I called Gillibrand and Schumer on Wed. and asked them to vote no on the Republican budget. I had one qualm, however: how would the shutdown affect the court cases being brought against Trump, Musk and OMP, some of which are starting to bear fruit? Two of my favorite online pundits have been weighing in on the topic: Josh Marshall and Marcy Wheeler.

Here are their latest takes, both of which are worth considering, IMO:

Looking Squarely at a Shutdown

It's hard to write clearly when you're being flooded with new information. But here goes. I've heard people arguing the "yes' on cloture" argument, essentially saying, "don't assume you can shut DOGE down, undo the damage. It's not a silver bullet." I can only speak for myself, but if anyone is thinking, based on the arguments I've made, that this is a silver bullet and if Democrats just do this we can shut this whole thing down, I haven't been clear. I will further say that while the things I've written over the last week or so make it pretty clear where I stand on this, I have several times over the last week had a hard think with myself: are you sure you're right about this? I'm not sure I'd say this is a close call. But it's a hard call, for me at least. Both options hold out possibilities of calamity and destruction I've never seriously contemplated before. That is simply where we are. I wish we weren't here. But we are here.

Gotta keep in mind that, unlike pretty much every other prez in hisotry, Trump wants the economy to fail. It assists him in manipulating the stock market and profiting from shorting it.
#4 | Posted by censored

Trump also wants the government to fail. Hello? That way he can justify all the cuts and executive orders he has already written as well as the ones he has ready to go the moment he is able to declare even more emergency orders that will give him unlimited and unfettered power over just about everything and in such a way that not even the courts will be able to stop him.

President Trump is testing the limits of emergency powers--again

Goitein, of the Brennan Center, says determining those limits is crucial. "There are powers that are available in a national emergency that are far more potent, including powers to shut down communications facilities, to control domestic transportation, to freeze Americans' assets without any due process or any judicial [approval]," she says. "So this question of 'What are the limits on a president's ability to abuse emergency powers?' is an absolutely crucial one for not just our individual liberties but for our democracy."

The question is how emergency powers are used--and for how long and with what limits.

Scheppele has studied how democracies, like Hungary, can turn toward autocracy. For her, the key question about the use of emergency powers is not whether they are legal--because lawful powers can be abused, she notes.

"The question is, does it move the president toward using powers that make it very difficult for powers ever to be taken out of his hands?" she says. "Autocracy is really about the executive capturing power and not letting it go."

With that in mind, she's watching to see whether declaring emergencies becomes a routine way for the Trump administration to push through policies over the objections of Congress or the public, sidelining the debates, compromises and checks and balances baked into democracy.

Full Pelosi statement a link:

Sahil Kapur
@sahilkapur.bsky.social

Extraordinary moment--Nancy Pelosi issues a statement calling on Democratic senators to reject the House funding bill, i.e. to defy Chuck Schumer.

"Democratic senators should listen to the women," she says, referring to Murray/DeLauro who want a 1-month stopgap bill instead.

This is a ridiculous assertion, what does "fail" even mean? You're basically saying Trump wants to fail himself out of a job.
Preposterous, no wonder no one takes you guys/gals seriously. Just lies upon hoaxes with "anon" sources.
#18 | Posted by oneironaut

He wants most of the federal government to fail, which will in turn will justify all the cuts he is making. He doesn't want the defense dept or homeland security to fail, but everything else that can be privatized and/or turned over to the states he doesn't care if it fails.

This is the sort of bigotry I expect from Elite Democrats, while the man on the street suffers.
#17 | Posted by oneironaut

She is not talking about women in general but about two specific women, who have been leading the House and Senate appropriations committees. This would probably be clear to you if you actually read Pelosi's statement in full:

"Democratic senators should listen to the women," she says, referring to Murray/DeLauro who want a 1-month stopgap bill instead.

This is a ridiculous assertion, what does "fail" even mean?
#18 | Posted by oneironaut

Doesn't deliver for the American people. VA services that can't be accessed. Social Security checks that don't arrive. FEMA funding that isn't available. That kind of thing.