Wednesday, November 12, 2025

Former Judge Mark Wolf speaks out

 First up,  Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Cupid Killer Kim Davis" 


kimdavis


Kim Davis is evil and needs to find a place to hide out, we don't need her in polite society.

I'm glad the Supreme Court refused to hear her latest attack.


A federal judge appointed by a Republican president resigned last Friday, and published a scathing letter in The Atlantic on Monday explaining why.

“The White House’s assault on the rule of law is so deeply disturbing to me that I feel compelled to speak out,” wrote Mark L. Wolf, a former U.S. district judge in Massachusetts. “Silence, to me, is now intolerable.”

In the letter, Wolf accused the Trump administration of corruption, using the law for partisan purposes and activating the Department of Justice as a tool for “targeting his adversaries while sparing his friends and donors from investigation, prosecution and possible punishment.”

Quoting the then Sen. Robert F. Kennedy speaking about apartheid South Africa in 1966, Wolf wrote, “‘Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope.’”

He added that, “Enough of these ripples can become a tidal wave.”


I've been meaning to note that since C.I. slid a report over to me -- Mattathias Schwartz (NEW YORK TIMES):

The judge, Mark L. Wolf, wrote in The Atlantic magazine that Mr. Trump’s actions were “contrary to everything that I have stood for in my more than 50 years in the Department of Justice and on the bench.”

The publication of the essay by Judge Wolf, 78, came two days after an announcement by the Federal District Court for Massachusetts that he was leaving his post as a senior-status judge.

An appointee of President Ronald Reagan who also served in the Justice Department during the Ford administration, Judge Wolf offered one of the most explicit expressions of concern for the rule of law to come from a member of the federal judiciary amid Mr. Trump’s efforts to vastly expand the scope of presidential power.

His seat on the court was filled by Judge Indira Talwani, a nominee of President Barack Obama, in 2014, after he stepped down from active service to senior status, a form of semi-retirement.

In a phone interview, Judge Wolf said he had resigned not only to speak more freely about his own views, but also those of colleagues who were still on the bench. “I hope to be a spokesperson for embattled judges who, consistent with the code of conduct, feel they cannot speak candidly to the American people,” he said.



What Nixon did episodically and covertly, knowing it was illegal or improper, Trump now does routinely and overtly. Prosecutorial decisions during this administration are a prime example. Because even a prosecution that ends in an acquittal can have devastating consequences for the defendant, as a matter of fairness Justice Department guidelines instruct prosecutors not to seek an indictment unless they believe there is sufficient admissible evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Trump has utterly ignored this principle. In a social-media post, he instructed Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek indictments against three political adversaries even though the officials in charge of the investigations at the time saw no proper basis for doing so. It has been reported that New York Attorney General Letitia James was prosecuted for mortgage fraud after Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, one of Donald Trump’s former criminal-defense lawyers, questioned the legal viability of bringing charges against James. Former FBI Director James Comey was charged after the interim U.S. attorney who had been appointed by Trump refused to seek an indictment and was forced to resign. Senator Adam Schiff, the third target of Trump’s social-media post, has yet to be charged.
Trump is also dismantling the offices that could and should investigate possible corruption by him and those in his orbit. Soon after he was inaugurated, Trump fired, possibly unlawfully, 18 inspectors general who were responsible for detecting and deterring fraud and misconduct in major federal agencies. The FBI’s public-corruption squad also has been eliminated. The Department of Justice’s public-integrity section has been eviscerated, reduced from 30 lawyers to only five, and its authority to investigate election fraud has been revoked.
The Department of Justice has evidently chosen to ignore matters it would in the past have likely investigated. Some directly involve the president. It has been reported that at a lavish April 2024 dinner at Mar-a-Lago, after executives from major oil companies complained about how the Biden administration’s environmental regulations were hurting their businesses, Trump said that if they raised $1 billion for his campaign he would promptly reverse those rules and policies. The executives raised the money, and Trump delivered on his promise. The law may be unclear concerning whether Trump himself could have been charged with conspiracy to bribe a public official or honest-services fraud. In addition, Trump himself may have immunity from prosecution if similar payments for his benefit continued after he became president. However, the companies that made the payments, and the individuals acting for them, could possibly be prosecuted. There is no public indication that this matter has been investigated by Trump’s Department of Justice.


