It goes with the territory. As a political commentator, I read a pile of political books every year, some of them worthwhile, most not. But one of the best political books I read this year is "Pardon: The Politics of Presidential Mercy" by CNN's Jeff Toobin.

Citing the broad pardon power given the president in Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution - "He shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment" - Toobin notes this is the one and only place where, in effect, the president is a king. He has absolute power to pardon anybody he wants, anytime he wants, for any reason he chooses. Nobody, not even Congress, can stop him.

King Donald has made the presidential pardon his personal playground. While most presidents wait till the end of their term to grant a few pardons, usually to persons recommended by the Justice Department who've not received a fair trial, Trump's been issuing pardons from day one of his second term.

The pardon process used to be complicated. Hire a lawyer. Apply to the Justice Department. Lots of time and paperwork. But no longer. Trump's made the pardon process totally transactional and political. For him, it's the ultimate quid pro quo. Just say you're a victim like him and claim you were charged with a crime only because you were a Trump supporter - and you're free! It doesn't matter what you were charged with or how guilty you are, Trump's got a presidential "get out of jail free" card for you! He handed out many of them in the last few weeks. Of which, a few of the more outrageous.

Example one. Scott Jenkins, former sheriff of Culpeper County, Virginia. Jenkins was convicted by a jury of accepting $75,000 in bribes from local businessmen in return for making them auxiliary deputy sheriffs and sentenced to 10 years in prison. In his defense, Jenkins argued the district attorney only went after him because he was a big Trump supporter. That was enough for Trump. On Memorial Day, the day before reporting to prison, Jenkins received a presidential pardon.

Example two. Paul Walczak, a Florida nursing home executive, convicted of $10 million in tax fraud and sentenced to 18 months in prison. But even after pleading guilty, Walczak claimed he'd only been targeted because his mother, Elizabeth Fago, had held three fundraisers for Trump. Last month, Ms. Fago paid $1 million for a Trump fundraising dinner at Mar-a-Lago. Less than three weeks later, Trump signed a full and unconditional pardon for her son.

Example three. Brian Kelsey, former Tennessee state senator, who pleaded guilty in 2022 to illegally funneling money to his failed campaign for Congress. Once Trump was re-elected, Kelsey accused the Justice Department of coming after him only because he was a MAGA supporter. In February, he reported to prison for a 21-month sentence. Two weeks later, he received a Trump pardon.

Example four. Michael Grimm, former member of Congress from Staten Island, indicted in 2014 for failing to report nearly $1 million in receipts and hundreds of thousands in employee wages from a restaurant he owned. After serving seven months in prison, he became a TV host on Newsmax, where he strongly defended Donald Trump. Bingo!

Example five. Reality TV stars Julie and Todd Chrisley, convicted three years ago of evading taxes and defrauding banks of more than $30 million to support their luxurious lifestyle. Their daughter Savannah, a big Trump supporter, spoke at last year's Republican National Convention and said the magic words: claiming her parents, like Trump, had been "persecuted by rogue prosecutors" because of their conservative political beliefs. They walked out of prison this week.

And then, of course, there's the worst pardon abuse of all: Trump's wholesale pardon of nearly 1,600 people who stormed the United States Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Several were serving long sentences for assaulting police officers, including Daniel Rodriguez, whom a judge labeled "a one-man army of hate." But Trump called them all "patriots," insisted the Justice Department went after them only because they were Trump supporters, waved his magic wand, and their crimes disappeared.

For would-be criminals, the message could not be more clear. If you're even thinking about committing a crime, don't worry about the police. Just make sure you send a big check to Donald Trump first. If Charles Manson had thought of that, he might have been out of prison a long time ago.

(C)2025 Tribune Content Agency, LLC. 

My new plane is bigger than yours!

It's official. In what is probably the most significant achievement of his first four months in office, Donald Trump has acquired a fancy new plane. For him, it's a personal triumph. For the rest of us, it's a national embarrassment.

His new plane is a luxury 747 worth $400 million called the "Flying Palace," which the government of Qatar has been trying to dump for years. But, since nobody makes 747's anymore and spare parts are practically non-existent, they had a hard time finding a willing buyer - until a sucker named Donald Trump came along.

