The Crooked Court. Some are
applauding it for the dissent in Chump's ballroom case. Crooked John
Roberts joined the 3 left justices in opposing allowing the Ballroom to
continue to be built even though, Roberts says, he thinks it's probably
illegal. Roberts couldn't get one justice on the right to agree with
him? That's because he didn't want to grab a right winger and pull them
over. If he had, Chump would have lost and Roberts knew that. This
was just another of his attempts to deceive the public.
When
the Supreme Court doesn’t want to decide on the legality of some issue,
it often finds that a plaintiff lacks “standing” — that is, doesn’t
have sufficient interest in the issue to merit the court’s involvement.
Today,
the five Trump-sympathizers on the court allowed construction to
continue on Trump’s 90,000-square-foot luxury White House ballroom,
which has been steadily rising to replace the White House’s East Wing
that Trump tore down last fall.
The five said
the preservationists who challenged the construction of the planned
ballroom lacked standing to bring their lawsuit because they were not
directly harmed by the project.
That lawsuit
was brought by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, a nonprofit
chartered by Congress to guard public buildings. If this organization
(and its longtime member, Alison K. Hoagland, an architectural
historian) doesn’t have standing to complain about Trump’s mayhem on the
People’s House, I can’t imagine who would.
Congress
might have standing, but the current lily-livered Republicans now in
control of Congress would never seek to stop Trump’s ballroom. They want
to be invited to it.
I was interested that
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. joined with the court’s three
Democratic-appointed justices in dissent, saying the construction was
“likely unlawful.” He reasoned that because the White House is “an
iconic American building whose symbolism and history are wrapped up in
its architecture,” it’s important that “those responsible follow the
rules in deciding what to tear down and what to build up at the People’s
House.”
Again,
John Roberts was engaged in theatrics. Like a senator voting against a
nominee only after enough votes takin place to allow a nominee to be
confirmed than the senator voting against -- the Susan Collins pretender
-- can say, "See I'm independent."
South
Carolina Representative Jim Clyburn endorsed calls to expand the
Supreme Court over the weekend, reflecting a growing resolve among
Democratic officials to do what they considered unthinkable a decade ago
and fairly unpalatable as recently as five years ago. “I think we are
in a position now that calls for some significant actions taken by the
Congress and we ought to expand, and thirteen is a pretty good number,”
Clyburn, the House Minority Whip, told Meet the Press host Kristen
Welker. “A baker’s dozen, it would be a good number to have on the
court.”
Clyburn is not the only prominent
Democrat to endorse Supreme Court expansion in recent years. Former Vice
President Kamala Harris, the party’s 2024 standard-bearer, also agreed
that Congress should add four more seats to match the thirteen federal
circuit courts of appeal. (The First through Eleventh Circuits hear
cases from the fifty states, while the D.C. Circuit hears cases from the
nation’s capital and the confusingly named Federal Circuit hears
specialized appeals on patents and whatnot.)
Support
from Clyburn stands out because he is, as Talking Points Memo’s Josh
Marshall notes, the first member of Democratic congressional leadership
to endorse the idea. That would, in turn, give cover for more
rank-and-file members to support court expansion. Clyburn is also,
notably, not exactly a radical member of the Democrats’ upper ranks. In
2020, his support helped swing the Democratic preisdential primary
toward then-candidate Joe Biden, the most moderate choice in the race at
that time.
I do not know whether the justices
particularly care about Clyburn’s position on anything. But they should
take stock of what it reflects: a deep and implacable desire among
Democrats to break the conservatives’ grip on the Supreme Court through
extraordinary means. I cannot stress enough how much the Supreme Court’s
conservative majority has brought this on themselves.
The
turning point in the high court’s trajectory came in 2018, when Justice
Anthony Kennedy retired from the Supreme Court. Kennedy was the last
remaining Republican appointee who was not, strictly speaking, a member
of the conservative legal movement. He did not identify as an
originalist or a textualist, instead hewing (for better or for worse) to
his own idiosyncratic vision of how the Constitution should be
interpreted. Thanks to the vicissitudes of fate, he also served as the
court’s median justice from 2005 until his retirement.
