David French’s warning is timely and well taken. That said, I think we may all thank Orange Mussolini for sending a clear and timely signal about his intent with respect to the 2026 elections. We have a reasonable amount of time to litigate l’affaire Fulton County ballot seizure, establish beyond peradventure of doubt that Tulsi Gabbard is a blithering idiot—and that Trump’s delusions are in fact delusions, and take the preventative steps that David French encourages us to take.
It’s a sign of the times that Senator Thune recognized that “nationalizing elections” is unconstitutional, and that he did not cotton to the idea.
Georgia Republicans are shitting their pants about the special election in Marjorie Taylor Greene’s district.
Second Bonus News Report: Legal Karma
While some law firms caved to Trump, renowned plaintiffs’ firm Susman Godfrey stood tall, and walloped the living daylights out of Team Trump. See here.
This week brings reports that top lawyers at the Susman firm are now charging $4,000 per hour. See here.
Point of personal privilege: I was one of the late Steve Susman’s ten thousand closest friends. I’m confident Steve is looking down from heaven or the bardo at recent developments, and I know he’s still wearing that shit-eating grin.
There was a special election yesterday in the Texas State Senate 9th District, located in northern part of Fort Worth and its suburbs. In 2024, Trump took the district by 17 points. Yesterday, the Democratic candidate won by 57.2 to 42.8.
Beginning with the Interstate Commerce Commission, established in 1887, Congress has created more than 25 independent agencies, chiefly to foster the development of regulatory specialization and expertise, and to provide some degree of insulation from political pressures—including the kinds of political pressures resulting from generous campaign contributions by affected interests.
Does Legal Precedent Support the Constitutionality of the Independent Regulatory Agencies?
Yes, it does. The leading case is Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, decided by the Supreme Court in 1935. The issue there was essentially identical to the current case, Trump v. Slaughter, argued before the Supreme Court in December, 2025. In each case, the President fired one of the five FTC commissioners, not “for cause,” as required by the Federal Trade Commission Act, but rather because he or she different with the President on political and policy grounds.
To amplify a little, Mr. Humphrey was a loud-mouthed, obnoxious anti-New Dealer. There was little doubt that President Roosevelt’s decision to fire him violated the FTC Act. Rather, the question was whether the statutory provision that Roosevelt violated was constitutional. The Court ruled nine to zero that yes, the pertinent FTC Act provision was in fact constitutional—and that it was OK to have independent regulatory agencies.
In the current Trump v. Slaughter case, both sides have elected to rely in general legal issues rather than whatever differences on policy may exist between Commissioner Slaughter and Orange Mussolini.
On the Face of Things, Should the Court Apply the Stare Decisis Doctrine and Reaffirm the 1935 Humphrey’s Executor Precedent?
Yes. The precedent is long standing and has enjoyed bipartisan support. There is no new or compelling reason to overturn it.
So, Does That Mean a Supreme Court Decision Favoring Trump Would be Clearly Unlawful?
Is the Court’s Likely Ruling Likely to Lead to Despotism?
No, no more than a ruling for Roosevelt back in 1935 would have led to despotism.
Is the Court’s Likely Ruling Likely, in the Current Environment, to Facilitate Kleptocracy?
Did God make little green apples? And does it rain in Indianapolis in the summertime?
A point of personal privilege here: Much of my 35 years of practice involved merger work before the Federal Trade Commission and the Antitrust Division. The staff was consistently conscientious, though they sometimes made unwise decisions, mostly because of ideological blinders. But the President was not taking bribes to dictate outcomes to the FTC or the Justice Department. And attempts by the parties or their counsel to use political influence, let alone bribery, in particular cases would have been highly counterproductive.
In my opinion, this video has more insightful observations than Carter has Little Liver Pills.
Watch it if you’re interested in understanding what is actually going on.
David French Channels Dante
And another useful source: yesterday, David French gave us a highly informative tour of the hellscape that is the MAGA mind. Along with that, he also offered thought-provoking historical precedents for our current state of affairs. David French (N.Y. Times): What MAGA Sees in the Minnesota Mirror.
And now some thoughts from me, your humble ink-stained scrivener.
The Supreme Court’s Role in 2026 as the Joker in the Deck and Potential Savior of Donald Trump—from the Perils Posed by Donald Trump
In the video above, Rick Wilson expounds on the consequences of Trump’s erratic and disastrous action regarding his key political issues, immigration and tariffs. But he doesn’t address how the Supreme Court, if it so chooses, could intervene in ways that would help to save Trump’s bacon by helping to save him from himself.
Likewise, the Court, if it so chooses, can rein in Trump’s due process violations in connection with its mass deportation project.