It's no secret how badly Trump wants a new Air Force One and how frustrated he is that Boeing can't deliver one for another two years. So, as reported by CNN and the New York Times, once Trump was back in office the White House asked Qatar if its Flying Palace might still be for sale. You bet, said Qatar. We'll even fly it to West Palm Beach (at an estimated round- trip cost of $1 million) so Trump can inspect it himself.

Which he did, off the record, on Feb. 15. And for Trump, penis envy kicked in. Their plane was clearly bigger, flashier, fancier and gaudier than his. He had to have it. But why should he buy it, Trump asked. Why don't they just give it to me? Which Qatar - eager to get rid of the jet, and even more eager to be in Trump's debt - readily agreed to.

There's only one problem. The Constitution! Recognizing the peril of a president being influenced by expensive gifts from foreign countries, the Founding Fathers made sure that wouldn't happen. Article 1, Section 9, Clause 8: "No person, holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, or foreign State."

No translation needed. Without congressional approval, Donald Trump is forbidden by the Constitution from accepting a $400 million gift from Qatar. But the Constitution's never stopped Trump, who says he's not even sure he's bound by it. So the White House invented an end run around the Constitution. It's not a gift to Donald Trump, they argue, it's a gift to the United States government. And Trump will never use it after he leaves office, he'll turn it over to his presidential library.

All of which is total nonsense. If you believe that story, I've got a used 747 to sell you.

Of course, this "deal" may never happen. Before it can serve as a new, temporary Air Force One, the plane must be swept for hidden listening devices, equipped with the highest standards of security, and reconfigured to meet the needs of a presidential delegation, not a royal family. Experts say that could cost up to $1 billion, and might not even be finished before Trump leaves office.

But, repurposed as Air Force One or not, the Flying Palace will always stand as the symbol of what Donald Trump's presidency is all about: self-enrichment. For him and his greedy family, the biggest bunch of grifters who ever walked the face of the earth.

It wasn't the president alone who used last week's romp through the Middle East to line his pockets. Before he got there, sons Eric and Donald Jr. had been on a whirlwind tour, signing deals for a $1 billion, 80-story luxury hotel in Dubai; a second high-end residential tower in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; a new high-rise Trump hotel in Serbia; a new golf course and villa complex in Qatar; and a new, exclusive private club in Washington.

These ventures come on top of the meme coins Trump is hawking (top buyers get a private dinner with the president); the sneakers, Bibles, and trading cards he's still selling; and World Liberty Financial, the crypto firm Trump just launched with a $2 billion investment from Abu Dhabi. All of which benefit not just his sons, but Trump himself.

For Donald Trump, the presidency is nothing but a giant money-making scheme. Period. As world leaders now realize. When Trump, in their Oval Office meeting this week, accused South Africa of "genocide," President Cyril Ramaphosa fired back: "I'm sorry I don't have a plane to give you."

In all seriousness, Trump replied: "I wish you did. I would take it." In which case, of course, Ramaphosa would have been treated a lot better. Sad!

(C)2025 Tribune Content Agency, LLC. 

Pope Francis: The down-to-earth pope

It's a lesson we all learned a long time ago: no matter what plans we make, unexpected events can pop up and change everything. It's a lesson I learned again this week. 

Here I am in Bologna, Italy, having decided to escape to Italy for a few weeks to study Italian and get as far away from politics as I could. Good plan. But, due to one big, unexpected event, I'm suddenly in the middle of another political campaign - a campaign for the next pope. Which is especially relevant for residents of Bologna, since Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, the very popular archbishop of Bologna and close friend of Pope Francis, is considered one of the leading candidates, or "papabile," to succeed him.

Of course, this election has global, not just national, consequences. It's about a lot more than who will be the next pope. It's about what direction the Catholic Church - the world's largest Christian church, with 1.4 billion baptized Catholics as of 2024 - will take in the future. Will it continue the open-arms, progressive outreach of the church, preached and practiced by Pope Francis till his dying day? Or will it go backward toward the closed door, ultra-conservative policies of Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI?