In
that role, Kennedy maintained an ideological balance of power of sorts
on the high court. It was still undoubtedly a conservative Supreme
Court. He wrote or joined some of the most consequential decisions of
the era, from 2010’s Citizens United v. FEC to 2013’s Shelby County v.
FEC. In less high-profile cases involving federalism and regulatory
power, he was more likely to join his fellow conservatives than not.
I support expanding the Court. It's one of many reforms we need to institute
"The Snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):
Tuesday, September 1, 2026. Chump keeps pimping unpopular data centers,
his own popularity numbers remain in the toilet, Pete Hegseth remains
an unqualified Secretary of Defense, and much more.
Chump's happy talkers keep preaching a rebound in his popularity. But so far I'm not seeing it. In fact, REUTERS reported late yesterday:
President
Donald Trump's approval rating was stuck at the lowest level of his
political career amid broad dissatisfaction over the war in Iran and the
Republican's economic stewardship, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll
that concluded on Monday.
Just 33% of Americans
approve of the job Trump is doing in the White House - the third
straight Reuters/Ipsos poll with that share of respondents giving the
president a thumbs up.
Trump's political brand
looks increasingly like a potential weight on his Republican Party,
which will be defending slim congressional majorities in the November 3
midterm elections.
Also late yesterday, Tom Durante (MEDIAITE) noted:
An
eye-opening new poll has shown that President Donald Trump’s approval
rating has dropped to its lowest level in either of his two terms, as a
growing number of past supporters say they wouldn’t vote for him again.
The UMass-Amherst survey
of 1,000 people, conducted between August 21 and 26, found growing
dissatisfaction with the president, due mostly to the ongoing war in
Iran and financial pain at the gas pump and grocery checkout. The margin
of error in the poll was 3.5%.
“With no end in
sight to the ongoing war in Iran, the continued rise in the price of
gas, groceries, utilities, and housing, an escalating trade war with Canada,
and the likelihood of higher interest rates, it comes as no surprise
that Trump’s approval rating remains at a paltry 32%, a
1-percentage-point drop since we last polled in March 2026,” Tatishe
Nteta, poll director and provost professor of political science at UMass
Amherst, said in a statement.
The poll also
noted growing regret among those who cast a ballot for Trump in the 2024
election, with about 16 percent of respondents saying they wouldn’t
back him again if they could do it all over again.
Are farmers growing disillusioned with Chump? Travis Gettys (RAW STORY) reports:
Republican
senators are increasingly convinced the battle for Senate control will
be decided in the Midwest, and that agricultural voters angered by
tariffs, fuel costs and beef imports could hand Democrats the majority.
Democrats
need a net gain of four seats to flip the chamber, and strategists say
that becomes attainable if they capture Republican-held seats in Ohio
and Iowa while holding Michigan, then find a fourth seat in North
Carolina or a longer-shot state, reported Politico.
"He's
in serious trouble in farm country," Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) said of
President Donald Trump. "He being Trump — and Trump is us. I'm not very
optimistic."
Farm-state Republicans point to a
combination of tariffs, expensive diesel and fertilizer, and
administration moves to ease tariffs on imported beef as driving
frustration among agricultural voters who have historically backed the
party.
Meanwhile the Iran War has been good for some . . . with the last name Chump. Tanya Rawat (BENZINGA) reports:
The
war has cost the U.S. tens of billions of dollars and reduced projected
global output by hundreds of billions, according to the Fortune report.
At the same time, businesses and investments connected to President
Donald Trump’s family have benefited from higher defense spending and
oil prices.
Military contractor Powerus, which
Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. were preparing to take public, won an
Air Force contract with a ceiling of up to $90 million for drone
interceptors.
Private equity firm 1789 Capital
Management, which Don Jr. joined after his father’s reelection, owns
stakes in several defense companies benefiting from the war. Anduril
received U.S. approval for up to $2 billion in drone-interceptor sales
to Kuwait, while Space Exploration Technologies Corp. SPCX is providing
satellite services to guide U.S. drones against Iran. Firehawk Defense
also won Pentagon contracts for propellants and warheads.