The judge was on PBS' NEWSHOUR this week.



Click here for the transcript of the interview.


"The Snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):

 Wednesday, November 12, 2025.  Chuck Schumer should step down as Senate Minority Leader, none of Chump's security appointees have any experience and it shows, Senator Elizabeth Warren warns a bout the ticking time bomb on student loans, and much more.


Let's start with angry e-mails.  I don't look at every video that goes up here.  A number of you are upset.  I looked at the video after I read some of the e-mails and you are right to be upset.  I didn't stream it before I posted it here and I didn't watch that program last night.  The host is a smart person so I had thought he wouldn't dig himself deeper.  The majority of Democrats disagree with him.  We discussed this yesterday.  My plan was to note -- as I did yesterday -- that he was wrong.  And then I posted him this morning.  Because he's smart.  Or usually is.  I had moved on and thought he would too.


He didn't move on and he got insulting with people who disagree with him.  That's just stupid.  Grasp that he's going on about Chump calling Americans fools while this host is doing the same thing as Chump.  Those of us who disagree with him, he says in the video I wrongly posted here, are focused on feelings and not facts.


What the hell is that supposed to mean?


Again, I thought he was smart enough to move on.  Every host on his network knows Chuck Schumer betrayed the American people and they noted that on their programs.  


I like the host.  He's very smart.  Again, I thought he would have moved on but instead he dug in deeper.  In the future, he won't go up here automatically.  


We don't have time to cover all of this.  So let's deal with just one spect: We are focused on feelings and not facts!

That's his accusation.  His false accusation.


He believes it's true.


Okay.


If it's true, how are you helping anyone?


Because, guess what, MS NOW host, people vote on feelings.  They are more likely to vote on feelings than on facts.  That's reality.  


And when you sneer at voters -- and viewers -- that they are feelings based and not fact based -- how are you different from Chump calling Americans fools?


He's not going to win on this topic.  He needs to leave it alone and stop returning to it.


Ezra Levin?  More Democrats agree with him right now.  He's also been on MS NOW this week and we've noted it.  We haven't noted his Jim Acosta appearance so let note that this morning.



 

Ezra Levin speaks for more people than a host trying to sugar coat the betrayal.  It is a betrayal and it feels like one because that's what it is.   Defending Chuck for the betrayal?  You're just running off viewers.  We're not stupid.  


And this nonsense argument the TV host is making goes like this:  Schumer had no power or influence and couldn't -- in effect! -- herd cat and Schumer should remain Senate Minority Leader!  


He has no power or influence?  But he should remain the leader?  That makes no sense at all.  He's inept and he's had eight years, time to go. 

At this late point,, you're either defending the people or you're defending the politician.  I don't have time to waste defending inept politicians who betray the people and I'm betting that feeling is much more common among voters than the TV host's opinions -- which, though he tries to deny it, also stem from feelings.  

My apology to community members for posting that.  I hear you on this and, again, no more automatic posting for that host.  


On Schumer, Alex Shephard (THE NEW REPUBLIC) writes:


What was this all for? 

A few days ago, that question would not have been difficult to answer. The government shutdown was about cuts to Obamacare subsidies that were poised to cause the cost of health care to skyrocket for millions—and that would likely destroy the Affordable Care Act itself. It was about an increasingly lawless and authoritarian administration that had simply stopped participating in normal politics, preferring instead to deploy armed goons in communities across the country. It was about fighting back against a rogue regime to the enthusiastic hurrahs of a base that only last week came out to the polls to deal a hammer blow to the GOP.

What is there to say now that eight Democratic moderates—with the barely disguised backing of party leader Chuck Schumer and all-but-certain coordination from some of the Democratic senators pretending to have been against the decision—voted to reopen the government in exchange for practically nothing? A few days ago, the Democrats had all the leverage in the world. The Republicans had none. It didn’t matter. The Democrats bailed out Trump and his Capitol Hill supplicants. They threw millions of people under the bus. For what? They protected the filibuster so they wouldn’t be tempted to use it to make people’s lives better the next time they take power. Besides that? Nothing.