In one respect, this campaign is different from any other political campaign. Since Catholics believe it's the Holy Spirit, not the cardinals themselves, who decides the next pope, it's considered inappropriate to openly seek the office or campaign for it. But, as last year's great film "Conclave" showed, that doesn't prevent a lot of wheeling and dealing in countless conversations, dinners or phone calls ahead of the conclave. And some cardinals make sure the media sees them as serious contenders.

The night Francis died, I watched an hour-long special about his papacy on Italian television, largely narrated by a cardinal I'd never heard of. Turns out he's another leading papabile, Luis Antonio Tagle from the Philippines, dubbed the "Asian Francis." The next morning, the aforementioned Cardinal Zuppi of Bologna had an op-ed in "La Repubblica," Italy's largest newspaper, praising the progressive policies of St. Francis and making the case for more of the same. They're off and running!

Given the worldwide importance of the election, it's surprising that it will be decided by only 135 voters - fewer than some Manhattan co-op boards. Once they're locked inside the Sistine Chapel, anything could happen. But chances are, despite the efforts of some extremely conservative American bishops to turn back the clock, the Vatican's not going to swing to the far right.

Consider the math. Out of a total 252 cardinals, only 135 are under 80 years of age and thereby eligible to vote - of whom Pope Francis elevated 108. In other words, four out of every five cardinals casting a ballot will be Francis-born. They're unlikely to repudiate the man they admire and owe their job to by choosing an ultra-conservative pope. Instead, they're more likely to choose a pope committed to carrying on Francis' legacy. But his shoes will, indeed, be hard to fill.

True, Pope Francis didn't go as far as progressive Catholics wanted him to go. He stubbornly refused to consider ordaining women as priests; he welcomed LGBTQ Catholics, but still treated them as second-class citizens. But he probably pushed the church as far as he could, and set a powerful example for public service.

Pope Francis was the real deal. He was not a pope on a pedestal, he was a pope on the streets. He didn't hang out with the high and mighty, he spent his time with the poor, with criminals and immigrants, with the "ultimi," the last of the last, those who needed help the most. He slept in a guest house on Vatican grounds rather than in the opulent Papal Palace, he was driven around in a little car, no limousine, and wore black loafers instead of Gucci papal red shoes. Italians called him "a pope like us."

He was the first pope to recognize the danger of climate change and make it a top priority. He opposed the war in Ukraine and Netanyahu's relentless bombing of Gaza. He championed the cause of immigrants and blasted politicians who exploit their plight for political gain.

As Cardinal Zuppi wrote, Pope Francis saw his position of power, "not as an office, but as a service." In him, the world had a leader who used his power to unite, not to divide; and to serve others, not to enrich himself. We poor Americans got stuck with just the opposite.

Don't get me wrong. He's not only the wealthiest man on the planet, he's also the most obnoxious. If I had a Tesla, I would have dumped it long ago. Nonetheless, I think we owe a big thank you to South African-born, non-elected, non-confirmed, oft-married, father-many-times-over, genuine weirdo, and Shadow President Elon Musk. He made us smile again!

Democrats have been in a funk. And not only Democrats, but anybody with a soul, or any sense of what's really important in life. Because, in the first three months of the Trump Regime, we've seen everything we cared about targeted and destroyed by the Trump/Musk machine.

Chainsaw in hand, Trump and Musk have moved to gut or eliminate everything that once seemed worthwhile: the Department of Education; the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau; researchers and scientists at the National Institutes of Health; doctors and health care providers in the Veterans Administration; the US Agency for International Development, or USAID, the most important source of aid for the poorest people on the planet; and FEMA, the most important source of relief for Americans wiped out by tornadoes, hurricanes or wildfire.

Not only that, Trump and Musk have also moved to shut down our legendary cultural institutions. Musk has ordered an 80 percent reduction in staff of the National Endowment for the Humanities, created by Congress in 1965 and supported by every president since. Meanwhile, Trump's taken over the Kennedy Center. He's shut down the Institute of Museum and Library Services, which provides funding for libraries and museums in every state of the union. He put JD Vance in charge of totally revamping the Smithsonian Institution. He's demanded that slavery be portrayed more positively in the National Museum of African American History and Culture. And he's even announced plans to remake the National Zoo. Because, apparently, the pandas are too "woke."