Apart from the fact that requiring due process will help to save the constitutional republic, it would also, once again, help to save Trump politically from himself. Essentially, for the reasons that Rick Wilson laid out in the video.
Trump’s mental problems are myriad: sociopathy, constant lying coupled with a total inability to keep his lies straight, an inability to plan, and, among others, a grievously limited political skill set.
In this witch’s brew of mental illnesses, we tend to discount the signal importance of delusional thinking. For example, Trump really thinks that he can bend the courts to his will in the same way that he has bent the Justice Department and the FBI to his will.
He should have learned his lesson in 2020, when the courts universally rejected his stolen election delusion.
But he did not learn his less, because he is delusional.
Now, once again, he is ordering his prosecutors to comply with his delusions by initiating a slew of utterly bogus criminal cases.
The consequences of the inevitable failure of that delusion will be yet another joker in the deck as we continue our hellish journey through 2026.
Of the many lessons to be drawn from the administration’s retreat in Minneapolis, the most important is that Donald Trump can be stopped.
He spent his first year acting as though the 2024 election were the last time he would ever have to give a thought to public opinion. Now the myth that Trump is invincible has been exploded.
After federal agents killed Alex Pretti, Trump-administration figures including Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller described the victim as a terrorist, indicating their desire to ignore or intimidate all opposition. But other Republican sources signaled their discomfort, and some called for an investigation—a routine step for a normal presidency, but a daring breach of partisan discipline in an administration that shields itself from accountability and tries to put itself above the law.
During yesterday’s White House briefing, when a reporter asked if Trump shared Miller’s belief that Pretti was a domestic terrorist, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt replied that she hadn’t heard him use that term. Trump also sent out conciliatory messages on social media indicating that he’d had productive talks with Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey. And he dispatched Tom Homan, the border czar and a more traditional immigration hawk, to replace Gregory Bovino, the commander at large in Minnesota. Bovino has justified his agents’ misconduct with transparent lies.
Trump’s retreat in Minneapolis is a stinging defeat for the national conservatives, the Republican Party’s most nakedly authoritarian faction. The NatCons believe American liberalism cannot be dealt with through normal political methods such as persuasion and compromise. Speakers at the National Conservatism Conference have described the American left as “the enemy within” (Senator Rick Scott of Florida) and “wokeism” as “a cancer that must be eradicated” (Rachel Bovard of the Conservative Partnership Institute). NatCons also maintain that immigration poses a mortal threat to the United States. These two strands of thought are intertwined; NatCons consider immigration a weapon employed consciously by the left to assume permanent power, via manipulating elections and creating government dependency, a conspiracy that can only be reversed through the kind of ferocious operation on display in Minneapolis.
The NatCons, whose ranks include powerful administration figures such as Vice President Vance and Miller as well as members of Congress (such as Senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri) and activists (such as Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts), have wielded profound influence. They have rarely, if ever, lost important struggles to steer Trump’s strategy.
For the NatCons, the mass-deportation scheme overseen by Miller is an existential priority. Vance once claimed that immigration levels “would mean we never win, meaning Republicans would never win a national election in this country ever again.” Ten days ago, Miller explained on Fox News that Democrats were resisting ICE in Minneapolis because “this mass-migration scheme is the heart of the Democratic Party’s political power.” Miller sees his crusade not merely as a matter of relieving the burden on public services or raising wages, but as a final chance to stop permanent left-wing tyranny. Thus Miller’s immediate, fervent insistence that Pretti and the other Minnesotan recently killed by federal agents, Renee Good, both deserved their fates, a line the NatCons repeated vociferously through Monday.
The NatCons have attained their sway by positioning themselves as the vanguard of Trumpism in its purist form. Other conservative factions, such as social conservatives, libertarians, and foreign-policy hawks, supported Trump reluctantly in 2016, and backed away after the January 6 attack on the Capitol, hoping Florida Governor Ron DeSantis or some other rival could displace him. The NatCons never flinched in the face of Trump’s failed autogolpe, or any other actions that made other Republicans nervous. They won the loyalty contest—which, in the second Trump administration, is the only currency of influence.
Calls for Trump to stand firmly behind Miller had a desperate yet vague tone. “Leftist protestors who shut down streets, destroy property, refuse lawful orders, and physically assault federal officers cannot be rewarded with veto power over public policy,” beseeched the Manhattan Institute activist Chris Rufo, employing the passive voice. In response to a liberal observing yesterday afternoon on X that Trump was backing down, Will Chamberlain, a national conservative affiliated with numerous right-wing organizations, replied, “This isn’t happening, and it’s very important that it does not happen.”
Nevertheless, it was happening.
