He's all over the place this week with stuff. Almost all of it counter to his campaign promises ...

Exactly! He's trying to divert the media's and voters' attention away from questions about his campaign promises that he can't fulfill. It will work for a while but when the price of groceries and other items are still high after 2 years, voters will give him the boot if he hasn't rigged the elections to the point of guaranteeing republican victories.

If there was ever any doubt as to her objectivity, this move erases it all.

Cut-rate theologians like Johnson would do well to take note of where The Jefferson Bible brings down the curtain because it sure as hell runs counter to the snake oil folks like him have on offer:

But that's part of their strategy. Adopt the language of goodness, virtue, morality, fiscal restraint, patriotism, etc. and do the opposite while proclaiming that the opposition are the bad guys. Their low information, gullible rubes fall for it each and every time.

the U.S. still has an obligation to help Israel when they're under attack

Really? Is there a treaty or something that obligates the US to defend Israel?

$20 says he skates.

Because of legal maneuvering, I don't expect the sentencing to occur on Jan 10.

Unfortunately, without that sentencing, I've heard that Trump can't be labelled a "convicted felon" even though he was convicted of 34 felonies. If it doesn't occur on Jan 10, it's not likely to occur until after his presidency because it's tough to envision a judge labelling a sitting POTUS a "convicted felon".

Merchan deserves as much blame as can be heaped upon him for letting things get to this point; he just can't lay all of the blame on the stalling tactics of Trump's attorneys. He now admits that he knew of their stalling tactics yet went along with them. He didn't have to postpone the original sentencing date but he did; supposedly because he didn't want to interfere with the election. Hell, his postpone of the original sentencing date WAS an interference! Americans deserved to know whether or not they were electing a "convicted felon".

So, we had no thinkers until 1980?

That sort of like saying why do we need a car for transportation. We got along well with the horse and buggy. Or, we didn't need computers, we had people using an abacus to do math.

Things change. People's needs change and government needs to keep up with the needs of the people.

The military takes men and breaks their brains to turn them into killers.

And then, they are released back onto the streets to deal with the emotional impact of what they have done. That is why it would seem that if there is a strong public consensus that a war is necessary (i.e. WWI, WWII), the emotional trauma on soldiers (i.e. killers) after the war might not be so severe.

I could see how it would be traumatizing if you're doing something you think is wrong just to earn a paycheck. You've got to be committed to the cause to do some of the things we ask our soldiers to do. And, they must never be lied to about the reasons for war, otherwise, when they are discharged, there will be hell to pay.

Forcing women to give birth to children they don't want isn't turning out as expected.

I don't know. The legislators that passed these laws were privy to all types of analysis as to what would happen in the wake of having passed these laws. IMHO, they didn't care BECAUSE the families likely to seriously affected would be the poor and destitute. Those type of families aren't part of their constituency that they give a damn about. They want to discourage women from well resourced families (white?) from having an abortion. And, if these women still decide to have an abortion, they know that they have the resources to travel to another state and therefore not endanger their lives by having the abortion.

Anti-abortion religious zealots are just a means to an end.

... people voted against their own self-interest and are now facing that reality

But, but, Trump wasn't supposed to cut the things that I need, he was supposed to cut the things that those other people, those black and brown people needed.

Can't fix stupid.

For good cops, cameras are a benefit. For bad cops, cameras are a liability.

Cops should not be permitted to turn a camera on/off. It should run continuously while they are on duty.

...one wonders just what is going to happen to our Social Security and other survival aides

Threatening old people with reductions in social security is a sure fire way to electoral defeat. Couple that with alienated MAGAs and the republican party is in for a "shellacking" in 2026. If present trends continue, Trump has 2 years to "fix" the electoral system to guarantee republican victories or his last 2 years are going to be very difficult. If dems win the HOR in 2026 and he behaves as he did in his first term, don't be surprised to see another impeachment; especially since the SCOTUS has given him immunity and impeachment is the only way to hold him accountable. A third impeachment might win over a few more Senate republicans if the MAGA base has been alienated.

MAGATS are ------- retarded.