Now add to those senseless, unnecessary and painful cuts Trump's bloated tariffs, which amount to the largest sales tax in history, and it's easy to see why kindred souls have been so downhearted. There's much to weep about and nothing to cheer about. Until this week! But now, thanks to Elon Musk, we all have something to cheer about: Wisconsin!

In a stunning setback for Trump and Musk, Wisconsin voters, by a 55 percent to 45 percent margin, chose progressive judge Susan Crawford as the next justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court over Trump and Musk's right-wing candidate Brad Schimel. This was much more than a statewide judicial contest. It was an election of huge national importance.

First, because it was the most expensive judicial campaign ever, with almost $100 million spent by both parties in what is, traditionally, a nonpartisan race. Second, because so many critical issues, including abortion and gerrymandering, are before the court. But, third, and most importantly, because Elon Musk made this a referendum on himself - and on the first three months of the Trump Regime. In a sign of what lies ahead for Republicans in 2026, Wisconsin voters soundly rejected both.

Despite a glaring conflict of interest - one issue before the Supreme Court is Musk's challenge to a Wisconsin law requiring car manufacturers to sell cars through local car dealers, and not directly to customers - Musk made this race his top priority. He gave Schimel a $21 million campaign donation. He offered $20 to anyone who volunteered to knock on doors, and $100 to anyone who signed a petition against "activist judges." He paid three individuals $1 million each, just for voting for Schimel.

Then he went to Wisconsin, doffed a cheesehead, personally handed out his checks and told a crowd of adoring MAGA supporters that this judicial election would "affect the entire destiny of humanity." Not only that, in pure Trumpian fashion he claimed that Schimel's loss would - wait for it! - mark "the end of Western civilization" as we know it. All because Tesla would have to sell cars in local dealerships. Please!

Musk spent more than $21 million trying to buy a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. But Wisconsin voters weren't buying it. They said loud and clear: "Wisconsin's not for sale."

Coming on top of winning two special legislative elections in Iowa and Pennsylvania, defeating four Republican-sponsored initiatives in Louisiana, a bold, history-making Senate speech by Cory Booker, and a triumphant victory in Wisconsin, Democrats suddenly have more bounce in their step.

And they may have found their silver bullet for 2026. As Pod Save America's Jon Favreau quipped, "Please send Elon Musk to all the close races!"

(C)2025 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Personal note: Determined to learn to speak Italian, I’m taking the next few weeks off for an intensive language program in Bologna, Italy. My column will resume in mid-May, when I hope we still have a democracy left to write about. A presto! BP 

For a good belly-laugh, there's nothing better than pulling up clips of that bumbling, incompetent band of policemen created for the silent screen by Mack Sennett who became known as the "Keystone Cops."

I promise you that you'll laugh yourself silly - until, about halfway through, you'll stop in your tracks like I did. OMG, you'll say, this isn't funny a ny more. Because the Keystone Cops are back - in real life this time, not on celluloid - and now they're running the country!

Indeed, so far the Trump administration resembles nothing so much as a rerun of the Keystone Cops, or that'50s classic television series, "The Original Amateur Hour." And that's nowhere more evident than in the scandal now called "Signalgate." Let's start with the facts.

Fact. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gathered top administration officials together to reveal plans for an American military strike on Houthi rebels in Yemen. In addition to Hegseth, on that call were the National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe. Also in the chat, mistakenly invited to join by Waltz, was journalist Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic.

Fact. Hegseth called his meeting, not in a secure room, or "SCIF" - many of which are located in the Pentagon, the State Department, the White House and the Capitol - but on a commercial app called "Signal," which, while it does have some encryption, is not a secure government communications system. It's one step up from scheduling a Zoom meeting to unveil detailed plans for going to war.

Fact. No question. This is an unprecedented, shocking and inexcusable breach of national security which put the lives of American soldiers at risk. If any military officer revealed such plans on a public app, he'd be summarily court-martialed. And any civilian leader who took part in such an exercise should be fired. Didn't any one of those so-called "geniuses" in the chat think to ask: "Why are we discussing military secrets online?" Or "Why's this reporter in the room?"