The reason it happened is that, although Trump listens to the NatCons, he has no deep grounding in their theories or, for that matter, any theories. The president’s despotism is not ideological but instinctive. He cannot tolerate criticism and he deems any process that embarrasses him, including a critical news story or an election, illegitimate, even criminal.
And while he has embraced a restrictionist immigration agenda, he has vacillated between endorsing mass deportation and allowing exceptions for categories of laborers he considers necessary. As Trump told The Wall Street Journaleditorial page before the 2024 election, “I mean, there’s some human questions that get in the way of being perfect, and we have to have the heart, too.” If that has ever occurred to Miller, he has hidden it well.
Whether or not Trump’s intermittent expressions of human feeling for the immigrants his administration has abused is heartfelt, his desire to maintain his political standing most certainly is. Trump appreciates the power of imagery. It does not take a political genius to understand that, if Americans were repulsed by the sight of a Vietnamese man being executed in 1968, an American being shot in the back, facedown on a midwestern street, would not go over much better.
Trump’s capitulation would never have occurred if not for the heroic, disciplined resistance in Minneapolis. Faced with something like an occupying army that was systematicallyflouting the law, the people of Minneapolis thrust its abuse into the public eye, raising the political cost of Miller’s war until enough Republicans decided that they couldn’t bear to pay it.
Political theorists have long debated whether Trump and his movement should be described as fascist. On an intellectual level, the answer depends largely on which definition of fascismyou choose (there are several). I have generally resisted the term because the definition I prefer, and the one most Americans probably think of when they hear the term, is not mere political oppression but a form of it so extreme that opposition becomes impossible.
That may be more or less Trump’s aspiration, and possibly our destiny. But this is not a fascist country, at least not yet.
I applaud her analysis and agree with much of it, though I think the optimism is premature. Let’s see what happens today. Let’s see what happens in the coming days on the streets of Minneapolis. Let’s see what happens in Congress with funding for the Department of Homeland Security.
A Signal Achievement
As Rachel emphasizes, Democratic pushback will be responsible for whatever good comes out of this disaster. That said, be it remembered that the Stephen Miller/Kristi Noem/Kash Patel/Greg Bongino team’s clusterfuck represents a signal achievement on their part—and a big reason why things are looking up today.
The progressives are riled up.
Lots of ordinary people are riled up.
Not only that: big business is riled up.
With big business riled up, the Republican empty suit politicians are beginning to speak up.
Even the Second Amendment wingnuts are fit to be tied, because of the suggestion that folks lawfully carrying a firearm deserve to be mowed down with impunity.
One of the early morning talking heads pointed out that, with Homan in Minneapolis allegedly reporting directly to Trump—thus, allegedly, bypassing and cutting the Miller/Noem gang—“Trump will personally own whatever happens next in Minneapolis.”
That sounds right. And I would add this: to get out of this mess with some dignity, Trump would need to be a Washington or a Lincoln or a Roosevelt.
Trump is not a Washington or a Lincoln or a Roosevelt. Instead, Trump is best compared to Jubilation T. Cornpone.
Thanks to international readers in January from Bahrain, Canada, Colombia, China, Germany, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Japan, New Zealand, Peru, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Turkey, UAE, UK, and Vietnam.
We love you all, but we especially love Canada.
My message to you: yes, I know very well that we’re acting crazy over here. I know very well that Humpty Dumpty has fallen, and all the king’s horses and all the king’s men can’t put Humpty together again. I know that we Americans don’t really know where we’re going, and we don’t know how to get there. But I believe in the core of my being that we will ultimately survive, flourish once again, and once again act like good neighbors.
In the United States, WordPress is telling me that my readers come from Ashburn VA, Atlanta GA (no surprise there), Boston and Cambridge (maybe MA, but could be lots of others), Council Bluffs IO, Kansas City (don’t know which one), Jonesboro AR, Los Angeles CA, New York NY, North Bergen NJ, Quay (don’t know which one), Seattle WA, Tucker GA, and Tuscaloosa AL.
And now, my American brethren and sistern, please rise with me in body or in spirit and join in singing
For additional insight, check out the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board today, which is shitting in its pants because the clownish but lethal brutality in Minnesota is hurting Republicans.
At least, the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board has its priorities straight.
The N.Y. Times piece is an excellent source of insight for those who need perspective on the events of the last few days. You probably want to read it for yourself; I’m not going to try to summarize it. But I will say this about that.
They’re Not Killing Nearly Enough People
So, here’s the deal. If you’re an authoritarian regime, you can put down opposition with brutal force—provided you can command enough state power (in other words, provided your own police and army don’t turn on you) and provided you are prepared to use enough brutality on your own population.
The Iranian tyrants just gave us an object lesson. So did the Chinese Communist Party in Tiananmen Square back in 1989.