There are many villains here. Abigail Spanberger, the newly elected governor of Virginia, went on Meet the Press to give political cover to the renegades, undercutting her party, and demanding that they reopen the government—her interview was shared widely with her fellow Democrats. (Shivving her party after they’ve won an election is something of a Spanberger special.)

The New Hampshire delegation should be singled out for special excoriation—the retiring Jeanne Shaheen, along with Maggie Hassan, led the negotiations with Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and the independent (and probably retiring) Angus King. They were joined by another soon-to-depart colleague in Dick Durbin, two others whose terms run until 2030 (Jacky Rosen and Tim Kaine), and one who is John Fetterman (John Fetterman). Underlining every comment they have made to the press is a staggering admission of their own sense of helplessness.

You may have looked at the Democratic response over the last 40 days as a party that was finally standing up for itself. There is every indication that this caught Trump entirely by surprise, the fact that Senate Democrats were suddenly vertebrates. But since Republicans and the president were moving no closer to a deal, Senate Democrats decided it was time to give up. “Most of us here … have voted repeatedly with the Democratic strategy,” Kaine said. “But after 40 days, it wasn’t gonna work.” Angus King, meanwhile, put it even more bluntly: “Standing up to Donald Trump didn’t work.” (“Standing up to Trump” was previously thought to be the single biggest reason to elect opposition senators. King offered little detail on how he and the Democratic caucus will redefine their duties in light of this new mission.)

The biggest villain of them all, however, is someone who cast a kayfabe vote against the deal on Monday. No one bears the weight of the failed shutdown as much as Chuck Schumer.

His “no” vote is particularly galling because it leaves only two options on the table. The first is that the eight Democrats who broke away from their party did so without his knowledge or consent, a conclusion that could only suggest that Schumer has lost control of his caucus. The second is that the moderates were negotiating with Schumer’s knowledge, approval, and encouragement and that the “no” vote was just to conceal that—and maybe as a kind of consolation prize to the other Democrats in his caucus. This suggests that Schumer has lost any ability to organize or think politically or strategically. Regardless of the reason, he needs to step down immediately. 




Multiple Democratic House members have called for Schumer to step down from his leadership position, including Reps. Ro Khanna (D-CA), Mike Levin (D-CA), and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI). Democrats in other positions across the country have criticized the capitulation, including the governors of California and New York, Gavin Newsom and Kathy Hochul, and the mayor-elect of New York City, Zohran Mamdani.

Immediately after Democratic senators folded, the progressive movement Indivisible launched what it said was the largest primary campaign it has ever run since forming almost a decade ago. “We need you in the fight for a stronger, better Democratic Party willing to defend our communities, our rights, and our democracy from the fascist threat of the Trump regime,” the group said on its sign-up page. It called on everyone who is “fed up with being failed by our leaders again and again” and wants to “elect the fighters we need in this moment.”

MoveOn, Our Revolution, and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee also have called on Schumer to resign.





It's not our education system that undermines American intelligence, it's the garbage like FOX "NEWS" that rots our brains.  Sarah Rumpf (MEDIAITE) explains:

Fox News Anchor Sandra Smith interviewed Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum on Monday, and made a comment about gas prices that was completely and totally accurate, yet nonetheless curious.

Smith welcomed Burgum, the former governor of North Dakota, to America Reports, and kicked off the conversation with a question about gas and oil prices.

“I’ll ask you a question so many are talking about, and that is gas and oil prices,” said Smith. “Thankfully, we have seen oil come down significantly — more than 20 percent since election day.”

“Gas prices are now negative under this administration, almost to the three-dollar mark,” she continued, “How much do you believe they will continue to go down? The president is talking about — I think I’ve heard him talk about — $2 gas?”

As Smith spoke, the following image was shown on the screen, using data from AAA to report on the national average gas price.
 

The price today, according to this graphic, is $3.07. A year ago, it was $3.08.

That is a difference of $0.01. One cent. One penny.

