Blog Betty (Thomas Friedman is a Great Man was an online novel)

Monday, June 30, 2025

Yet when the powerless were threatened, Roberts didn't give a damn

BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX & THOMAS FRIEDMAN IS A GREAT MAN & ANN'S MEGA DUB & THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS & THE COMMON ILLS -- THE KOOL AID TABLE

CONTEMPTUOUS CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS PAUSED FROM SPITTING ON THE CONSTITUTION AND ENSHRINING DONALD CHUMP AS A KING TODAY LONG ENOUGH TO DECLARE THAT JUDGES ARE AT RISK OF "THREATS OF VIOLENCE AND MURDER" AS A RESULT OF STATEMENTS BY PSYCHOTIC LAWMAKERS -- THE SAME ONES THAT ROBERTS KEEPS BACKING IN ONE DECISION AFTER ANOTHER.

REMINDED THAT THE LGBTQIA+ COMMUNITY IS AT DIRECT RISK OF VIOLENCE AS A RESULT OF SEVERAL SUPREME COURT DECISIONS, JUSTICE ROBERTS INSISTED, "NO, NO, NO. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ME. I MATTER. THEY DON'T."

WHEN THESE REPORTERS PUSHED BACK ON THIS CLAIM, ROBERTS CALLED IN ICE -- SEE ISAIAH'S PHOTO OF OFFICER DUMB F**K BELOW.

FROM THE TCI WIRE:

At AXIOS, Russell Contreras explains:

The images of masked, heavily armed immigration agents snatching people off the streets and taking them away in unmarked cars have shocked many Americans — and led to a simple question: Is all of this legal?

It is — at least for now.

Why it matters: Since Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was created after the 9/11 attacks, its agents have operated with vastly more enforcement power, less transparency and fewer guardrails than local police.

ICE's rules were designed largely to give the agency broad leeway in helping the FBI identify and arrest domestic terror suspects.
Now the Trump administration is using that power to go after unauthorized immigrants — potentially millions of them — with a frequency and aggressiveness that has sent ripples through communities nationwide.

Zoom in: Under Trump, critics say, ICE has become the closest thing the U.S. has to a secret police force.

ICE agents aren't required to wear body cameras, can cover their faces, don't have to provide badge numbers or identify themselves, can arrive in unmarked cars and don't need a warrant from a judge to detain someone.
Like those with other federal enforcement agencies, they can ignore rules that govern local police departments, particularly those local agencies with histories of abuse or that operate under court-imposed restrictions on racial profiling.
In some cases, ICE agents can even arrest U.S. citizens — but they aren't supposed to place them in immigration detention units. Even so, a few U.S. citizens have been detained in recent ICE raids because of agents' mistakes or negligence.

A few? One is too many but "a few"? Alisha Ebrahimji (CNN) reports on some of the US citizens being rounded up but, repeating, none should be. Of course its happening, we said it would back in August because you can't carry out these sort of attacks without rounding up US citizens. It's outrageous and it needs to end immediately.

Instead of grasping that, many people are trying to excuse a Gestapo police force. And that's what it is.

Daniele Di Bartolomei (VNY) reports:

The Trump administration wants to increase fines for those living in the country illegally. Under current rules, the government can begin issuing penalties 30 days after informing someone of their presence in the U.S. without authorization, a rule introduced by President Donald Trump during his first term.

The rule had been abolished by Joe Biden, only to be reintroduced by the Republican president in his second term. However, a new federal report reveals that the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice plan to completely abolish the 30-day waiting limit and immediately issue fines to those who overstay their visas.

The new penalties start at $100 to $500 for those who enter the states illegally, and can go up to $1,000 a day for those who fail to comply with deportation orders. “DHS believes that the nature of the failure-to-depart and unlawful entry penalties supports the need for more streamlined procedures,” the report reads.

“The law doesn’t enforce itself; there must be consequences for breaking it,” Assistant Department of Homeland Security Secretary Tricia McLaughlin added, “President Trump and Secretary [Kristi] Noem are standing up for law and order and making our government more effective and efficient at enforcing the American people’s immigration laws. Financial penalties like these are just one more reason why illegal aliens should use CBP Home to self-deport now before it’s too late.”

