Elon Musk runs Tesla in the same manner Donald Trump wants to run the United States: as an autocrat. With Musk now acting as Trump's consigliere, we're headed for destructive chaos.
Okay, glad you are writing. But I believe you missed several important points that give considerable cover to some of Trump's moves.
The Biden admin spent like a drunken sailor in the last few months of the term, leading to Yellen declaring that the US was forced to use "extraordinary measures" to forestall default as of (who could have dreamed?) January 21st, Trump's first full day in office. Trump may be constitutionally required to spend appropriated monies as designated by Congress, but Congress must not only appropriate funds but also authorize the Treasury to borrow. Trump requested that Congress suspend or lift the debt limit before he took office, and Congress declined.
I am sure you will agree that there is not only precedent but a duty for the Executive to prioritize spending in such a situation.
The USAID status, as far as I can tell, is that it exists, Rubio is the acting head, and he is delegating some of the supervision to an underling. But frankly, it appears as if the functionaries of USAID have been insisting on a degree of independence which is difficult to support after the SC mandated the change in the leadership structure of the CFPB statute.
Further, as to abuse of executive power, I suggest everyone contemplate the Biden admin's conversion of the EV tax credit (non-refundable) to a refundable EV tax credit, via the simple expedient of stating that they would not pursue refunds of any recipients who met the income requirements but not the federal tax liability requirements.
This, of course, followed the Obama admin's precedent of simply declining to enforce the tax penalty involved in Obamacare for failure to purchase insurance.
So we are hardly in uncharted territory. I also don't like either of these people, but I cannot see that the constitutional order is being uniquely violated by most of this.
These are all excellent points. And, actually, I have been intending to write a piece on how the Democrats - particularly Obama and Biden - opened the door to the worst Trump abuses, and have helped normalize them.
I believe Biden was the very worst president ever, except perhaps for Trump.
I'm not sure I agree with you on your last paragraph. I think we are in deeper water than ever. I earnestly hope I'm wrong.
Time will tell, but what I was trying to suggest is that we HAVE been in deep water.
Constitutionally.
I am hoping that overturning the Chevron precedent will curb Executive excess, but of course Congress must also step back in. My hope and theory is that Trump's slash and burn campaign, aided by the Idiot In Chief, will cause that to happen.
However it simply cannot be constitutionally upheld that a president of whom we do not approve has diminished powers under the Constitution. And that is the claim of many.
And yeah, the Biden admin set this up. I guess they thought they were setting the R's up for failure, but instead they handed Trump a remarkably strong hand. Generally, if you are going to stack the deck, you don't do it to benefit your opponent!
As for the FBI, well if they are investigating the rank and file and only pursue censure for an officer who violated investigative norms, that's okay. But they better not be simply pursuing everyone who followed orders in a legal fashion. A lot of this depends on the application.
My gut is that this is all so well orchestrated that the admin is using shock and awe statements which do not accurately describe exactly what is going on in order to get opponents to take a few crippling defeats in court.
I have to say that the abuse of power in the FBI, which began in the Obama admin, is clearly documented and most alarming. Unfortunately that's been a recurring problem in US history. But it didn't start in 2025, and I refuse to clutch my pearls when efforts to clean out the detritus at the top are so clearly required.
I don't like Trump. But I dealt with my personal distaste back in 2016. I am capable of recognizing his better qualities as well as his worse qualities.
Thank you for the (characteristically) thoughtful response. You always give me much to think about, and you are astonishingly well informed.
Yes, the water has been getting deeper for quite some time. Among many other causes, we have arrived where we are thanks to a primary system that rewards politicians for performative art rather than reaching across the aisle to accomplish something.
I agree that the Executive should be able to assure that the people directing the Executive agencies are aligned with his goals and philosophy. I hope I didn’t suggest otherwise. However, the Executive still must “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” and those laws come from Congress.
I have agreement with what Trump says are his policies on some issues (principally DEI, energy, immigration). My problems with his approach are twofold: first, his administration is taking some extreme positions (for instance, we are going to have a terrible labor shortage if he deports everyone he says he will), and second, he is at bottom not interested in policy. His decisions often result from, as Kevin Williamson writes, whomever has most recently blown smoke up his butt.
