IN THE NICK OF TIME

The fury and outrage of Democratic senators condemning their own for crossing over and voting with the Republicans to reopen the government has petty much died down. (In public, at least.) What's done is done!

Now, on to the possibility of the Republicans debating the renewal of Covid-era subsidies for the Affordable Care Act. (They said they would, right?)

Not that any sort of debate will make a difference. Nothing will come of it.

And maybe it shouldn't. Folks were given a financial break during Covid and now that dangerous time is over. Sure, people are still affected by Covid, but that is likely to stay true for years to come. When did the last guy die of the Spanish Flu? Google's AI tells me it happened in April, 1920. But remember, the H1N1 virus has not actually disappeared. It has just mutated into something we have learned to live with.

At some point, all pandemics drop to the level of the yearly flu stats and tracking it loses priority. That means at some point, even for Covid-19, elevated subsidies should come to an end. Well, maybe we're there now.

(On September 22nd of this year, the Covid death rate in the US was point zero eight per million. Then it went to zero. People still get sick, but they recover.)

The lasting problem is not Covid, of course, but American healthcare in general.

As usual, the Republicans hint at a health plan to replace the ACA, but they're unable to produce it. Business as usual. Maybe the Dems can get control of both houses and take a shot at really fixing that thing.

(Right now, Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer wants to force a vote so folks back home will know how their representatives acquitted themselves. It's just political shaming, really, but maybe that's all that could possibly come of it.)

During the government shutdown, certainly, nothing was going to happen. Democrats held out, even so, hoping against hope—but it was a false hope.

If things had gone on much longer, the Democrats, who were definitely scoring points against the GOP, would nevertheless have begun to lose ground. Voters of every persuasion are ultimately willing to blame both parties for whatever bad thing is going down.

Another few days, in fact, and the matter of the SNAP shutdown, affecting more than forty million citizens, would have become acute, as vast numbers of Americans started to go hungry. In most states, even if people still had money on their SNAP cards, they wouldn't have been able to use it. Local administrators had suspended the program entirely, waiting for federal funding to return.

Making matters worse, the effed-up airport situation was driving folks nuts just as the country began ramping up for the Thanksgiving travel nightmare.

These problems (and many others) would have had the population demanding answers and scapegoats, and the Democrats were not going to be able to avoid scrutiny for holding out for something that simply wasn't going to happen.

But then the Democratic Eight stepped up and ended the crisis—just in the nick of time, in my opinion.

But don't forget, the Hateful Eight didn't capitulate to the Republicans without getting something in return.

No way were they going to get the ACA subsidies restored. But they did get SNAP funded through the end of September, 2026, along with some other stuff. What this means is, when the government shuts down again at the end of January (which is how the smart money is betting), the problem of Americans going hungry won't be a factor to pressure a fast surrender.

During the next "capitulation" negotiations, maybe they can come away with funding for airport workers so TSA personnel and air traffic control folks won't have to work for nothing.

Then, in the inevitable shutdown after that, neither of those killer items will be available to gum up the works. At that time, maybe the Dems can hold out longer for a lot more valuable stuff.

Little by little, they work their subterranean tactics, all the way to the 2026 midterms, after which maybe the entire concept of government shutdowns can be addressed.

Will Donald Trump live that long? Stay tuned. Could be a photo finish.

HOW TO END THE SHUTDOWN

Republicans say to Democrats: Refund the government and we'll talk about reinstating the subsidies for the Affordable Care Act.

Democrats say: We don't believe you. If we end the shutdown, you'll blow off the talks and nothing will happen. We don't trust you guys to bargain in good faith.

(History is on their side.)

The solution: Trump and the Republicans need to state with great clarity that they will never reinstate the subsidies for the ACA, so the Democrats might as well restart the government right away and end the pain caused by defunding SNAP (and everything else).

And that will call the Democrats' bluff.

They will be forced to realize that for the time being things will get very bad for low-income folks who need healthcare coverage. They will know their work is cut out for them. They will understand they'll have to take control of both houses of Congress and install a Democrat in the White House if they want to put the subsidies back in place.

Fortunately, the Republican stance on the ACA will make that outcome much more likely.

Democrats will have to accept that fact as the best they can do in this situation.

Will they?

THE OPPOSITE OF WOKE

The opposite of woke is shitty, a category that includes such popular pastimes as racism, homophobia, and misogyny. And, as you're probably already aware, Donald Trump is exceedingly shitty.