As is always the case with Donald Trump, once the story broke, the denial and cover-up was as bad as the scandal. First, because that's what he always does, Trump attacked Greenberg personally, calling him a "sleazebag," and dismissing The Atlantic as a "failing magazine." Which is not true, and which has nothing to do with the substance of the Hegseth chat. And, remember, Goldberg did not sneak his way into the chatroom. He was invited to join by Trump's national security adviser.

Then, unbelievably, Trump, Hegseth and the other Cabinet members insisted there was "no classified information" discussed on the call. An assertion totally destroyed the next day when Goldberg published the timeline provided in Hegseth's chatroom, which - hours before the military operation began - included such crucial details as the targets of the attacks, the fighter planes and weapons to be used, the way they would be delivered and the precise timing of each missile launch. The only thing missing were the names of the pilots.

If that's not classified information, what is? As retired four-star general Barry McCaffrey told MSNBC: "This was an egregious breach of security that put Navy combat flyers at risk." The Wall Street Journal called it "security malpractice."

Equally disgusting is the reaction of cowardly Republican members of Congress. Just a few years ago, they demanded that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton be "locked up" for using her personal computer to email friends. Yet Donald Trump's team uses an unsecured online chatroom to discuss details of a military strike and their response is: Crickets! No outrage. No demands that anybody be fired. No calls for congressional hearings. Crickets! Cowards!

This may be the worst screw-up by the Trump gang, but it's hardly the first. The last two months have seen a string of embarrassing moves: ordering a freeze on all federal grants, only to rescind it the next day; firing scores of Department of Energy employees, but forced to rehire them when learning they were responsible for overseeing nuclear weapons; also forced to rehire fired Agriculture employees leading the fight against bird flu; and taking many actions blocked by courts as clearly illegal.

No surprise, I guess. When you elect an incompetent president who surrounds himself with incompetent people, this is what you get. But, after two months of the Keystone Cops, the big question for 77 million Americans remains: Are you still glad you voted for this clown?

(C)2025 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Bill Press: Democrats: This is not the time to surrender or play nice

It's what everyone is asking today: Having had their clocks cleaned in November 2024 - and with the country facing an existential threat to our democracy - can Democrats ever get back on top? And if so, how?

First, two important points. One: No doubt, the Democratic Party will bounce back, as it always has before. As bad as November 2024 was, we've seen worse. In 1984, Ronald Reagan won 49 out of 50 states. Two years later, Democrats regained control of both the House and Senate for the first time since 1980.

Two: It's going to take time. Given all the damage he's doing every day, we're all frustrated and angry that Democrats haven't yet stopped Donald Trump in his tracks. But, though it seems like an eternity, it's only been five weeks. Republicans were also in total disarray after Obama's election in 2008. It took them six months to come up with a strategy, which was to deny Obama a second term. Democrats already have a strategy, taking back the Senate and House in 2026.

The big question is: How? This week, we saw three examples of how not to do it. From Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries and Gavin Newsom. Democrats are never going to win by surrender (Schumer), waiting for the sky to fall (Jeffries) or playing nice (Newsom).

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer infuriated fellow Democrats by attacking the Republicans' budget bill one day, and then announcing he'd vote for allowing it to proceed the next. He defended his decision by insisting Democrats only had two choices: shutting down the government or going along with a bad bill. The bill sucks, he argued, but a government shutdown sucks worse. So, without putting up a fight, he simply surrendered.

Schumer was dead wrong. A shutdown would have been a disaster Trump could easily blame on Democrats, but Democrats had at least two other alternatives. One, proposed by Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), was pushing for a four-week extension to negotiate a bipartisan solution. The other was simply to fight like hell.

Even if they lost that battle, Democrats could have used that time to let the American people know how dangerous the Republican budget plan is. It guts funding for health care, increases military spending while slashing $13 billion in domestic spending, funds mass deportations and cuts many vital services, including FEMA's disaster relief program, which is out of money after last year's disastrous tornadoes, hurricanes and wildfires. But Democrats never got that message out because Schumer walked off the field.

Newsom, meanwhile, adopted the losing strategy of "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em." He launched a new podcast and bizarrely invited as his first guests three extreme MAGA Republicans: Charlie Kirk, Steve Bannon and Michael Savage. In this case, Newsom's extreme ambition got in the way of his good judgment. You don't give the opposition a platform to spew their lies. And if you do invite them on, you don't play nice. You challenge them and prove them wrong.