FWIW, my take on the “shock and awe” executive orders and DOGE actions is that they are poorly crafted. Better lawyering would have helped give some of them a better chance in court. Trump’s cadre of lawyers is largely second rate.
I'm supportive of everyone staying in their constitutionally permitted lanes (along with whatever authority Congress has granted along the way). That said, the pearl clutching by so many in the last couple of weeks ignores the historical context of 1) delegation of the reorganization 1/6 of the economy (healthcare) by Bill Clinton to his unelected and unconfirmed wife, 2) Mr. "I have a pen and a phone" Obama who issued a blizzard of executive orders, many of dubious constitutionality, when confronted with a Congress that wouldn't cave to his wishes, and 3) the abject ex-legal efforts by Biden to forgive student loans (3 times!) despite the obvious lack of authority to do so and 3 slap downs from the judiciary branch. The norms on the limits of executive authority have been progressively degraded over a long period of time, and the cries of the "we're here to save Democracy" crowd who stood mute while their team abused the Constitution over several decades ring very hollow.
They do indeed. One could literally write a book enumerating the red lines that have been passed by previous administrations, and still end up having glossed over many highly troubling issues.
I was watching the PBS election night coverage (full). It was pretty good - by far the best I'd seen. I'm down to the last hour or so - soon they will have to concede to reality, but they are already discussing the loss of the working-class Dem affiliation.
I was, however, struck by the screaming hypocrisy involved in the discussions over Trump's rhetoric. The CW that Trump was extreme, whereas no one mentioned the sitting president's "lock him up", or his opponent's claims that Trump was a Nazi, and this could be the last Democratic election, etc. Perverting the courts to pursue your opponents - eh, the Dems get a pass. All of their framing has been accepted as accurate, but in fact, beginning in Obama's administration, there was a very real attempt to subvert elections and pervert the election process. The claim that Trump would "go after his enemies" - really, dudes and dudettes?
There is a tremendous institutionalized cultural hypocrisy within the elites. One can even go back to the Bush/Clinton era when the RNC/DNC agreement not to let third-party candidates in on the debates was reached.
So Trump is rough justice. And Trump is a rough character indeed. But his reelection does represent a genuine attempt by the people to restore a representative republic rather than a descent to fascism. It will not be graceful, whatever else it may be. But it may be very good for the country as a whole.
The attempt to hang some of the dirty laundry out for the average citizen to view will be painful, but is necessary, because nothing but public shame and ignominy will generate enough pressure to make Congressional reps step up and resume trying to craft a real budget and fully assume their constitutional responsibilities.
This is spot on, every bit of it. And the laundry hanging is very much needed since the press refuses to cover so much of it, and instead defaults to "conspiracy theory" characterizations of so much that is later proven to be dead-on accurate. Perhaps Congress will be embarrassed enough by all of it to get off their asses, but I'm not holding my breath.
Please tell us more about the history of the Presidential pardon. If there is precedent for past, future and current crimes not even specified or yet committed, I'd like to know. Only a corrupt court would allow these things. Has it happened before Biden?
Biden is the first president to issue preemptive pardons.
I regard Biden as one of the worst presidents, and worst human beings, ever. His actions during his term have the effect of normalizing many of the abuses Trump is now committing.
I also believe we need to amend the Constitution to eliminate or, at least, circumscribe the pardon power.
We may well have to make the attempt, but the problem is that the legal excesses of the last administration will make Congress very nervous of doing so.
The one thing we have going for us that we didn't in the Biden administration is that the press will be critical, and we will get some public discussion of issues. There will be fear of governmental overreach rather than public adulation of it.
Trump has his virtues as well as his vices. He certainly makes little attempt to hide his vices. His virtues are a dynamic Bismarckian pragmatism and his undoubted ability to see trouble coming a mile away and his habit of trying to forestall it.
Trump is genuinely trying to forestall the fiscal collapse that we are facing. It will require getting our current account balance in a much better state.