Rumpf also notes there is no gas below $2 and no gas at $2 despite Chump's claims otherwise, "Unfortunately for the president -- and the American driver -- that number does not match reality"


Chump just lies.  He never learned a lesson.  He'd refuse to pay up contractors and others.  Then he'd declare bankruptcy and move on.  Over and over.  He treats the American people the way he did the contractors and sub-contractors -- always insisting he's cut the check and it must be tied up in the mail but it will be arriving any day.  He thinks he can dodge us the way he did his creditors.  It's not happening.  Every lie he tells exposes himself for the fraud he truly is.  The former chair of the United States Council of Economic Advisers Jared Bernstein (MS NOW) explains:


Last week, President Donald Trump had what was arguably the worst week of his second term. And though the hits to him and his agenda came on several fronts, they had a unifying theme: affordability, as in the lack thereof.

A mini-blue wave swept the off-year elections on Nov. 4, and the dominant force behind the wave was Americans’ intense, lasting discomfort with how much things cost. On Wednesday, during oral arguments at the Supreme Court, conservative and liberal justices expressed skepticism of the administration’s arguments that the president’s tariffs, which the justices widely agreed raised costs, were legal. Trump made things even worse for himself by first treating affordability as a surprising new issue: The Democrats, he told Fox News on Wednesday, “have this new word called ‘affordability,’ and [Republicans] don’t talk about it enough.” Then, a day later, he didn’t even “want to hear about affordability.” As MSNBC’s Steve Benen cataloged, Trump’s dismissal of cost-of-living concerns was accompanied by an avalanche of wrong numbers, including gems like “Energy costs, as and [sic] example, are plummeting.”

I could point out that it takes one mouse click to prove that consumers’ electricity bills have gone up 5% over the past year while overall inflation is up 3%. But, in fact, no clicks are necessary. Trump, whose political instincts are rarely this far off, is making a big, basic mistake: telling people they’re better off than they know they are. As Axios summarized the situation: “You can’t convince Americans your economic policies are working if they’re paying 20% more for a cup of coffee.” Especially when that price is largely a function of the 50% tariff you levied on Brazil (with which, for the record, the U.S. runs a trade surplus).

Trump also keeps banging on about $2-per-gallon gas prices when no states are posting costs anywhere near that number. The national average Tuesday was $3.07, which is admittedly down from a year ago. By roughly 2 cents. 

But here’s the thing about gas prices. In 2022, thanks to both the pandemic and Russia’s war in Ukraine, a gallon of retail gas peaked at an extremely uncomfortable $5. It soon after starting sliding down and, by late 2023, landed at just about the same price it is today. Despite that 40% ($2 per gallon) decline, do you remember Americans feeling like their affordability problems were solved? Me neither.


Meanwhile, old fat Chump thought he could put one over on the press but, Divya Verma (INQUISITR) reports, he couldn't:
 

“Walmart said Thanksgiving this year will be 25 percent cheaper than last year under ‘Sleepy Joe Biden,’” he announced confidently. He also added that “Walmart is respected.”

However, NBC News reporter Monica Alba began the push back and pointed out that the Walmart basket this year has fewer items and the store is misleading its customers with shrink-flation.

 
Reminder that MEIDASTOUCH NEWS broke the Walmart story last week and you can see a full list of what was offered in 2024 and what will be offered this year.  You can also refer to Eleanor Tolbert and Averee Nelson report yesterday for THE MIRROR who note the reduction in items this is "a 28.6% decrease, so customers are still paying 3% more than what the basket is worth."     Of course, morons of a feather flock together.  Markwayne, Markwayne?  And just like that, he enters in a fog of stupidity.  JD Wolf (MTN) reports:  



Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) was hit with a Community Note on X after echoing Donald Trump’s false claim that Walmart’s holiday price cuts prove the “Trump economy is working.” Mullin was attempting to counter Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene who has refused to play along with the GOP narrative on the economy. 
Appearing on Fox News, Mullin said the Walmart CEO told him grocery prices were “down across the board” and repeated Trump’s boast about Walmart’s lower priced Thanksgiving basket. However, fact-checkers quickly noted that Walmart’s special Thanksgiving basket, which the company has promoted as cheaper than last year, includes 11 fewer items, making the comparison misleading.