Turns out he's also stupid and delusional.

(In addition, he's a vindictive thug and a pathological liar.)

He thinks a cognitive test is an IQ test that proves he's a genius. He thinks you can cure Covid with an injection of bleach. (Not that you have to cure it; just let it wash over the country.) He thinks you can reduce drug prices by 1700%. (How would that work? You buy a pill and the drug company hands it to you for free, then follows up by giving you a tiny bar of gold?)

He thinks he won the election in 2020. Many a marginal man has dived into that rabbit hole, never to be seen again, lest their creditors dun him for life-altering court-ordered awards.

He started a completely disruptive and unnecessary trade war with every single country in the world because he doesn't know how tariffs work. (He thinks that since the people he tariffs will be paying those fees, he can effectively tax those countries to recoup the money they make selling stuff to us he thinks they should have spent on American products. It wasn't enough they were supplying a product we wanted at an excellent price—they were, according to Trump, cheating us!)

He thinks American cities are burning to the ground and he needs to send troops to quell out-of-control riots. Ultimately, he wants no visible push-back on his immigration enforcement policy, a policy he claims to have a mandate to operate. (Hey, Donald, hold the election again right now and see how much of a mandate you actually have.)

He thinks drug runners are narco-terrorists and is blowing their boats out of the water, though he offers no proof those folks are committing capital crimes. (At worst they're supplying a product our citizens crave. Maybe Trump should address the demand-side of the problem and not start international wars without congressional approval as required by the Constitution.)

Trump has authorized the CIA to operate in Venezuela and he plans ground operations there in the near future. What are the chances he doesn't use tactical nukes against the cartels in South America? He once suggested nuking drug suppliers in Mexico, and he's repeatedly complained about being restrained from using nukes whenever he wants.

Trump thinks that a Russian test of a nuclear-powered rocket is the same as a test of a nuclear warhead. Accordingly, he wants to resume testing nukes himself, which will end a Test Ban Treaty in place for thirty years and open the door to actual Russian tests, along with those of China and who knows how many other countries in the nuclear club, not to mention the enthusiastic adventures of nuclear wanna-bes.

Trump "knows" Biden weaponized the DOJ against him so he's fighting that alleged corruption with real corruption of his own by using his DOJ to prosecute this enemies for bogus crimes.

He goes after universities and others for being too woke, illegally withholding federal funding already authorized by congress.

He demands tribute in the form of "judgments" against private companies and corporations in lieu of lawsuits he could never really win. (But it's easier to pay him off.)

He's literally demolishing part of the White House to build an unwanted monument to himself, which he is paying for with "contributions" from companies doing business with the government or which are facing legal hassles with federal regulators.

He even wants the Washington Commanders to change their name back to the Redskins.

Donald Trump plans to drag his salty nuts over every square inch of this country, just to prove he can do it. He thinks immunity from prosecution is the same thing as there being no crime he cannot legally commit, and he's hot to take advantage of the situation.

History will fall down laughing over all this nonsense.

Then excoriate us for not setting up procedures to make damn sure another president as defective as Trump never again holds the office.

I sincerely doubt we will meet that challenge.

BIRTHDAY BOY

The assassination of Charlie Kirk has sucked a lot of the Epstein oxygen out of the room. Members of a House committee had journeyed to New York to see the infamous Birthday Book in person, as well, perhaps, as other documents held by the Epstein estate. I've heard no report on that excursion, thanks to the Kirk shooting.

Donald Trump is calling the Epstein matter a "dead issue," says he has nothing more to say about it. His last words: That's not my signature and the text of the letter is not how I speak.

(And to close the subject forever: Eric Trump says his dad never doodles women's bodies.)

Okay, a few comments:

If that's not Trump's signature it is one hell of an accurate forgery.

At first, the White House brought up samples of Trump's "first-name" signatures, demonstrating that none of them displayed the tail at the end.

That was disingenuous, at best. Samples of Trump's first-name signature from the era of the Birthday Book clearly show the tail.

As for the outline of the naked female, I have to wonder why it was drawn with stumps for arms instead of simply letting the arms trail off, like the bottom of the body. This may be a meal for psychiatrists to chew on.

Obviously, the signature and text could have existed before someone else added the drawing. What needs to happen is a forensic examination to determine if the outline was made with the same pen as the signature. Looks to me like it was.

Trump's other denial is bizarre.