I’m just waiting for Musk to send Congress home. To my eyes, they’ve been pretty ineffective for a long time and the last two weeks behavior hasn’t changed my mind.
I think it’s also worth pointing out that the assertion that republicans are making cowardly decisions because they don’t align with your perspective speaks to a hemmed in understanding which reads like the framing of legacy media. Maybe it would help me to understand what you think is so cowardly about republicans supporting Gabbard, Kennedy, and Patel.
From my perspective, democrats waged an embarrassing campaign of rhetorical devices known as logical fallacies in more civilized times: straw man, false dichotomies, bait and switch. It was bad faith discussion rather than a genuine raising of valid issues. Do I wish the republicans wouldn’t have lobbed softballs or just said “I love you?” Yes very badly. But it’s expected counter play.
Trump is going wild, no one (I’m pretty sure) is arguing against that. But I don’t think you’ve put in the effort to understand why people went for him. Maybe you have. I don’t want to mischaracterize you, but that’s what I’m seeing here. A consistent theme emerging from left of center is the assumption that it was because over half of America is morally or intellectually inferior to the Democratic Party. It’s that very assumption that played a large part in Trump’s ascension.
È vero, più della prima volta è colpa dell'elettorato "not very sophisticated", to put it ultra-mildly. Nevertheless, to the global audience, including adversaries such as putin, it was glaringly apparent the first time. The United States shall be on the verge of becoming significantly diminished, both politically and economically. The overwhelming tide of ignorance has now utterly prevailed. I have never has such a low financial exposure to America before. This primarily stems from the historic bubble within your stock markets, the inflated valuation of the dollar, and the prevailing economic and political landscape.
I am a Brit - something that is not well-liked in the USA at the moment, possibly with good cause.
Mr Musk, if he had stood for elected office or been appointed with suitable cross examination by elected officers, would have more credibility.
As it is, the President seems to be the only one who can moderate what is going on with Mr Musk.
In principle the idea of stripping back layers of administration to let daylight reveal what has been going on is good - the UK and EU27 don't have that.
However, public servants - people employed by the government to do a job - are entitled to protection by law as anyone else. I understand the risk is the speed of change may lead to some traumatic and expensive mistakes.
Surely if the President can deliver two or three huge projects - the southern border, not funding endless war for example - and complete them robustly, then isn't this enough for the citizens of the USA?
My profound apologies if I have upset anyone with this.
Had Trump focused on a few issues on which he had broad support, things would be far less chaotic and, indeed, less controversial.
The southern border was undoubtedly one of them, and it is largely within his power to enforce the border (though some immigration legislation reflecting sensible compromises would, IMO, also be welcome).
As for "funding endless war," I have a feeling you're not referring to FDR getting around an isolationist Congress by instituting Lend Lease to keep Great Britain afloat in 1941.
Indeed, the endless war refers to events after 1945. Even now in the town I live in we have Ukraine people with evident wealth, running around in Ukraine registered cars with RHD. Of course. Like keeping a Rawanda revolution asset in secret - revealed once his son killed 3 children....
Our countries have lost so much money chasing evil 'dreams'.
I think you raise a lot of solid points, but I think the fear of RFK is the product of extremely effective propaganda and powerful interests. RFK is a big reason Trump got the support he did.
In general, I appreciate the cautionary tale about extending executive power you don’t want to see your opponents have access to, but I’m a little weary and wary of the alarm sounding around Trump. It’s mostly partially told stories and it comes off poorly after four years of pretending Biden or the oligarchy behind him was on the path of righteousness. The Twitter files reveal a much larger threat to our democracy (or democratic republic) than the bulls in the China shop right now (if we can in good faith claim to still be holding onto democracy).
I’m not advocating for ignoring Trump’s overreaches. That’s vastly important But if media outlets and authors keep preaching the political end times they’re going to burn out audiences and if the wolf comes genuinely in sight, its name will have been cried too many times. Maybe that’s where we’re already at in your eyes, but to me it looks like a nation or maybe rather an entire West of hijacked nervous systems.
