This article slogs through a bash of seemingly unrelated stories which ultimately point to how autocracy is being formed and what measures the federal government is going to support this strategy.
The sun rises early around here, really early. When I first woke from my previous dozy mind, I looked to see what had taken place in the world from the night before. What manner of work has been done to get the boys back on track? News sources were expelling their normal biases. The physical news sources are getting much lower on relevant socio-political content. Where does one go when the walls of research appear to be slowly closing in? It’s moments like these when starting the research process is troubling.
Looking for the common theme in the news, the term “whack job” was repeated multiple times. That’s the direction to follow; what’s the “whack job” in the news today? The weekend is typically a slow news cycle overall. Having only the colorful term in mind and a largely reduced reading time, it was not hard to uncover the gems littered throughout.
You’re Not Fired, For Now
“A federal judge in San Francisco temporarily blocked the White House from firing hundreds of thousands of government employees in a ruling late last night” (Axios, May 10).
A major stop to the out-of-control train of federal firings, all in the name of saving money in the government and streamlining productivity. Recall, DOGE does stand for “Department of GOVERNMENTAL EFFICIENCY” (emphasis added). This “GE” is the sticking point. What exactly qualifies as “efficiency?” This question is assumed and not articulated. Had such a working definition been prescribed, it may have been possible to stop, or at least overturn, a number of the unethical federal employee firings.
“The ruling pauses for two weeks firings that would block critical services for millions of Americans, including Social Security help, occupational safety and pre-school for poor children.
“It’s the latest and broadest setback for President Trump’s and DOGE’s chainsaw efforts to radically slash and burn the federal government” (Axios, May 10).
This is quite a hard break to the president’s winning streak. The president has become accustomed to getting his way. The past lines of demarcation between the two different branches of government, judicial and executive, are becoming thin in the hands of President Trump’s government. Will the president succeed in fighting against this new order? There’s been no sight or sound of a counterattack to this order. But the ruling has only come down. There’s time to begin unwinding this order.
“In her 42-page ruling, Judge Susan Illston, a Clinton appointee, explained that the president does have the right to change the executive branch, but must do so lawfully, and with the cooperation of Congress” (Axios, May 10).
“Federal courts should not micromanage the vast federal workforce, but courts must sometimes act to preserve the proper checks and balances between the three branches of government” (Judge Susan Illston, qtd. in Axios, May 10).
The balance between the three branches of government, a constitutionally mandated responsibility for the court. Why this is a radical action to uphold in any administration is a mystery.
Icing On The Cake
ICE Threatens to Arrest Democratic Lawmakers
“Democratic members of Congress who were part of a scuffle with law enforcement officers at an ICE facility in New Jersey may face arrests.”
“It would be a major escalation in the Trump administration’s arrests of politicians and other public servants, including the mayor of Newark and a judge in Milwaukee” (Axios qtd in The Political Wire, May 10).
If this were to take place, it would be a major feather in the cap of the president. Such a triumph would boost the president’s credibility with his MAGA base. Is this likely to come to fruition? The possibility is far and wide; a pipe dream with no end, a fantasy of the president opening the door for further radical deportations, the likes of which have never been seen on American soil.
Still At It
U.S. and China Prep for Second Day of Trade Talks
“Marathon conversations here between U.S. and China officials came to an end Saturday, with more talks scheduled for Sunday over the continuing trade war between the countries.“
“The talks, which were led on the American side by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, spanned at least eight hours and concluded without an announced deal” (Wall Street Journal qtd in The Political Wire, May 10).
Will a deal come from these meetings? If so, the president will have to eat crow on the highest 145% tariffs. Who would be the victor coming from these meetings? The obvious answer would be China. Put any result through the Trumpian marketing machine and MAGA base, the language will be that America is the winner, regardless of how poor the actual agreement is for U.S. tariffs.
Authoritarianism Marching On?
A critic of President Trump all but says the word “authoritarianism.” The phrase is skirted around in a lovely political dance. If headlines are the draw, this one works well. The argument and evidence provided make the case by the guest. What stands out is the soft pitches from the host to angle the guest and state the claim for the country under the president’s leadership is moving toward authoritarianism. Almost every pitch is bunted with the comment provided. The phrase is noted by the host and jabbed at the guest (5:31). The retired political science academic doesn’t take the bait. The guest does what all well-trained academics do: he talks verbiage around the question to make it sound like a response to the question left unanswered.
The joy of online journalism and a guest knowing he will retain further critique of his work by his home institute if he so much as thinks socio-politically, culturally, racially, or ethically centered language, which may sound like a subversive coup.
DOGE Goes Wild
America’s favorite meltdown queen, Marjorie Taylor Greene, launches on another classic stall and near meltdown. She could have done better, but the effort is well noted. The committee is undertaking a review of bans on transgender athletes and their place in academic sports. The unspoken, driving undercurrent of these Congressional meetings is how much more will DOGE be allowed to go to camouflage a political cleansing of the government seen in cuts throughout the federal. The meeting is to center on how DOGE is working currently. A logical agenda would be to see if this strawman department would remain operating. Noting DOGE’s inability to meet the proposed target funding cuts, one would suspect that this committee to discuss is DOGE is working, what changes might be necessary, or is this counterfeit department is working for the American people. Nothing of the kind will be seen or heard in this committee. What a grand use of taxpayer money.
Forbes Business posted a video of the committee meeting. The truth is in the watching.
Have we all heard enough?
Pete Hegseth Plagiarized Parts of His College Thesis
“A review of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s thesis by The Daily Princetonian, in consultation with three experts on plagiarism, found eight instances of uncredited material, sham paraphrasing, and verbatim copying in his senior thesis” (The Political Wire, May 10).
My question is, with all Secretary Hegseth has gone through, starting with his Congressional hearings, how much more is the executive going to do to protect this cabinet official? The press and select public have been calling for Secretary Hegseth’s removal. Still, the administration protects his appointment. The more information uncovered about Secretary Hegseth, the deeper the question becomes, “What’s more of a controversy? Secretary Hegseth’s history or the extent the president is going to keep Secretary Hegseth on the job?” The proverbial jury is out.
The plot thickens. The Political Wire notes,
Pete Hegseth sparks fears as he moves to ax generals
“Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s move to ax the size of the U.S. military’s top ranks has triggered concerns of a political purge.
Hegseth, who on Monday directed significant cuts to the U.S. military’s senior-most positions, has already fired several top leaders with no explanation” (The Political Wire, May 10).
Another action being leveled by Secretary Hegseth to build confidence and inflate his ego. What does this action solve? This is the question those informed on the matter are trying to conclude. Right now, the most scholarly response to the issue and aligned question is, “Nothing.”
Alan Lechusza