A spokeswoman for 1789 Capital said Don Jr. was not involved in the investment decisions.
Trump’s
own portfolio, managed by outside managers, has also gained from
holdings in defense companies including Lockheed Martin Corp. LMT,
General Dynamics Corporation GD and Northrop Grumman Corp. NOC.
Democrats said his oil and gas holdings had increased in value by as
much as $15.5 million.
The estimate came as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) pointed to Trump’s reported holdings
in ExxonMobil Holdings Corp XOM, Chevron Corp CVX, Occidental Petroleum
Corp OXY and ConocoPhillips COP, whose shares had gained significantly
since the start of the year, according to a Senate Joint Economic
Committee Democrats’ analysis.
While Chump and his family rake up corrupt cash, Americans are not doing that well. Jing Pan (MONEY WISE) reports:
American
consumers have kept the economy afloat for years, even as inflation,
high borrowing costs and rising grocery bills squeeze household budgets.
But some of the country’s biggest corporate leaders are warning that
shoppers may be hitting a breaking point.
Kraft Heinz CEO Steve Cahillane offered one of the bluntest assessments of the financial strain facing lower-income consumers.
“They’re
literally running out of money at the end of the month,” Cahillane said
in a May 2026 interview (1). “We’re seeing negative cash flows in the
lower-income brackets where they’re dipping into savings.”
The
company behind brands like Heinz, Kraft and Philadelphia is now cutting
prices (2) on some products that have grown too expensive, increasing
promotions and rolling out smaller package sizes at lower price points.
Cahillane
added that the industry has endured years of “volume degradation”
because consumers had to absorb “too much price.” He also warned that
another round of price increases could put more pressure on
already-stretched household budgets.
“We could see more significant inflation and nobody wants to see that,” he said.
Cahillane isn’t the only CEO sounding the alarm.
McDonald’s
CEO Chris Kempczinski has flagged pressure on consumers, pointing to
“heightened anxiety (3).” The company’s CFO Ian Borden also noted that
higher gas prices are hitting lower-income households especially hard,
saying the company was seeing those consumers pull back on spending,
while higher-income customers remained much more resilient.
Elsewhere,
Whirlpool CEO Marc Bitzer has described a sharp pullback in demand for
big-ticket appliances, while North America executive president, Juan
Carlos Puente, has pointed to “recession-level industry contractions,”
with discretionary demand down roughly 15% (4).
Pete Hegseth, the unqualified Secretary of
Defense who only got into the position thanks to JD Vance's tie
breaking vote in the Senate. It was the narrowest vote for a Secretary
of Defense ever. And that's because (a) Hegseth wasn't qualified
because being a weekend talking head on FOX "NEWS" doesn't make you
qualified, (b) Hegseth had never supervised a department or anything as
large as the Defense Dept and the minor organizations he had been in
charge of all had money problems with some people pointing to him as the
problem, (c) he was considered a sexist and he also had forced a woman
to sign an NDA that he would not release her from to allow her to
testify at his confirmation hearing, (d) he had a drinking problem and
had to assure the senators that he wouldn't drink booze if he was
confirmed and . . .
He
wasn't qualified. The whole country sees that now and sees how badly
things go when you put an unqualified nominee into an office.
Now
some people with no experience for the job would be eager to hear input
and utilize the intelligence of others. But Hegseth has no respect for
intelligence. Hence Joseph Gedeon (INDEPENDENT) reports:
Pete
Hegseth regularly receives formal objections from senior commanders and
proceeds anyway, the Pentagon’s top spokesman has said, as he tried to
discredit a Washington Post report that four generals and admirals had
advised against prolonging the war in Iran.
“Of
course, we demand candid military advice,” Sean Parnell wrote on X,
formerly Twitter. “Non-concurs are standard. The Secretary sees them
constantly. That’s how you run a real military.”
Parnell was responding to the Post’s account
of four four-star commanders who had lodged formal “non-concurs”
against a plan to keep more than 50,000 US troops in the Middle East
through September, with some deployments potentially running into 2027.