I must commend you for, among other things, using the perfect photograph of Musk. It captures his insanity to a Tee. At best, Musk looks like a little, little boy with a very bad case of Attention Deficit Disorder. At worst, he looks like a psychotic in Bellevue who has just been apprehended for trying to kill millions of poor people.
I had a certain epiphany about Musk and Trump, and I wrote a comic poem about those A holes. Take a look:
I strongly suspect Musk, with his PHD in government Grift, an army of quants, a flashlight, and the world's biggest megaphone (X), will shine the light of truth on the fact that USAID is indeed a democratically controlled opaque money laundering criminal enterprise. In time, that flashlight will also be aimed at the DOD, Medicare, and intelligence agencies. The corruption in our federal Government runs deep, and Musk is just the opening salvo. Gabbard, Patel, RFK, Hegseth, and Lutnick are all highly principled America first patriots. They are precisely the type of people this country needs. As someone who has worked in the private sector his whole life and has seen firsthand the lunacy of Government on a Kafkaesque level, I for one hope they take a wrecking ball to all of it. In time, I expect that group of patriots will expose mass corruption, trim waste, eliminate bureaucracy, and balance the budget. As for whether it's done in an I's dotted T's crossed legal manner, I really don't care. Provided they continue to do things in a transparent manner as they have so far, I'm happy to let the robes decide.
So you think it is unconstitutional to look for and act on corrupt spending. Keep peddling that crap and see how it goes. No matter how sleazy and corrupt one might think democrats are, it is simply not enough.
Good point on keeping it civil. The President gets a great deal of leeway in how to execute the law. The President gets to appoint representatives and delegate authority. Not just democrat Presidents. B8den, for instance, got away with ignoring the law and courts on student loans.
Trump is the cure for a very bad disease. The corruption being uncovered explicitly shows that demoxrat party has turned the government into a giant Tammany Hall Trump is the only one willing to expose it and deal with it.
I am not as pessimistic as you. I think the courts will push back hard. And I think, once Trump begins to become deeply unpopular, some Republican legislators will be able to summon a modicum of courage. Or, at least, I hope so.
I am really hoping the last part comes sooner than later. I think with the velocity of the missteps either by tactics or by mistake the people and congress will begin to turn.
And it seems like Trump and Elon don't care. Elon has an hearing via telephone to a court tomorrow. I wonder if he'll turn up. It is very difficult to keep up with it.
Okay, glad you are writing. But I believe you missed several important points that give considerable cover to some of Trump's moves.
The Biden admin spent like a drunken sailor in the last few months of the term, leading to Yellen declaring that the US was forced to use "extraordinary measures" to forestall default as of (who could have dreamed?) January 21st, Trump's first full day in office. Trump may be constitutionally required to spend appropriated monies as designated by Congress, but Congress must not only appropriate funds but also authorize the Treasury to borrow. Trump requested that Congress suspend or lift the debt limit before he took office, and Congress declined.
I am sure you will agree that there is not only precedent but a duty for the Executive to prioritize spending in such a situation.
The USAID status, as far as I can tell, is that it exists, Rubio is the acting head, and he is delegating some of the supervision to an underling. But frankly, it appears as if the functionaries of USAID have been insisting on a degree of independence which is difficult to support after the SC mandated the change in the leadership structure of the CFPB statute.
Seila Law LLC v CFPB
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/591/19-7/
Further, as to abuse of executive power, I suggest everyone contemplate the Biden admin's conversion of the EV tax credit (non-refundable) to a refundable EV tax credit, via the simple expedient of stating that they would not pursue refunds of any recipients who met the income requirements but not the federal tax liability requirements.
This, of course, followed the Obama admin's precedent of simply declining to enforce the tax penalty involved in Obamacare for failure to purchase insurance.
So we are hardly in uncharted territory. I also don't like either of these people, but I cannot see that the constitutional order is being uniquely violated by most of this.
These are all excellent points. And, actually, I have been intending to write a piece on how the Democrats - particularly Obama and Biden - opened the door to the worst Trump abuses, and have helped normalize them.
I believe Biden was the very worst president ever, except perhaps for Trump.