In June, DHS issued about 10,000 fines, totaling $3 billion. According to the agency’s report, those who self-deport using the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) mobile app will be exempt from paying fines.

According to the latest rumors, the Trump administration is also considering confiscating the property of immigrants who do not pay the fines.

It's all so outrageous and offensive. Some have spoken out and their voices grow louder as other voices join with them.

We see the pushback -- the attacks -- and even that does not silence the growing opposition.

Brad Lanford, NYC City comptroller, was attacked by ICE. He discussed it with MSNBC over the weekend.

Brad stated, "The ICE agent who arrested me confess to me afterwards that his wife hopes he quits his job. She texted him saying, "I don't want you in this anymore."

There is no justification for this. That's why I've repeatedly stated that these ICE agents have a very limited future: Drug addiction or suicide. You can't live with being a Nazi.

And Americans are not going to be silent or inactive as this secret police carries out illegal actions. Rosalina Luna Vargas was targeted on Saturday in Pasadena. PASADENA NOW reports what happened:

Three plainclothes agents -- all wearing federal badges on lanyards and two wearing masks -- attempted to place Vargas into an unmarked vehicle while her [two] children were present, according to [witness Jillian] Reed and a Reddit witness account.

Reed told KTLA: “[The children] kept asking for a warrant. They told the officers they would stop resisting if they just showed them a warrant. One of the men said he had one but didn’t show it.”

The situation escalated when Vargas broke free and ran into Del Mar Park, an assisted living facility at 990 East Del Mar Boulevard, according to witnesses.

Her children formed what Reed described to KTLA as “a human wall” to protect their mother.

Facility staff reportedly told the agents they were on private property and needed to leave without a warrant, according to witnesses. The agents complied, photographed witnesses, and departed in two separate vehicles before returning later and detaining Vargas.

US House Rep Judy Chu is quoted stating, "ICE agents are pointing guns at innocent individuals, no warrants, no explanations, just fear and intimidation. These raids in my district are absolutely vile. Masked and armed like a militia, they're terrorizing families and destroying any sense of safety in our communities. This is not law enforcement it’s a gross abuse of power, and I will not stand for it."

Meghrig Milkon (QUEEN'S JOURNAL) observes:

The United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) isn’t protecting anyone—it’s terrorizing communities, and it’s time it gets abolished.

Since the start of his presidency-- and even during his campaign -- Donald Trump promised mass deportations, targeting more than 10 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States. His administration has followed through with 11,000 people deported in February, over 12,000 in the first four weeks of March, and approximately 17,200 in April, according to NBC News.

According to its website, ICE was established in 2003 through the merger of the investigative and interior enforcement functions of the former U.S. Customs Service and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. ICE currently operates in 400 offices across the United States and internationally, with an annual budget of approximately eight billion dollars. Nearly 60,000 migrants are currently being held in ICE detention centers, with 11.4 per cent fast-tracked for deportation, according to NBC’s live tracker.

What the live media coverage makes evident is that the administration continues to view immigrants and migrants as statistics rather than people: a true testament to the tragedy that is the United States. Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff, stated that ICE officers would aim to carry out at least 3,000 arrests per day, an increase from the approximately 650 daily arrests during the first five months of Trump’s second term. ICE operations have triggered protests across the U.S., often resulting in arrests and the imposition of curfews.

All around the country, people are witnessing these outrageous acts and they're using their voices to object. In a letter calling out Chump's immigration lies, Darryl Cornelius informs the editorial board of THE LAS VEGAS REVIEW JOURNAL, "Our nation has reached a point where there is nothing too false, ridiculous or stupid that one-third of the country will not swallow. A substantial portion of our country has become scornful of compromise and unmoved by facts, evidence and science. We are rapidly losing the truth. We must not let it die."

So we have to use our voices -- especially when the Supreme Court refuses to stand up for the rule of law. Robert Kuttner (THE AMERICAN PROSPECT) writes:

The Supreme Court issued a shocking ruling today, making it easier for President Donald Trump to overturn birthright citizenship. The way the Court did it was in keeping with its disingenuous strategy of using technicalities that allow it to duck the underlying question.

The substance of Friday’s 6-3 decision, written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, involved a challenge to Trump’s executive order denying citizenship to children born in the U.S. to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily. His order violated the 14th Amendment, which clearly holds that anyone born in the U.S. is a citizen, regardless of the circumstances.