As Democratic leader of the House, Jeffries takes the "wait and see" approach. Yes, Trump's doing a lot of bad stuff, he admits. But, he shrugs, "We can't swing at every pitch." Which raises the obvious question: How long do you wait before you swing - and do you have any juice left when you finally do?

"Right now, you have to swing at every pitch," counters Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT). "If you let some of these egregious acts of his early days pass without real protest, it normalizes the behavior. It ends up less likely that you convince anyone to get off the mat later on."

Murphy's right. And, fortunately, he's not the only one speaking out. So is Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), holding packed rallies in the Midwest to protest Trump's dismantling of the federal government. So is Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker, comparing Trump's authoritarianism to the rise of Nazism in Germany.

And so is Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), the first to challenge Schumer's surrender, recently named in an SRSS poll as the politician who best represents the Democratic Party's "core values." In that same poll, 57 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters said that opposing the GOP should be the party's number one priority, rather than trying to find common ground with MAGA.

Surrender, playing nice or sitting on the sidelines is not the answer. Democrats must be raising hell every day, on every platform, against every Trump outrage. There's no time to waste. The 2026 midterms are only 19 months away.

(C)2025 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

We know what he's against. What is Donald Trump for?

We remember the good old days: when we had the strongest and best economy in the world. America was firing on all cylinders. Wages, consumer spending and corporate profits were up. Unemployment was at a record low. The stock markets were at a record high. The labor market added 7.9 million new jobs. And inflation, which popped up for a few months, was falling.

Believe it or not, that was just a month ago. We remember the good old days, under Joe Biden. It took Donald Trump only a month to destroy it all. Today, the markets are plummeting; unemployment - thanks to tens of thousands of workers fired by Trump - is soaring; inflation is creeping back up; and consumer prices are about to explode as Trump pursues his mindless, confusing, on-again-off-again trade war against Mexico, China, Canada and Western Europe.

And Americans don't like it. In the latest CNN/SRSS poll, 56% of Americans disapprove of Trump's handling of the economy and 61% oppose his position on tariffs. Overall, only 45% of Americans approve of the way he's handling the presidency so far; 55% disapprove. Trump's honeymoon with voters lasted about as long as his honeymoon with Melania.

There's a good reason why Americans, even many who voted for him in 2024, have turned sour on Donald Trump so soon. Because, while it's easy to see what he's against, he's almost impossible to figure out what he's for.

Clearly, he's against education. What used to be a major plank of the Republican Party - that nothing was more important than giving American child the best possible education - means nothing to Donald Trump. He's determined to end any federal role in public schools - and has already, just this week, fired one-half of all employees of the Department of Education, on his way to eliminating it altogether.

Clearly, he's against science. With his blessing, Co-President Elon Musk has taken a chainsaw to several federal agencies where scientists are doing unsung but critical scientific research. Scientists have been fired and labs are shuttered in the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Clearly, he's against veterans. Trump's clobbered them twice. Roughly one-third of all federal employees are veterans (under a priority hiring program begun under President Barack Obama) so many of them are likely to face firings. On top of that, Trump has announced plans to fire 80,000 employees of the Veterans Administration, which will mean drastic cuts in medical care for America's 9 million veterans in 170 VA medical centers.

Clearly, he's against the environment. He's rolled back most of Biden's moves on climate change and renewable energy. He's repealed dozens of environmental regulations, including on pollution from tailpipes and smokestacks. Lee Zeldin, Trump's EPA chief, says the agency's new goal is to "lower the cost of buying a car, heating a home and running a business" - no mention of "protecting the environment and public health," for which the EPA was created by Richard Nixon in 1970.

Clearly, he's against national parks. He's already fired 1,000 National Park Service employees and demanded that NPS come up with a plan to cut costs by 30%, while shutting down 34 park service centers nationwide. This despite the fact that national parks - which attract 300 million visitors annually - represent only one-fifteenth of 1% of the federal budget, yet contribute $55.6 billion in revenues to the federal budget.