I'm not sure I agree with you on your last paragraph. I think we are in deeper water than ever. I earnestly hope I'm wrong.
Time will tell, but what I was trying to suggest is that we HAVE been in deep water.
Constitutionally.
I am hoping that overturning the Chevron precedent will curb Executive excess, but of course Congress must also step back in. My hope and theory is that Trump's slash and burn campaign, aided by the Idiot In Chief, will cause that to happen.
However it simply cannot be constitutionally upheld that a president of whom we do not approve has diminished powers under the Constitution. And that is the claim of many.
And yeah, the Biden admin set this up. I guess they thought they were setting the R's up for failure, but instead they handed Trump a remarkably strong hand. Generally, if you are going to stack the deck, you don't do it to benefit your opponent!
As for the FBI, well if they are investigating the rank and file and only pursue censure for an officer who violated investigative norms, that's okay. But they better not be simply pursuing everyone who followed orders in a legal fashion. A lot of this depends on the application.
My gut is that this is all so well orchestrated that the admin is using shock and awe statements which do not accurately describe exactly what is going on in order to get opponents to take a few crippling defeats in court.
I have to say that the abuse of power in the FBI, which began in the Obama admin, is clearly documented and most alarming. Unfortunately that's been a recurring problem in US history. But it didn't start in 2025, and I refuse to clutch my pearls when efforts to clean out the detritus at the top are so clearly required.
I don't like Trump. But I dealt with my personal distaste back in 2016. I am capable of recognizing his better qualities as well as his worse qualities.
Thank you for the (characteristically) thoughtful response. You always give me much to think about, and you are astonishingly well informed.
Yes, the water has been getting deeper for quite some time. Among many other causes, we have arrived where we are thanks to a primary system that rewards politicians for performative art rather than reaching across the aisle to accomplish something.
I agree that the Executive should be able to assure that the people directing the Executive agencies are aligned with his goals and philosophy. I hope I didn’t suggest otherwise. However, the Executive still must “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” and those laws come from Congress.
I have agreement with what Trump says are his policies on some issues (principally DEI, energy, immigration). My problems with his approach are twofold: first, his administration is taking some extreme positions (for instance, we are going to have a terrible labor shortage if he deports everyone he says he will), and second, he is at bottom not interested in policy. His decisions often result from, as Kevin Williamson writes, whomever has most recently blown smoke up his butt.
FWIW, my take on the “shock and awe” executive orders and DOGE actions is that they are poorly crafted. Better lawyering would have helped give some of them a better chance in court. Trump’s cadre of lawyers is largely second rate.
I'm supportive of everyone staying in their constitutionally permitted lanes (along with whatever authority Congress has granted along the way). That said, the pearl clutching by so many in the last couple of weeks ignores the historical context of 1) delegation of the reorganization 1/6 of the economy (healthcare) by Bill Clinton to his unelected and unconfirmed wife, 2) Mr. "I have a pen and a phone" Obama who issued a blizzard of executive orders, many of dubious constitutionality, when confronted with a Congress that wouldn't cave to his wishes, and 3) the abject ex-legal efforts by Biden to forgive student loans (3 times!) despite the obvious lack of authority to do so and 3 slap downs from the judiciary branch. The norms on the limits of executive authority have been progressively degraded over a long period of time, and the cries of the "we're here to save Democracy" crowd who stood mute while their team abused the Constitution over several decades ring very hollow.
They do indeed. One could literally write a book enumerating the red lines that have been passed by previous administrations, and still end up having glossed over many highly troubling issues.
I was watching the PBS election night coverage (full). It was pretty good - by far the best I'd seen. I'm down to the last hour or so - soon they will have to concede to reality, but they are already discussing the loss of the working-class Dem affiliation.
I was, however, struck by the screaming hypocrisy involved in the discussions over Trump's rhetoric. The CW that Trump was extreme, whereas no one mentioned the sitting president's "lock him up", or his opponent's claims that Trump was a Nazi, and this could be the last Democratic election, etc. Perverting the courts to pursue your opponents - eh, the Dems get a pass. All of their framing has been accepted as accurate, but in fact, beginning in Obama's administration, there was a very real attempt to subvert elections and pervert the election process. The claim that Trump would "go after his enemies" - really, dudes and dudettes?