While that may/may not be true, I am beginning to think that its more about their feelings of entitlement to all of the benefits that American society can bestow on them. And, as a result, they will bend and break the rules whenever it suits them and not feel one iota of regret. Also, they KNOW that the resources to fund benefits are limited and therefore, if extended to all citizens, there will be less for them. So, they decide not to extend the benefits to those considered unworthy. Who are the unworthy? For the entirety of American history, we know that the unworthy were considered to be POC and their descendants.

Dems lost because a few of their priorities, like cancer research

Strictly speaking, you may be right that funding cancer research was a democratic priority. However, it is hard to imagine that funding cancer research wasn't important to republicans. In reality, it IS and SHOULD BE an American priority to fund cancer research. Dems aren't the only ones that get cancer.

#5, #6

Thanks.

Based on the following statement from the link Hispanic Republicans are barred from membership per 2000s rule change, it seems as if caucuses can create rules to include or exclude any one they want.

They'll frame cuts to Social Security as a way to pay for things, but they don't care " they'll just add it all to the deficit.

President Musk/Trump have 2 years to do whatever it is that they plan to do. If they implement their plans regarding cuts to SS or Medicare, seniors will hand them their heads in the 2026 elections. Seniors will be quick to recognize the negative impact on these 2 essential programs and, as we know, seniors vote. A little democratic messaging to stoke the fire and 2026 will be a free for all. Musk's pledge to primary incumbents that are insufficiently local will only improve the odds of a democratic challenger because the republican replacement will have lost the advantage of incumbency.

Are these House caucuses open to any member of congress? If so, why wouldn't dems join so that they would have some visibility into the process?

There is such a thing as jury nullification. One of the reasons that the person that murdered the United Healthcare executive has achieved social media notoriety is because many people have felt abused by the health insurance industry. There will likely be many potential jurors that don't have a high regard for the insurance industry. The prosecutor will have to be vigilant to exclude them from the jury box.

The economic effects of the mass deportation of millions of people will act as a brake on Trump's deportation plans because he knows that one of the reasons he got elected was the "economy". However, to the people surrounding him and many of the people that voted for him, the economy was an after thought. This tension will probably limit the deportations to only criminals which will leave many of his supporters very unhappy. How unhappy? The elections of 2026 will be very revealing.

Russia's war on Ukraine is proving that the war can not be constrained to a "battlefield". The battlefield is where ever the enemy is. The animosity and hate generated by war will last a generation or more. It's an important lesson that combatants in the Middle East would be wise to learn.

How about if we just deport the 13000 known murderers? Still a problem?

These "murderers" broke American laws and should serve out their sentences in the US. They should not be released to their country of origin to engage freely with other members of society. In any event, their country of origin probably won't accept them after they have served their sentences. If their country of origin won't take them back, then what? A life time of incarceration? Seems a bit inhumane and a source of trouble for people having to guard "inmates" that have lost all hope.

It's amazing of how many attorneys (who presumably knew better) were duped ($$$ signs) into violating the tenants of their profession in hopes of landing a gig in the Big Time.

IMHO "duped" is to tame a word because it implies that they were "tricked" into doing something wrong. These highly intelligent, legally trained people, willfully participated in the alleged criminal activity for personal gain. If they didn't know of the potential legal consequences, their certification as attorneys implies that they should have known.

If the idea is to bring factories back to the US, why not just stop incentivizing businesses to off shore those factories? Give incentives to businesses that bring those factories back.

The increasing frequency and severity of disasters underscore the urgent need to fortify our nation's healthcare capabilities

Agreed! But, the fortification should not be limited to healthcare. A comprehensive look at all major facets of our economy should be undertaken and an assessment made as to their disaster resilience. If their resilience is found lacking, steps should be undertaken to shore them up.

Just setting term limits is not enough. All of the drama associated with a SCOTUS pick needs to be minimized or eliminated if possible. I would think a rotation into SCOTUS seats would be preferable than direct appointments. In that way, the POTUS can not influence the current makeup of the court and consequently its decisions.

Members of the SCOTUS would rotate into those positions on a random basis from the appellate courts and serve a multi-year (6?) year term. Instead of nominating judges to the SCOTUS, president would nominate candidates to the District courts. Staffing of appellate court positions would come from the District courts.

Trump Lobbied DeSantis to Name Daughter-in-Law Lara to Senate

Nothing to see here. Lara, along with Trump's other picks are just more of the same: DEI candidates: Didn't Earn It.