As Chump continues to lie about our economic reality,  Ewan Gleadow (RAW STORY) notes other Republicans are in a panic:

   
Republicans not staggering around in a stupor  are worried that Donald Trump's focus on his "legacy" is distracting the president from dealing with the cost-of-living crisis.

A White House official has suggested the president needs to shift his focus from foreign policy to domestic issues. Speaking to MSNBC, the insider said, "I predicted this. The president needs to focus on domestic issues versus his foreign policy legacy." The comment comes following Democratic Party election wins in the New York mayoral race and governor elections in Virginia and New Jersey.
It's caused some worry for Republicans, with Vice President JD Vance suggesting the government will be "judged" on its economic successes as early as next year. Vance stated the party needs to "focus on the home front" and fix domestic issues like the cost-of-living crisis urgently.

 

What they should be panicking over is there long standing conspiracy with regards to judicial nominees.  I've noted that for several years now.  It's an issue a number of us have been working on offline.  It is a crime to conspire to defraud that American people and the US Senate.  But several judicial nominees -- including Supreme Court nominees -- were part of an active conspiracy.  Demand Justice has a report on a number of coaches justices who deceived intentionally.  Demand Justice notes:


A new Demand Justice report analyzed the Questions for the Record (“QFRs”) submitted by President Trump’s Article III judicial nominees in 2025, finding that all 27 respondents provided answers about the 2020 election and January 6, 2021 that were dishonest or misleading.

The analysis finds that nominees’ responses appear nearly identical, with many nominees using verbatim phrasing, repeating key words, and, overall, using unusual and evasive language that’s almost entirely outside the normal, historical, and common lexicon used to describe such events.
For instance, every nominee provided near-identical phrasing to avoid a direct answer about the 2020 election, instead referencing the results of the Congressional “certification” process, or answering by noting that President Biden “served” as President. And 21 of 27 nominees provided extremely similar responses in re gard to January 6, often describing what transpired as a “political issue” and refusing to comment further.

All 27 nominees omitted key phrases and descriptions commonly used to describe the factual events of the 2020 election and January 6.

In short, not a single answer provided by the nominees on the 2020 election or January 6 was a direct, factual response – all nominees used similar language and sentence construction to avoid contradicting President Trump’s false narratives about both events.

Background
As part of the confirmation process, senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee are able to submit written questions to nominees after their hearing. These QFRs are another chance for senators to elicit information from nominees beyond their brief 5 minutes of in-person questioning.

Historically, judicial nominees have avoided providing direct answers on questions of unsettled law or constitutional interpretation that may come before them if confirmed. Yet, on these two subjects, President Trump’s second term judicial nominees repeatedly avoid providing answers on basic questions of documented, established, and historical fact.

In their QFRs in 2025, nominees were asked numerous questions related to the 2020 election and January 6. To ensure as uniform a comparison as possible, in re gard to the election, this report focuses on one question that all nominees were uniformly asked: “Did D onald Trump lose the 2020 election?” In re gard to January 6, we evaluated the answers to two questions, one of which at least all nominees were asked: ” Was the U.S. Capitol attacked by a violent mob on January 6, 2021?,” or “Do you agree with me that the attack at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, was an insurrection? Why or why not?”

Our analysis finds that answers to these questions are strikingly uniform. On the 2020 election: nominees’ answers use nearly identical phrasing that avoids plainly acknowledging President Biden’s victory. On January 6, responses universally fail to acknowledge the plain facts on what occurred during the attack on the Capitol.


Again this was a conspiracy as is the plot with regards to the Supreme Court -- nominees were coaches on what to say, on how to evade and on how to lie.  


The Department of Justice has been hemorrhaging staff under President Donald Trump, with thousands of attorneys leaving and few being hired to replace them, according to a new report.

Since January, nearly 5,500 DOJ career employees have quit, taken a buyout, or been fired, according to Justice Connection, an advocacy group composed of department alumni.

A Justice Connection spokesperson told The Independent that its estimates are based on both public reporting and non-public information the group has gathered.