Parnell's response was the response of an idiot. Ellie Quinlan Houghtaling (THE NEW REPUBLIC) notes:
Shortly
after the article’s publication, Defense Department spokesperson Sean
Parnell falsely claimed on social media that the publication of the
report was not only wrong, but also illegal.
“Publishing
highly classified assessments from the Secretary’s orders book is a
crime. It’s a betrayal of the force,” Parnell wrote. “And much of what
they’re publishing is inaccurate.”
Fact check:
While it’s against the law for government employees to leak sensitive or
classified government details, the Supreme Court ruled in 1971 that the
press’s ability to publicize that information is protected under the
First Amendment. That was the outcome of New York Times Co. v. United
States, which pitted the daily newspaper against the Nixon
administration after it published a top-secret history of the Vietnam
War known as the Pentagon Papers.
As Elaine noted last night, one of the problems with our government is
people like Parnell who try to cite the law without actually knowing the
law. That kind of makes him the perfect spokesperson for Hegseth --
they bond over their ignorance. Peter Suciu (NATIONAL INTEREST) notes:
Tensions are running high at the Pentagon on Monday, following a scathing report
from The Washington Post on Saturday that Secretary of Defense Pete
Hegseth was warned by multiple combatant commanders that the ongoing war with Iran is unsustainable, and that if it continues, it will weaken the US military’s ability to address other threats.
Military
leaders warned in the August 14 edition of the classified Secretary of
Defense Orders Book (SDOB) that extending deployments in the Middle East
could compromise global readiness and even homeland defense, the paper
of record reported.
The SDOB contained
classified assessments from the commanders tasked with overseeing US
areas of responsibility in Europe, Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
Those generals expressed opposition to an extended deployment of US
military forces in the Middle East. They warned that diverted warships—notably aircraft carriers—and
aircraft have degraded abilities elsewhere. According to an assessment
from the Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle, only a quarter of
the US Navy’s destroyer fleet is currently prepared to deploy. That is a
sharp decline from the prewar levels.
The conflict, which is now in its sixth month, has cost $37.5 billion to date.
Cost $37.5 billion to date.
Army Secretary Daniel P. Driscoll, the service’s top civilian leader, who clashed repeatedly with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over the ouster of key combat-tested Army leaders, handed in his resignation to President Trump on Monday, administration officials said.
Mr. Driscoll’s resignation was expected but it comes at a tumultuous time, as the military’s largest service faces its busiest period since the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Army air defense soldiers are playing the leading role in defending U.S. troops in the Middle East from increasingly sophisticated Iranian missile attacks. The Army’s command in Europe is providing critical intelligence and other support to Ukraine as it fights to hold off a larger Russian force.
And Mr. Hegseth has in the meantime initiated a series of firings and feuds that has left the Army essentially rudderless as it struggles to deal with the threat posed by cheap, deadly drones and missiles that have pounded U.S. bases in the Middle East.
Mr. Driscoll met with Mr. Trump in person to hand in his resignation and discuss the current state of the Army, said one official, who like others in this story spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss personnel issues.
How bad are things for Hegseth? Insiders are saying he'll be gone by Thanksgiving. Alexander Willis (RAW STORY) notes:
Multiple
White House insiders have named the same Trump Cabinet member they
believe will become the administration's first “midterm political
casualty" and predicted the official will be fired before Thanksgiving,
former Obama campaign aide Christopher Hale claimed Sunday night.
“Everyone
I talk to in and around the Trump White House says [Defense Secretary
Pete] Hegseth will be the first midterm political casualty and will be
fired before Thanksgiving,” Hale wrote in a statement shared on social
media.
Over the weekend, the big news was that Chump was no longer depending upon Hegseth the way he once did. Thomas Kika notes that this all has been a failure for Chump:
President
Donald Trump's botched handling of the Iran war has done "irreparable
damage" to his standing among voters, one veteran defense expert wrote for The i Paper, and the full extent will become clear after the midterms.
Robert
Fox is a long-time journalist and war correspondent with a career
dating back to the late 1960s, with experience covering conflicts in
places like Afghanistan, Iraq, the Falklands and many more. On Monday,
he published a new column for The i Paper breaking down why Trump's
"credibility is in tatters" as his war with Iran has left the U.S. military near its "breaking point."