Clearly, he's against the arts. He took over the Kennedy Center, for which he named a new MAGA chair and board of trustees. He disbanded the President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities, created by President Ronald Reagan in 1982. He fired one-half of the General Services Administration staff responsible for overseeing 26,000 public artworks in federal buildings, including the huge, red, iconic Alexander Calder "Flamingo" sculpture in Chicago.

No need to mention how much Trump's against immigrants. Still, you must ask: While he's busy destroying so much, is there anything Donald Trump is actually for?

Yes, as we discovered this week. He's for anything to help the richest man on the planet get even richer, including turning the revered South Lawn of the White House into a used-car lot and urging Americans to buy a car most of them can't afford, especially after he's fired so many of them.

After just one disastrous month, the big question for 77 million Americans is: Are you still glad you voted for this clown?

(C)2025 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
 

News outlets scrambled to find the right words to describe Donald Trump's address to a joint session of Congress this week. CNN: "unapologetic." Politico: "raucous." New York Times: "rowdy." The Hill: "campaign rally-like."

All of which are true. But I think The Bulwark summed it up better: "childish, silly, and unimpressive." To which I would add: disgusting, embarrassing, insulting, demented, disrespectful, offensive, provocative, perverse, mocking, mean-spirited, unwatchable, egomaniacal, packed with lies, and far, far too long. 100 minutes. 9,888 words.

Only a madman would begin a speech to Congress by bragging that it has been "stated by many" that his first month in office was "the most successful in the history of our nation." Stated by whom? Name one person! He didn't. He can't. But Trump didn't stop there. If he had the most successful month ever, that makes him the greatest president ever. "And what makes it even more impressive," Trump continued, "is that you know who No. 2 is? George Washington!"

The next morning, with exquisite timing, NOTUS - the great news outlet recently launched by the Allbritton Journalism Institute - gathered a group of journalists to discuss how to cover Trump 2.0. The general consensus was that, no matter how challenging covering this president is, it's important that reporters simply do their job: ask tough questions, tell the people what's going on and speak truth to power.

It's in speaking "truth to power" that I expose, out of hundreds of lies Trump told Tuesday night, a few of the biggest whoppers.

Mandate. "The presidential election of Nov. 5 was a mandate like has not been seen in many decades." False. It's no mandate. Not even close. Trump's margin over Kamala Harris was 1.5 points, the fifth smallest margin of 32 presidential races since 1900. He didn't win most of the popular vote, either: 50.2% of Americans voted for someone else.

Economy. His first term, Trump again claimed, gave us "the most successful economy in the history of our country." No, not true. According to FactCheck.Org, here are the economic numbers: We lost 2.7 million jobs. Unemployment climbed to 6.4%. Home prices rose 27.5%. And the federal debt soared from $14.4 trillion to $21.6 trillion.

Free speech. "I've stopped all government censorship and brought back free speech in America." No way. Just the opposite. Trump initiated government censorship by banning AP reporters from White House press events because they won't say "Gulf of America," and decreed that from now on, he alone, not the White House Correspondents Association, will decide which reporters get to cover him. Vladimir Putin did the same thing.

Price of eggs. "Joe Biden especially let the price of eggs get out of control." Ha! Yes, the price of eggs did soar last year. But only because the Agriculture Department required poultry farmers to destroy millions of egg-laying hens to prevent an outbreak of bird flu. With the continuing threat of bird flu, USDA projects egg prices will increase this year by 41.1%.

Social Security. As an example of "waste and fraud," Trump cited "1,039 people between the ages of 220 and 229" on Social Security and "one person listed at 360 years of age." Ridiculous. Officials quickly pointed out these were merely people for whom there is no known date of death. They're not still getting checks.

Inflation. Under Biden, Trump claimed, "we suffered the worst inflation in 48 years. Perhaps even in the history of our country, they're not sure." Not true. And they are sure. Inflation soared to 9.1% in June 2022. It was 23.75% in 1920. When Biden left office, inflation had cooled to 2.9%. Under Trump, it's now 3%.

Bureaucracy. "The days of rule by unelected bureaucrats are over." LOL. Maybe Trump's biggest lie of all, because everybody knows that an unelected, unconfirmed bureaucrat from South Africa is now actually running the government!