As a result, the department is grappling with sweeping vacancies amidst a dearth of qualified applicants, according to The Washington Post.


Everything Chump touches, he destroys.  It wasn't bad enough that he put people with no qualifications in charge of security -- Trashy Garbage aka Tulsi Gabbard for example.  Again, if there is an attack on US soil like 9/11 again, we need to remember that Chump put people in charge with no experience and we need to add to that how he ran off needed employees.

Ka$h Patel's not qualified.  He's also now part of 'the deep state.'  Let's note -- for the fourth time -- a very important MEIDASTOUCH NEWS video report.

 

 

 Grasp what all he knows and has covered up.  He is 'the deep state' he used to decry.  Who is his girlfriend, by the way?  Marni Rose McFall (NEWSWEEK) reports:


Alexis Wilkins, the girlfriend of FBI director Kash Patel, has filed multiple lawsuits over what she says are damaging and false claims that she is an agent of Israeli intelligence, working as a “honeypot,” to compromise Patel.

Newsweek has previously contacted legal and media representatives for Wilkins via email for comment.
Wilkins, 26, is a country music singer, podcast host, writer, and conservative political commentator. Wilkins has over 90,000 followers on Instagram, where she regularly shares political content and videos of her performing at conservative events, including ones organized by Turning Point USA.  


She's not a honey pot.  She might be a munchkin, but she's no honey pot.  Ka$h can't protect the American people nor can Prissy Pot Pete Hegseth.  In fact, should the country be attacked, the first question from Senator Elizabeth Warren in an open hearing should be, "Pete, you think maybe you spent too much time playing Secretary of War to actually defend our country?  Because that's what you were, Pete, Secretary of Defense.  There is no Secretary of War."  Pete's in the news because he continues to discriminate.  Janna Brancolini (DAILY BEAST) reports:


A Navy captain who was the first woman to serve with the elite SEAL Team Six as a troop commander is being pushed out of the military.

The officer, whose identity has not been revealed, was supposed to take over a new role that would have made her the first woman in a Naval Special Warfare command overseeing Navy SEALS, CNN reported.
But just two weeks before the command was supposed to begin, the Pentagon abruptly revoked her orders, suggesting that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had killed the command because he didn’t want a woman in the role, sources told CNN.

The circumstances under which the decision was made and the way it was communicated—through a series of phone calls instead of through the usual channels—seemed designed to avoid leaving a paper trail.


Loose Lips Hegseth done screwed up again.  Wonder how Joni Ernst feels about that vote for Petey now, knowing, as she should, that she destroyed opportunities for women in the military when she voted for Hegseth.  

Let's turn to Stewart Rhodes.  Who?  Once upon a time, I didn't have to know the names of these nut jobs.  Carl Gibson reports:

One participant in the January 6, 2021 siege of the U.S. Capitol is now calling on President Donald Trump to establish an armed vigilante squad that exclusively reports to the president.

During a recent appearance on the far-right Gateway Pundit podcast, Stewart Rhodes — who founded the "Oath Keepers" paramilitary group — told host Jim Hoft that not only was he relaunching the Oath Keepers, but issuing a direct call to Trump to deputize his loyal followers to enforce federal laws. Progressive group Media Matters for America noted that Rhodes explicitly urged Trump to use a power that the Constitution assigns to Congress.


Stupid Stewart Rhodes, where do we start with you?  Chump already has an armed vigilante squad, they call it "ICE."  So that's one.  Second, a militia would report to Pete.  

Stewart, you do own a mirror, right?

You're what, sixty pounds overweight?  Seventy?  And you've got a beard.

In Pete's eyes, you're a "beard-o."  Did you miss all that last month?

To help Stewie Rhodes out, let's go back to Janna Brancolini (DAILY BEAST) report:


In late September, he flew in almost 800 generals, admirals, and their senior enlisted leaders from around the world to lecture them in person about grooming and physical fitness standards.

“It all starts with physical fitness and appearance,” Hegseth told the gathered generals. “If the Secretary of War can do regular, hard PT, so can every member of our joint force.”