"The
war, which was intended to last six weeks at most, has now run for more
than six months. To say there is no credible peace settlement in sight
might qualify as the understatement of the year," Fox wrote, citing the
recent U.S. strikes on Iran's Larak Island as a sign that the conflict
has fully ramped up after beleaguered peace talks.
He
added later: "The latest exchange of fire means that there is little
chance of meaningful peace talks before the U.S. midterm elections in
early November, and Israel’s general election on 27 October. It means
rising prices on the international energy markets and at the petrol
pumps for U.S. voters."
When not worrying about Pete, the administration is worrying about his wife Jennifer. Laura Esposito (DAILY BEAST) reports:
Pete Hegseth’s tenure
as defense secretary has been marked by leaked Signal chats, radical
religion, and a war on wokeness. But it’s his wife who has officials
concerned.
Across Donald Trump’s administration
and the Pentagon, concerns are spilling out over Jennifer Hegseth’s
influence on her husband—and on a department with an annual budget
larger than countries with the world’s largest economies.
“Jennifer
Hegseth is a very heavy hand and one of his closest advisers with
access inside the building, which is very unusual for a secretary of
war/secretary of defence,” one official told the Times of London on Monday.
Long
before the president announced that he had appointed Jennifer, 49, to
lead his Military Spouse Commission, the former Fox News producer’s
influence over her husband, 46, was known.
In
March 2025, Pete was caught revealing details about forthcoming strikes
on Yemen to his wife in a Signal group chat. Before being appointed, he
credited positive changes in his life to “two Js”: Jennifer and Jesus.
Just last month, more than 20 former and current DOD officials told The
New York Times that Jennifer was a key part of her husband’s
decision-making process.
In addition to sitting
in meetings with reporters and preparing Hegseth for appearances, his
wife has reportedly interviewed candidates for jobs at the Defense
Department. As she serves out her unofficial role, Jennifer is a
full-time mother for the child she shares with Pete and her six other
stepchildren, some of whom she homeschools.
Turning
to data centers. They are unpopular and opposition to them only
continues to grow. Out of touch and out of step Chump fails to realize
that. Luke Broadwater (NEW YORK TIMES) notes Chump's declarations yesterday:
President Trump on Monday lashed out at communities that are protesting data centers, suggesting that residents who do not go along with the artificial intelligence revolution must prefer to be “backwards and poor.”
“The only reason that communities throughout the U.S.A. should not want Data Centers is if they want to end up being backwards and poor,” Mr. Trump posted on his Truth Social site. “If they want to be successful and rich, with far lower taxes and jobs all over the place, let Data Reign.”
Polling shows most Americans oppose the proliferation of data centers in their communities, a signal of worries about a quickly changing economy and the loss of jobs to machines. Residents have also cited potential negative effects on the environment and increased utility costs as reasons to oppose data centers.
Yet Cump continues to be on the wrong side of this issue. As Ruth noted last night, "Mr.
Chump has lost his gift for speaking to the people. He has nothing to
connect with them on anymore. The dementia has taken hold. " Ryan Grenoble (HUFFINGTON POST) notes:
In
related news, officials in El Reno, Okla., say a damaged private water
line at a data center there wasted more than 3 million gallons of water
before it was discovered late last week. According to KOCO News, the business in question specializes in AI storage and Bitcoin mining.
The
leak forced El Reno schools and the county courthouse to temporarily
close, and forced thousands of residents to go without water, KFOR reported, after levels in El Reno’s water towers unexpectedly plummeted.
Still on data centers, Nicholas Liu (SALON) reports:
Despite
efforts to tout AI infrastructure as a boon to the American economy, as
well as a home-field advantage to a country steeped in capitalistic
aspiration, hawkers of this technology have failed to convince 70% of Americans
that AI and its data centers are anything other than a hostile
intrusion. To the public, they are monoliths that pollute the
environment, drive up energy costs, strip people of their livelihoods
and degrade the meaning of art.
But the catch for some politicians is that supporting AI is an
immensely profitable enterprise, even if the money and favors come from
just a few very powerful, very rich people. Oh, what are they to do?