There is a tremendous institutionalized cultural hypocrisy within the elites. One can even go back to the Bush/Clinton era when the RNC/DNC agreement not to let third-party candidates in on the debates was reached.
So Trump is rough justice. And Trump is a rough character indeed. But his reelection does represent a genuine attempt by the people to restore a representative republic rather than a descent to fascism. It will not be graceful, whatever else it may be. But it may be very good for the country as a whole.
The attempt to hang some of the dirty laundry out for the average citizen to view will be painful, but is necessary, because nothing but public shame and ignominy will generate enough pressure to make Congressional reps step up and resume trying to craft a real budget and fully assume their constitutional responsibilities.
Congress is a real problem.
This is spot on, every bit of it. And the laundry hanging is very much needed since the press refuses to cover so much of it, and instead defaults to "conspiracy theory" characterizations of so much that is later proven to be dead-on accurate. Perhaps Congress will be embarrassed enough by all of it to get off their asses, but I'm not holding my breath.
Please tell us more about the history of the Presidential pardon. If there is precedent for past, future and current crimes not even specified or yet committed, I'd like to know. Only a corrupt court would allow these things. Has it happened before Biden?
Biden is the first president to issue preemptive pardons.
I regard Biden as one of the worst presidents, and worst human beings, ever. His actions during his term have the effect of normalizing many of the abuses Trump is now committing.
I also believe we need to amend the Constitution to eliminate or, at least, circumscribe the pardon power.
We may well have to make the attempt, but the problem is that the legal excesses of the last administration will make Congress very nervous of doing so.
The one thing we have going for us that we didn't in the Biden administration is that the press will be critical, and we will get some public discussion of issues. There will be fear of governmental overreach rather than public adulation of it.
Trump has his virtues as well as his vices. He certainly makes little attempt to hide his vices. His virtues are a dynamic Bismarckian pragmatism and his undoubted ability to see trouble coming a mile away and his habit of trying to forestall it.
Trump is genuinely trying to forestall the fiscal collapse that we are facing. It will require getting our current account balance in a much better state.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IEABC
Trump is interested in the policy of staying alive. The earlier we correct the better, and the tariffs are about doing that.
I’m just waiting for Musk to send Congress home. To my eyes, they’ve been pretty ineffective for a long time and the last two weeks behavior hasn’t changed my mind.
I am rooting for Congress to do its damned job. As it did with the TikTok legislation.
And I am hoping for just one more Republican Senator to demonstrate some courage.
I think it’s also worth pointing out that the assertion that republicans are making cowardly decisions because they don’t align with your perspective speaks to a hemmed in understanding which reads like the framing of legacy media. Maybe it would help me to understand what you think is so cowardly about republicans supporting Gabbard, Kennedy, and Patel.
From my perspective, democrats waged an embarrassing campaign of rhetorical devices known as logical fallacies in more civilized times: straw man, false dichotomies, bait and switch. It was bad faith discussion rather than a genuine raising of valid issues. Do I wish the republicans wouldn’t have lobbed softballs or just said “I love you?” Yes very badly. But it’s expected counter play.
Trump is going wild, no one (I’m pretty sure) is arguing against that. But I don’t think you’ve put in the effort to understand why people went for him. Maybe you have. I don’t want to mischaracterize you, but that’s what I’m seeing here. A consistent theme emerging from left of center is the assumption that it was because over half of America is morally or intellectually inferior to the Democratic Party. It’s that very assumption that played a large part in Trump’s ascension.
You elect a clown, you get a circus. You elect a buffoon/traitor/criminal, you get...?
Yes, this one is on the American voters. They knew, or should have known, that Trump was a treasonous, narcissistic clown.
As for Musk, we didn't elect him, but he fits perfectly with the package, doesn't he?