Of course, those are only a few of Trump's cascade of lies. Which is only important if you think lying is wrong. Sadly, most people today don't seem to care. They may still teach their kids to tell the truth, but they don't care if the biggest liar of all time is in the White House.

How far we've come from the wisdom of French philosopher Michel de Montaigne: "Lying is an accursed vice. It is only our words which bind us together and make us human. If we realized the horror and weight of lying, we would see that it is more worthy of the stake than other crimes."

(C)2025 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Who's in charge? It's not Donald Trump

No wonder the American people are confused. At first, it's hard to know who's actually running the country these days, the elected President Donald Trump or the unelected, unconfirmed "Shadow" President Elon Musk.

But take a closer look and there's no doubt about it. Who stood alongside the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office last week taking questions from reporters for half an hour? Not Donald Trump, but Elon Musk. Who ordered 2.3 million federal workers to tell him five things they'd done the previous week or be fired? Not Donald Trump, but Elon Musk. And who was standing up, dominating Donald Trump's first second-term Cabinet meeting, giving orders to Cabinet secretaries? Not Donald Trump, but Elon Musk.

No, that mad man from South Africa, unvetted and unelected to anything, is not the shadow president, he's the acting president. Another big Trump lie. He said he was going to be a dictator for one day. He didn't tell us he was going to make Elon Musk a dictator for four years. When does Musk move into the Lincoln Bedroom?

No doubt about it, Musk is running the show, taking a chainsaw to the federal government, already destroying the lives of many American families with his mass firings, and handicapping the ability of government agencies to provide important services.

What's striking is not only how much harm Musk has done in just one month, but also, despite his reputation as a genius, how badly he's screwed things up. He fired 300 employees of the National Nuclear Security Agency without realizing they were responsible for guarding America's nuclear arsenal - and had to hire them back. He fired a group of workers at the Department of Agriculture without realizing they were coordinating the government's response to bird flu - and had to hire them back. While the nation's still dealing with the impact of two deadly air crashes, Musk fired FAA employees without realizing they were providing backup to air traffic controllers - and had to rehire them. On DOGE's website, Musk bragged about saving $8 billion by canceling a diversity program at ICE - only to admit later that the total cost of the program was $8 million, not $8 billion and, in two and a half years, only $2.5 million of it had been spent.

Wait! It gets worse. Under Musk's orders, VA Secretary Doug Collins proudly announced he was cutting 875 government contracts for a savings of $2 billion. Two days later - after the Washington Post reported those contracts covered such essential services as basic medical care, cancer treatment, recruiting new doctors at the VA's 170 hospitals, and paying costs of burial services for veterans' families - Musk and Collins reversed course and renewed all 875 contracts.

But, of course, that didn't spare veterans from the Musk/Trump massacre. Thanks to a program begun by First Lady Michelle Obama, which requires federal agencies to give veterans priority status in new hires, 30 percent of federal employees today are veterans. Which means that almost one-third of all workers fired by Trump and Musk so far are veterans, one group that Republicans promised never to abandon - until Elon Musk and Donald Trump came along. Thanks for your service, indeed.

And Musk is just getting started. He's already given federal agencies a mid-April deadline for submitting plans to move their operations out of Washington. He's targeted cutting the work force at the Social Security Administration in half, cutting EPA by 65 percent, firing 7,000 employees at IRS, gutting the National Park Service, and cutting the Equal Opportunity staff at the Department of Labor by 90 percent.

Here's what's really galling: While Musk sells himself as the champion against waste and fraud, he himself has pocketed more than $38 billion in federal loans, contracts and subsidies over the years. He wouldn't be the business success he is today without the federal government. He's not only cruel, he's a phony.

Two things for sure. One, you can't take such a meat ax approach to government without its blowing up in your face. Two, when it does, Trump will try to blame it all on Elon Musk. But don't be fooled. Trump gave Musk the power. And rather than try to rein him in, Trump has encouraged Musk to be even more "aggressive." Donald Trump is Elon Musk.

In the meantime, this is the only time I've ever agreed with Steve Bannon, who's called Musk "truly evil." We don't need any dude from South Africa wrecking our government, while telling us what democracy is all about.

(C)2025 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.