It is certainly true that Trump does not talk like the letter's text when he addresses the press. When he freestyles an answer, he mostly digresses and jabbers off topic to revisit favorite hobby-horses of discourse. Ask about tariffs and you might end up listening to another diatribe against windmills and how they kill birds and drive whales crazy.

The weird thing is, Trump apparently thinks the dialogue depicted in the letter is a transcript of a conversation between him and Epstein. If that were true, Trump would be right: He doesn't speak like that. Nobody does.

The point of the letter seems to be to link Trump and Epstein in a world of secrets and enigmas. Other items revealed from the Birthday Book do a lot more than hint at Epstein's penchant for getting massages from scantily clad barely pubescent young females. Trump's letter fits in nicely, though in an arguably classy manner.

But seriously, what other secret could Trump be referring to? And if the pair are linked by secrets, is it the same one? That's creepy.

The obvious thing to do is to ask Epstein confidant Ghislaine Maxwell about the Book. She was the one who put it together. She must have contacted various folks to invite them to contribute. She would probably know if Trump was a part of the project. She might well remember what his birthday letter looked like: text and drawing.

She might, but she doesn't.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche questioned the woman in Florida for nine hours on July 24th and 25th, about a week after the Wall Street Journal revealed the existence of the Birthday Book. And yes, the matter came up.

Maxwell said she didn't remember if Trump was in the book or not, but that she didn't ask him to be. She said Epstein was mostly in charge of calling contributors.

She "honestly" has no memory of Trump's letter or drawing, none whatsoever.

And that's the right answer. Thanks for playing the game.

PRESIDENT WITH AN ASTERISK

Donald Trump has mounted three full-blown presidential campaigns, winning two of them, both times against women—in a country that has never elected a woman president.

Twice the women involved, Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris, either got close to beating the man in the popular vote—or in the case of Clinton, actually did beat him there, though Trump denies that happened.

(After all, tons of illegal aliens voted for her, and, as he would say, everybody knows it.)

But the way I see it, Trump is a president with an asterisk next to his name: He can only win against women, in a country that may never vote in a woman, no matter what slime-ridden knuckle-dragger she's matched with.

On the other hand, put Trump up against a dementia-adjacent old man, and he's toast.

Trump knows, of course, that he did beat Joe Biden, but his proof got lost in the mail. Fortunately for the Donald, his pal Vladimir Putin backs him up on the 2020 election theft. But that's how you ingratiate yourself with the current president: flatter him and re-enforce his delusions.

(According to Trump, Putin even agrees that if Trump had been allowed to take power in 2021, there would have been no war in Ukraine. Would be interesting to hear Putin explain how that could have come about—and compare his reasoning with Trump's. But I've never heard Trump explain why there would not have been a war. Would he have said something that prevented it? Something like, "Hey, Vlad, invade Ukraine and I'll nuke Moscow!" Or was his mere presence in the White House going to be enough to scare Putin into waiting until Trump was out of office before putting his pent-up plans in motion?)

Here's the thing: Donald Trump is a stupid, crazy, aggressively shitty man, a vindictive thug, and a pathological liar.

(Perhaps one day he can tell us more stories about Uncle John and his relationship with Jack the Ripper.)

Trump doesn't recognize any of these faults, of course, and he never will. In general, the human brain protects us all from ever finding out the truth about ourselves.

However it happened, the man got himself elected, so we're stuck with him for another three and a half years: a criminal enterprise without guardrails, who is dismantling government and science and history and decency in a race to the bottom layers of human existence.

I'm pretty sure he plans to send troops to every (blue) city in the country, just to intimidate folks.

His illegal and delusional tariffs are hamstringing our economy and driving once friendly trading partners to embrace China, possibly forever. Trump thinks he can cure a trade deficit by taxing the offending country with tariffs, which is not how they work. (He still appears to think the foreign country pays the tariff.) The real fix for this condition is to find out what the other country needs and supply that need at a good price.

The members of his own party refuse to stop him because they fear his ability to destroy their political careers—and let's not forget they took a sacred oath on the Holy Bible to protect and preserve those careers.

(At least, that's how they must remember the day they got sworn into the House or Senate.)

There is, consequently, no viable, legal method for removing Trump from office.

We desperately need to create one.

We need a way to declare "no confidence" in a given president and demand a do-over of the most recent election.

If the president refuses, he's out, and the new election will be held without him.

If he participates, and wins, maybe give him (or her) a bonus year or two to prove his programs are proper and effective, despite appearances.