During the speech, he also called for a “return” to “male” fitness standards for combat roles, even though there have never been lower standards for women in combat.


Get it, Stewie?  You're too damn fat and that scraggly beard would have to go as well.

Since I had to learn you name, idiot, let's let American learn a little more about you, specifically what an awful father you were:

Dakota Adams has said that his father was abusive to him, his mother, and his siblings; he stated that Rhodes has sabotaged his children's homeschooling and that the family "lived in extreme isolation in one particular cultural bubble in increasingly paranoid and militant right-wing political spheres everywhere we moved in the country until eventually we ended up in Montana."[49] Rhodes required them to line up with their backs to him at ATMs and gas pumps to look for assassins and unload groceries from the family vehicle one-armed to have hands free in case of attack.[51] The children suffered severe medical neglect and were illiterate, and Dakota only learned his multiplication tables at age 19 so that he could pass his high school equivalency test. In the spring of 2024, Dakota Adams announced he was running for the Montana House of Representatives.[49]


Let's wind down with this from Senator Elizabeth Warren's office:


Borrowers who earn income-driven repayment cancellation after decades of payments could be hit with tax bills as high as $10,000

“The Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service should move immediately to avoid this financial disaster for working-class Americans.”

Text of Letter (PDF)

Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, led her colleagues in a letter urging Secretary of the Treasury & Acting IRS Commissioner Scott Bessent to use the IRS’s existing legal authorities to stop the looming “tax bomb” facing borrowers who obtain income-driven repayment (IDR) discharges of their student loan debt. Senators Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ranking Member of the Senate HELP Committee; Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.); Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.); Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.); Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.); Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii); Cory Booker (D-N.J.); and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) joined the letter as well.

In 2021, Congress passed into law a provision excluding student debt cancellation from taxable income. As a result, borrowers who received student debt relief after years of repayment were not faced with high and unexpected tax bills.

However, that provision is set to expire at the end of this year. Absent action from President Trump or Republicans in Congress, this expiration will mean that borrowers on IDR plans who have legally earned debt cancellation after 20 or 25 years of repayment will be hit with significant tax bills.

“If neither the Trump Administration nor the Republican-controlled Congress act soon, families who earn student debt cancellation after paying their loans for decades will be hit with surprise tax hikes—as high as $10,000 in many cases—starting next tax year,” wrote the senators. “The Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service should move immediately to avoid this financial disaster for working-class Americans.”

New data from Protect Borrowers reveal that a typical family headed by a borrower receiving IDR cancellation (i.e., a married parent with two children earning $50,000 a year) could see their tax bill spike by $8,789. A similar family making $40,000 a year could shoulder a net tax increase of $10,295. Lower-income borrowers and borrowers with children would likely be forced to pay the most, as they stand to lose access to critical programs like the Earned Income Tax Credit and the refundable portion of the Child Tax Credit.

In their letter, the senators laid out the legal case for the Trump administration’s options to defuse the IDR “tax bomb.” In particular, they argued that the insolvency exclusion, scholarship exclusion, and general welfare exclusion were all options to declare IDR discharge as non-taxable income. The senators also noted that, in 2020, the Trump Administration delivered similar relief to recipients of closed school discharge and borrower defense to repayment, excluding those discharges from taxable income using its administrative authorities.

“By punishing IDR beneficiaries with massive tax bills, the federal government undermines the very purpose of the IDR program and reneges on its promises to borrowers,” the senators concluded. “Instead of compounding this problem by denying legally owed IDR discharge to borrowers, the Administration can and should deliver certainty and relief to these families as soon as possible.”

“President Trump and his allies in Congress passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to cut taxes for billionaires while hiking taxes for thousands of student loan borrowers who have earned debt relief after paying for decades,” said Persis Yu, Deputy Executive Director and Managing Counsel for Protect Borrowers. “This tax bomb will force working families to trade their crushing student loan debt for a crushing tax debt. We applaud Senator Warren for taking the lead and demanding the Trump Administration take immediate action to protect these borrowers from being needlessly pushed further into debt. Policymakers must address this tax bomb before it is too late.”

###


The following sites updated:





Posted by at