Some
of them, like David Crowley, Wisconsin’s Democratic candidate for
governor, have wisely and belatedly eschewed “turn[ing] Wisconsin into
an AI and data hub . . . for the entire globe” as a talking point in
favor of convincing voters that local elected boards are the vanguard of
communal protection and direct democracy. Attempting to shrug off the
perception of being too pro-AI, Crowley told supporters
shortly after his primary win in August that “Local communities should
be the end all be all when it comes down to data centers. They should be
able to make the decision when it comes to data centers and if they
don’t want a data center, they should not be forced to have a data
center, and there’s no ands, ifs, or buts about that.”
When
Tom Tiffany, Crowley’s Republican opponent, has managed to take breaths
between his incessant attacks on “Data Center David,” he has also clarified his own position in favor of “local input” and “local control” — even though he previously voted in favor of federal bills to expedite the construction of data centers and ban state and local AI regulations.
Significantly,
neither candidate’s Paul-on-the-road-to-Madison conversion includes
support for a temporary moratorium on data center construction — a cause
with especially strong support from the left
and elected officials like Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., as well as Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, the
Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in neighboring Michigan. The logic
behind that push — buying time to evaluate the extent of data center
effects and find a more permanent solution — is a direct answer to
damage that has already been inflicted and to what polls have indicated
as sweeping, bipartisan opposition
to their further construction. Proposals to offload data center
permitting, on the other hand, use the vocabulary of democracy and
autonomy to hide the fact that “local communities,” in practice, means
local governments, which are structurally overmatched, underfunded and
vulnerable to the pressure tactics of trillion-dollar technology
monopolies.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Tammy Duckworth's office:
[MARION, IL] – U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) today held a roundtable with Illinois health care providers, leaders and advocates to discuss the challenges they’re facing in providing care to rural communities as a direct result of the Trump Administration’s harmful health care cuts. Since being signed into law last July, President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill made the largest health care cuts in history, destabilizing the health care system with more than $1 trillion in cuts from Medicaid and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Photos from the roundtable can be found on Senator Duckworth’s website.
“For many Illinoisans in rural communities, health care was already too expensive and too hard to get—and then came the Medicaid cuts,” Duckworth said. “Slashing Medicaid has not only put reliable health care coverage at even more risk for hundreds of thousands of Illinoisans but also added even more pressure on rural hospitals already struggling to keep their doors open. The Administration’s cuts will only make it harder for families to get care close to home when mere minutes can be life-saving—or stop access altogether. Senator Durbin and I will keep fighting to protect Medicaid, support our rural health care services and make sure every Illinoisan can get the care they need when they need it, no matter their zip code.”
“Senator Duckworth and I sent letters to Illinois hospitals last year and asked them how the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act and its devastating Medicaid cuts would impact their hospital, health care workforce, and the patients they serve,” Durbin said. “The 129 responses we received made it clear that this legislation will mean shuttering of services, layoffs, and even hospital closures—meaning patients will needlessly suffer. If you look at the numbers, 24 rural hospitals are at risk of closure in Illinois. I think we ought to make a commitment to rural hospitals and families struggling with the cost-of-living instead of slashing federal funding for health care in order to fund tax cuts for billionaires.”
The consequences of these policies will continue to be felt across our state, with an estimated 400,000 Illinoisans expected to lose health coverage by 2034. Illinois nursing homes and hospitals, primarily in rural areas, are at risk of closing and Medicaid cuts are predicted to result in more than 27,000 jobs cut across the state.
Yesterday, Duckworth hosted a women’s health care roundtable with local reproductive health clinics, obstetrics providers, federally qualified health centers and health departments to hear about the difficulties of providing reproductive and maternal care in rural Southern Illinois, where Carbondale has become a safe haven for women seeking care from across the region and surrounding states, and the impact of Trump Administration policies on access to care. Photos from the women’s health care roundtable can be found on Senator Duckworth’s website.
-30-
The following sites updated:
Chump's dementia continues to worsen
6 hours ago
Weekend Box Office
6 hours ago
Slow Cooker Meatloaf
6 hours ago
Chump is eating his way to a stroke
6 hours ago