Perhaps a petition signed by millions of verified voters could make this do-over election happen, voters from both parties or those with no party affiliation.

But it would likely require a constitutional amendment to start the ball, which would no doubt take years to ratify. Nothing to address the immediate threat.

A more secure and honest president than Trump might be counted on to agree to a do-over election without any law or amendment in place, but we don't live in that world.

In the meantime, if the man is not actually planning a coup, it's astonishing how much it looks like that's exactly what he's up to.

During the campaign he said folks would only have to vote one more time, because he would just need four years to "fix" everything.

Can't help thinking that sounds ominous...

THE GULF OF AMERICA

Here's what should happen in the matter of immigration, but probably won't:

Trump needs to order a complete ground-stop on all round-ups of illegal immigrants, with the possible exception of violent criminals who also happen to be in this country illegally.

It's time to have that national debate on the past and future of immigration, leading at long last to Congressional legislation and a triumph of cold logic over super-heated emotion.

Given the uproar of protest against the imperial tactics of ICE, this is the only reasonable thing to do.

But who said this country is in the thrall of reason?

It is, instead, in the thrall of an ignorant crazy man who also happens to be a vindictive thug.

The guardrails have all been replaced by ranks of cheering sycophants. Nobody has a say on how this country should be operated unless they've already taken up residence in Donald Trump's poop cave. And there's not of a lot of difference of opinion coming from that redolent location.

Trump is not just a naked emperor, the man is positively inside-out.

But he knows he's not. He knows he's just fine, okay? He won a landslide victory at the polls, the result of which is that he's got an irresistible mandate to do whatever he might possibly think of doing.

Period. The end. Full stop.

It doesn't matter what fetid nonsense oozes from the haunted palace of his fever-baked skull. His will be done.

Trump is convinced that criticism from the national media is by definition illegal and must be put down. Jail, deport, or execute his detractors. That's what god clearly wants.

Only federal judges dare attempt to contain him, but unfortunately it's only a matter of time before Trump's rants against those critters will trigger his Brown Shirts to act on his behalf (if not on his specific orders).

We may soon be nostalgic for the time when murdering judges only happened in failed drug-peddling nations run by cartels.

Trump's preferred hatchet men were literally culled from prisons by presidential pardon and declared patriotic heroes by the massively delusional f-head of America.

Those guys owe the man, big time.

Elsewhere, the President's ineffective legal counsel, Emil Bove, is on a one-stop express to SCOTUSville. More long-lasting fallout from the detonation of Trump's atomic power grab.

Meanwhile, at the center of the country: a void, an emptiness, a mathematical null-set.

Donald Trump is the Gulf of America.

FAST TRACK

When the President of the United States runs the party that holds the majority in both houses of Congress, I think we can go ahead and call the situation "dictatorship by proxy."

And when the party that's in control has taken an oath to maintain their careers in Congress, no matter what, the deal is sealed.

(Talk of an oath to preserve and protect the Constitution can go on the trash heap of quaint and forgotten history. Political reality has entered the premises. Job One is sucking up to the man who can ruin your career by backing somebody else in the next primary election.)

When a President rules by kingly edict (executive order) and is himself a convicted felon, it's reasonable to assume that many (if not most) of his orders will be illegal.

When that information reaches a federal judge (by way of legal suit) and the judge is of reasonable mind and possesses basic common knowledge, that judge will quickly rule the President's executive order is defective and needs to be vacated.

Such a ruling should be applied as widely as the original executive order was intended to go. If nationwide, then nationwide.

The Supreme Court seems to disagree. Wrong again, boys and girls!

The President can always appeal the judge's decision (right quickly, too, if the President's name is Donald Trump, the man of a thousand lawyers). If the judgment is upheld by an appeals court, the President can pester SCOTUS for relief.

There is no harm to the nation if the judge's decision to derail the executive order is applied nationwide. If the President disagrees, says the matter is super-duper urgent, some sort of accelerated appeals process can be instigated.

Fast track the sucker!

After all, the original timing is entirely up the President. Nothing is on the table until he scrawls his name on the document in question.

When you're dealing with a dictator-by-proxy, everything has to run faster. If the Supreme Court doesn't want to work the whole year round, maybe some sort of penultimate court could pull that duty, ever ready to step in and stuff the President back into his fetid hole.

Let the crime-addled President cool his heels waiting for some final-final decision coming out of Big Time SCOTUS world. I'm sure he'll have lots of other fun criminal activities to fill out his schedule.

Plus, there's always golf, right?