È vero, più della prima volta è colpa dell'elettorato "not very sophisticated", to put it ultra-mildly. Nevertheless, to the global audience, including adversaries such as putin, it was glaringly apparent the first time. The United States shall be on the verge of becoming significantly diminished, both politically and economically. The overwhelming tide of ignorance has now utterly prevailed. I have never has such a low financial exposure to America before. This primarily stems from the historic bubble within your stock markets, the inflated valuation of the dollar, and the prevailing economic and political landscape.
I agree with you on every point.
Last night showed dramatically, where Trump's allegiances are. And it is not the US.
Anybody still saying anything good about this administration reminds me of Germans after the war on Hitler: "But he built the autobahn".
I wish I could disagree with you. But I cannot. I have never felt so ashamed to be an American.
A feeling not entirely alien to us Germans.
I am a Brit - something that is not well-liked in the USA at the moment, possibly with good cause.
Mr Musk, if he had stood for elected office or been appointed with suitable cross examination by elected officers, would have more credibility.
As it is, the President seems to be the only one who can moderate what is going on with Mr Musk.
In principle the idea of stripping back layers of administration to let daylight reveal what has been going on is good - the UK and EU27 don't have that.
However, public servants - people employed by the government to do a job - are entitled to protection by law as anyone else. I understand the risk is the speed of change may lead to some traumatic and expensive mistakes.
Surely if the President can deliver two or three huge projects - the southern border, not funding endless war for example - and complete them robustly, then isn't this enough for the citizens of the USA?
My profound apologies if I have upset anyone with this.
Had Trump focused on a few issues on which he had broad support, things would be far less chaotic and, indeed, less controversial.
The southern border was undoubtedly one of them, and it is largely within his power to enforce the border (though some immigration legislation reflecting sensible compromises would, IMO, also be welcome).
As for "funding endless war," I have a feeling you're not referring to FDR getting around an isolationist Congress by instituting Lend Lease to keep Great Britain afloat in 1941.
Indeed, the endless war refers to events after 1945. Even now in the town I live in we have Ukraine people with evident wealth, running around in Ukraine registered cars with RHD. Of course. Like keeping a Rawanda revolution asset in secret - revealed once his son killed 3 children....
Our countries have lost so much money chasing evil 'dreams'.
There are rotten Ukrainians just as there are rotten Americans.
There were some rotten Brits, Frenchies, Dutch, etc. when the US jumped in to save the UK from Hitler.
I'm glad we stopped Hitler, and I hope we keep trying to stop Putin.
Yes. That would be enough. As exciting as it is to think of the government losing so much of its bloat, this seems like a very dangerous precedent.
It seems all the activities are on the verge of becoming unfocussed, at which point very little will be done properly.
I think you’re right. And that may be part of the point. Blitzkrieg comes to mind.
I think you raise a lot of solid points, but I think the fear of RFK is the product of extremely effective propaganda and powerful interests. RFK is a big reason Trump got the support he did.
In general, I appreciate the cautionary tale about extending executive power you don’t want to see your opponents have access to, but I’m a little weary and wary of the alarm sounding around Trump. It’s mostly partially told stories and it comes off poorly after four years of pretending Biden or the oligarchy behind him was on the path of righteousness. The Twitter files reveal a much larger threat to our democracy (or democratic republic) than the bulls in the China shop right now (if we can in good faith claim to still be holding onto democracy).
I’m not advocating for ignoring Trump’s overreaches. That’s vastly important But if media outlets and authors keep preaching the political end times they’re going to burn out audiences and if the wolf comes genuinely in sight, its name will have been cried too many times. Maybe that’s where we’re already at in your eyes, but to me it looks like a nation or maybe rather an entire West of hijacked nervous systems.