But if you kill just a few people, you don’t terrorize the population. Instead you just royally piss off the general public. And you create martyrs, which is very helpful to your opposition. Case in point: the Boston Massacre of 1770. Other examples include the Peterloo Massacre in England in 1819, Bloody Sunday in Russia in 1905, South Africa’s Sharpeville Massacre in 1960, and the events at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma back in 1965.
They Have No Coherent Story and No Coherent Plan
Stephen Miller and Kristi Noem hired a bunch of White supremacist thugs and told them they enjoyed absolute immunity for whatever they might choose to do.
Just what the hell did they think was going to happen?
Then, when it happened, as inevitably it would happen, did Stephen Miller and Kristi Noem actually proclaim to the public that they were trying to impose authoritarian terror?
No, siree, they did not say that. What they said was that the public must disbelieve the evidence from the dozens of iPhones that were taking movies from all directions.
Then, on Sunday, when Miller and Noem couldn’t even get Orange Mussolini to endorse their lies, the official story changed to: He was carrying a gun, therefore it was OK to execute him in cold blood. A massively stupid response, on multiple grounds. And one that was particularly offensive to the National Rifle Association.
Yesterday, in broad daylight, Alex Pretti was executed.
Let’s be clear. What killed this poor man was not law enforcement. It was lawlessness.
The problem is not whether or how Alex Pretti complied with the law.
The problem is that federal agents, sent to sow chaos, are out of compliance with our Constitution.
Are out of compliance with the scope of their role. And are out of compliance with principles of public safety.
So, the question I’m asking is why don’t these agents comply with the law?
Any narrative that suggests that Alex Pretti was anything other than innocent is pure fabrication. The Administration is lying. But you can trust your friends. You can believe your own eyes.
What happened is horrifying. And, of course, it’s not new. This country has a long memory of Jim Crow terror, night patrols, and violence carried out with the blessing—or the silence—of those in power.
Still, many of good conscience this weekend are rightly feeling heartbroken, furious, helpless, and confused.
If you are scared, that makes sense.
If you are angry, you have a right to be.
If you are not sure what to do next, you are not alone.
I’m deeply grateful for, and inspired by, UUCA Associate Minister Rev. EN Hill, who stood in the cold in Minneapolis this past week, alongside hundreds of clergy, representing the body of holy love in the streets. Church people know simple, ancient good things–like that showing up matters. Especially when so much is at risk and the stakes are so high.
We are now in a moment when political violence is being normalized. When cruelty is defended as order. When fear is being weaponized in American streets. Today, it is Minneapolis. Tomorrow, it could be Atlanta. That is sobering to say out loud. It is also necessary.
I do not know what the future holds. I do not know how all of this will unfold. I do not yet know what UUCA will be asked to risk, or where solidarity will require us to stand. I do not know what our most vulnerable neighbors will need, or how they will call on us for protection and partnership.
But here is what I do know.
UUCA is not a bystander congregation.
UUCA is not a silent congregation.
And UUCA is held and fueled by a Love that our Universalist ancestors claimed never quit and left nobody out!
UUCA, you are powerful beyond measure—because of your history, your relationships, your commitments, and your hard-won wisdom. You have not been caught off-guard. You have been watching. You’ve been strengthening networks and joining Signal groups. You’ve been weaving strategic ties across difference. You have been preparing.
And you are not alone. You have neighbors. Partners. Shoulder-to-shoulder companions.
With strong UUCA Board leadership, with long-time movement veterans among you, with the boundlessly deep resource of music and joy, with Rev. EN’s steady courage, and with Rev. Taryn returning next week, this congregation is well-resourced—not only spiritually, but strategically.
We are a people of tenacious hope. Of stubborn, resilient love. We won’t back down. Nor will we be hardened or embittered or cornered. We will sing. We will rest. We will rise.
Let me say this, my sibling Unitarian Universalists: this engagement, ahead of us, is going to cost something. It may cost comfort. It may cost convenience. It may cost reputation. It may cost time and money and the illusion that someone else will handle it.
And still, we are called.
Some of you will offer care and compassion.
Some will show up on front lines.
Some will make sure things at home are steady and strong so others can do what they need to do on the streets.
All of it matters.
In the coming days, there will be opportunities to gather, to pray, to listen, and to discern concrete next steps together. Watch for those invitations. Bring your whole self. Feel it all.
Thank you for the discernment you are already doing about the part you will play.
Thank you for the preparation you are undertaking for UUCA to be a force for the Beloved Community—not in abstraction or in theory, but in neighborhoods, households, and in real lives.
Gratefully, mournfully, and with resolve,
Rev. Jake Morrill Senior Sabbatical Minister UU Congregation of Atlanta
Facing MAGA 