that was born as a rebuke to genocide is now guilty of committing genocide to preserve its own existence.

That is a broad-strokes painting of where Israel finds itself today. But between today and the end of World War II — during which Nazi Germany tried to extirpate Europe’s Jews — lies a tormented and bloodstained narrative of colonial highhandedness, ineptitude and bankrupt assumptions; betrayals; usurpations; religious and secular warfare; deep hatreds; land grabs; displacements; massacres; terroristic murder; apartheid; and so much else, all for control of what the American author Aaron David Miller has called “the much too promised land.”

This is how the United Nations defines genocide: acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.

And the U.N. lists acts that constitute genocide:

  • Killing members of the group;
  • Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
  • Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
  • Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
  • Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

With the exception of the final item in the list, I think all of the conditions for genocide exist in the Gaza Strip. But what is the proximate context and background to what is happening in Gaza?

On Oct. 7, 2023, the terrorist group Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, led a shock assault out of Gaza into southern Israel, attacking multiple small civilian communities, Israeli military posts and a music festival underway in the desert near the Israel-Gaza frontier. The assault force included fighters representing multiple groups that are pretty much universally committed to the eradication of the state of Israel: Hamas’s al-Qassam Brigades; Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s al-Quds Brigades; the Popular Resistance Committees’ al-Nasser Salah al-Deen Brigades; and, of course, al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades among a handful of other militant anti-Israel groups.

The assault was a horror. About 1,200 people, mostly Israelis, were slaughtered in civilian settings and at military posts. The terrorists butchered people in unspeakable ways, and about 250 people, also mostly Israelis, were kidnapped and hauled across the frontier into Gaza to be held hostage for bargaining purposes. Israel responded with a furious assault on Gaza to destroy Hamas and its allied forces and to free the hostages.

Today, about 50 of the hostages are thought still to be in Gaza, but it is now feared that most of those are corpses. To minimize its own troop losses, Israel has taken the sledgehammer approach to killing militants. And so Gaza lies in absolute ruin because of the pounding that it has taken from Israeli artillery fire and airstrikes, Israel’s preferred method of attack.

More important, an estimated over 60,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed in the bombardments. How many of those are non-combatants is unclear, because the Hamas authorities in Gaza obviously will not issue numbers distinguishing between fighters and civilians. But there is no doubt that the vast majority of the victims of the war have been Palestinian civilians, people trapped in Gaza with no way to escape the fighting between Israel and the Hamas coalition.

Remind yourself that the Gaza Strip is, indeed, a strip of land, just 25 miles deep and about seven miles at its widest point, bounded to the south by Egypt’s North Sinai Governorate, to the west by the Mediterranean Sea, and to the east and north by Israeli territory. Israel holds the sea and the surrounding land except for that south of Gaza, which is Egypt’s.

Gaza is, in effect, a prison holding about 2 million suffering people. Most of them have been displaced multiple times, chased from their homes by fighting or directly ordered by Israeli forces to leave parts of Gaza to make way for military operations.

As Israel has pressed its campaign, its military has repeatedly targeted journalists working in Gaza, killing scores so far, no doubt to cut off the outward flow of information about the atrocious spectacle unfolding in Gaza. And with the repeated killings of aid workers, medical rescue personnel and civilians just trying to get food at aid distribution points, no one should doubt that the Israeli military is acting with naked malice toward Palestinians in Gaza.

Palestinian civilians have repeatedly been herded in every direction within that tiny territory. Their homes have been leveled. All the normal structures of civic life have been shattered. Their hospitals have been repeatedly attacked and are mostly out of use — and not just because Israel has wanted to destroy them: Hamas does embed itself in civilian facilities, as the Israeli forces say, because Hamas cares nothing about how many Palestinian civilians it causes to be slaughtered as it pursues its own interests. If it cared at all, the conflict would not have come to this.

And what it has come to is famine.

A single dry sentence just issued in a United Nations report should shock us all: “As of 15 August 2025, Famine (IPC Phase 5)—with reasonable evidence—is confirmed in Gaza Governorate.”

Those words are the essence of a “snapshot report” on the hunger situation in the Gaza Strip, whose lifelines have been exclusively in Israeli hands for many months now. The next two sentences of the snapshot are no less grim: “After 22 months of relentless conflict, over half a million people in the Gaza Strip are facing catastrophic conditions characterised by starvation, destitution and death. Another 1.07 million people (54 percent) are in Emergency (IPC Phase 4), and 396,000 people (20 percent) are in Crisis (IPC Phase 3).”

The Israeli government declares that there is no starvation in Gaza.

But that is a lie.

Israel has repeatedly cut off or sharply restricted the entry of food and medicines into Gaza in order to force Hamas to give up the remaining hostages, employing the illegal tactic of collective punishment. But we also know that Israel has another design on Gaza. It wants to possess all of that land, but without Palestinians on it. And the Israeli government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is busily scheming with the barbarian Donald Trump to cleanse the Gaza Strip of its people and turn the place into a gleaming Mediterranean resort for the world’s unscrupulous rich. They are planning ethnic cleansing, lest anyone be confused about what is in the works.

And it is because Donald Trump, the chief executive of the United States, is a part of this dirty plan that the U.S. government is silent on the genocide that is unfolding in Gaza. How did the great United States of America sink to such infamy? When your nation is led by a thug, thuggish things will be done in your nation’s name.

But what about Congress, our independent legislature and a check on the executive branch of government led by Trump as president? Ah, poor Congress. So cowardly, so feckless. It is in the hands of Republicans, and almost to a person, they are moral midgets. They remain silent in the face of multiple outrages being committed by the Trump administration.

Why will members of the Republican majority that controls Congress not rouse themselves to say something about the enormous crime being committed in Gaza? They have an obligation to do so, because we, the United States, are the ultimate guarantors of Israel’s security. As such, the Israeli government’s crimes are our crimes. Israel’s infamy is our infamy.

The genocide that Israel is committing in Gaza is being armed and underwritten by us. This is intolerable.

Clarification: The assertion that fighters from Gaza who attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, committed rapes is a highly disputed issue, and an assertion that rapes were committed that day has been removed from this post. It is to be noted, however, that on Aug. 14, 2025, the U.N. secretary general’s special representative on sexual violence in conflict issued a news release that includes the following passage:
With respect to the situation in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Hamas is listed in the annex of the report on the basis of information verified by the United Nations in 2024, indicating reasonable grounds to believe that some hostages taken to Gaza were subjected to different forms of sexual violence during their time in captivity, and clear and convincing information that sexual violence also occurred during the attacks of 7 October 2023 in at least six locations.

The actual report can be seen here.