🫣
🫵 YOU 🫵
⚠️THEY STOLE THE ELECTION⚠️
⚠️THEY ARE ILLEGITIMATE⚠️
⚠️WE OWE THEM SHIT⚠️
#WeThePeople
#ChallengeTheElection
#PowerByTheNumber
THEY CHEATED:
THEY’RE ILLEGITIMATE
DOWNLOAD—READ—SHARE THIS PDF:
👉🏻 https://surl.li/xduoux 👈
➡️REPOST PLS↩️
https://open.substack.com/pub/publicenlightenment/p/context-musk-isnt-doing-efficiency?utm_source=app-post-stats-page&r=2xd80&utm_medium=ios
I must commend you for, among other things, using the perfect photograph of Musk. It captures his insanity to a Tee. At best, Musk looks like a little, little boy with a very bad case of Attention Deficit Disorder. At worst, he looks like a psychotic in Bellevue who has just been apprehended for trying to kill millions of poor people.
I had a certain epiphany about Musk and Trump, and I wrote a comic poem about those A holes. Take a look:
https://davidgottfried.substack.com/p/donald-trump-the-latest-iteration-
I strongly suspect Musk, with his PHD in government Grift, an army of quants, a flashlight, and the world's biggest megaphone (X), will shine the light of truth on the fact that USAID is indeed a democratically controlled opaque money laundering criminal enterprise. In time, that flashlight will also be aimed at the DOD, Medicare, and intelligence agencies. The corruption in our federal Government runs deep, and Musk is just the opening salvo. Gabbard, Patel, RFK, Hegseth, and Lutnick are all highly principled America first patriots. They are precisely the type of people this country needs. As someone who has worked in the private sector his whole life and has seen firsthand the lunacy of Government on a Kafkaesque level, I for one hope they take a wrecking ball to all of it. In time, I expect that group of patriots will expose mass corruption, trim waste, eliminate bureaucracy, and balance the budget. As for whether it's done in an I's dotted T's crossed legal manner, I really don't care. Provided they continue to do things in a transparent manner as they have so far, I'm happy to let the robes decide.
So you think it is unconstitutional to look for and act on corrupt spending. Keep peddling that crap and see how it goes. No matter how sleazy and corrupt one might think democrats are, it is simply not enough.
Of course it's not unconstitutional. Did you read my article about DOGE?
That said, the Constitution instructs that it is Congress has the power to appropriate or not appropriate. Not the President. Not Elon Musk.
Try being more civil in your comments. And, maybe, learn a bit more about our system of government.
Good point on keeping it civil. The President gets a great deal of leeway in how to execute the law. The President gets to appoint representatives and delegate authority. Not just democrat Presidents. B8den, for instance, got away with ignoring the law and courts on student loans.
Prosecutorial discretion is one thing. But refusing to enforce a law is quite a different thing.
As for Biden, I agree (as MaxedOutMama notes) that he and Obama were gateway drugs to Trump, and intend to write about that.
Trump is the cure for a very bad disease. The corruption being uncovered explicitly shows that demoxrat party has turned the government into a giant Tammany Hall Trump is the only one willing to expose it and deal with it.
I am not as pessimistic as you. I think the courts will push back hard. And I think, once Trump begins to become deeply unpopular, some Republican legislators will be able to summon a modicum of courage. Or, at least, I hope so.
I am really hoping the last part comes sooner than later. I think with the velocity of the missteps either by tactics or by mistake the people and congress will begin to turn.
US politics work that way. Very few policy victories are truly durable.
Trump is ignoring the courts right as we speek. Why should he start to care? Who's going to stop him? The FBI he's currently purging?
Its a coup. And I believe Gaza/ the trade war is just a distraction.
I am unaware of any court order that Trump has disobeyed in his second term. Perhaps I missed something?
I'm sure he would like to ignore the courts, but it would be very politically costly for him to attempt it.
There was this: https://www.arise.tv/court-blocks-trumps-aid-freeze-as-it-sparks-chaos/
And because that was ignored there was a second ruling on that: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/judge-maintains-block-on-trump-administrations-funding-freeze/ar-AA1ylYvl
And it seems like Trump and Elon don't care. Elon has an hearing via telephone to a court tomorrow. I wonder if he'll turn up. It is very difficult to keep up with it.
I don't think the second ruling came because the first was ignored. It came because the court was not convinced that the first one would be effective.
That said, so much is up in the air right now.
https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/boilingfrogs/elon-musk-doge-donald-trump-coup-2/
Interesting take! Can you say more?