Immigrant rights groups and 22 states sued, and three different federal district court judges issued universal injunctions barring the administration from enforcing the Trump policy anywhere in the country. The Department of Justice asked the Supreme Court to overturn the injunctions.

Today's ruling ducks the underlying constutional question about the meaning and reach of birthright citizenship, but bars the injuctions from taking effect nationwide and explicitly allows Trump's order to take effect in 30 days. This will only give more cover to ICE raids and deportations. Along the way, the high court overturned the ability of lower courts ever to issue injunctions with national reach.

As Chump, Kristi Noem, Tom Holman, the Supreme Court and others attack immigrants (and those perceive to be immigrants), real journalists note what happens. That includes Sofia Mejias-Pascoe. Ken Stone (TIMES OF SAN DIEGO) reports:

Sofía Mejías-Pascoe of inewsource, San Diego’s newest and youngest Journalist of the Year, says immigrants and asylum-seekers she once followed closely are no longer reachable.

Ever since Donald Trump took office, she said Thursday night, “I’ve stopped hearing from many of them. The numbers I used to reach them at are no longer in service.”

Texts messages aren’t going through, she said, and “the people I do talk to are really afraid.”

"The Snapshot"

Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Imbeciles Appear Before Congress"

"The Snapshot"

Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Fatal Repulsion"

"The Snapshot"

"Amy Coney Barrett gets some much needed schooling"

"Not agreeing with Joy Reid on this"

"Bill Maher's hypocritical attack on Whoopi Goldberg"

"Marco The Mild Man Child"

"The racist Donald Chump"

"M3GAN 2.0 and MY MOM JAYNE a film by Mariska Hargitay"

"Mariska Hargitay's Jayne Mansfield film"

"Barbra Streisand is done being a Focker"

"Teeny bopper and man tease Bobby Sherman has passed away"

"Weekend Box Office"

"Boe-Boe speaks, stupidity tumbles off her tongue"

"Sam Smith, Barbra Streisand, Carly Simon and Chinese food"

"We do not need an 87 y.o. president -- pack it in"

"Marc Maron is right again"

"Chump lies and lies"

"andy gibb, lorde, supergrass, alanis, chaka khan"

"chris hayes, martin short, janis ian"

"chump the economic failure"

"our desperate economy"

"things that stink up our world (jk rowling, chump)"

"Muslim and Christian bigots unite to discriminate"

"Beyond the Gates?"

"Big Freedia and the first Hollywood film to use the term "gay" as we know it today"

"Lock him up"

"2 important videos"

"Joni Mitchell's Song To A Seagull"

"Musk has lost Big Balls"

"Musk and that low bar"

"Marco upstages Secretary Doofus"

"LeAnn Rimes, New Kids On The Block, Elvis Costello, Bob Dylan, Diana Ross"

"LaMonica McIver, Evanscence"

"Brandy, Monica, Morgan Wallace, Bruce Springsteen"

"Brian Wilson, Joanna Newsom, the Beatles, Diana Ross & the Supremes"

"Chump the open racist"

"Barbra Streisand and Bob Dylan"

"Chump The Full Blown Fool""

"He's falling apart in real time right before our eyes"

"Those of us who knew boys who died in Vietnam cannot forgive Chump ever"

"Chump is not just a loser, he is a loser cubed"

"Matt Gaetz's mother thinks her son is a moron (she's right!)"

"Idiot Bobby Junior, PRIDE, MIDCENTURY MODERN, OVERCOMPENSATING, GLAMOROUS"

"The out of control egos that will kill us all"

"Idiot of the Week"

"Ro and other disappointments"

"DIY Salad in a Jar in the Kitchen"

"Air Fryer Stuffed Cabbage Rolls in the Kitchen"

"Slow Cooker Funeral Potatoes in the Kitchen"

"Shrimp Salad Rolls in the Kitchen"

"Watermelon Gazpacho in the Kitchen"

" Mild Marco"

"Beauty tips from Marco Rubio"

"THIS JUST IN! MILD MARCO!"

"Media: Truth Molested Versus Truth Told "

Saturday, June 28, 2025

Amy Coney Barrett gets some much needed schooling

The Supreme Court is a joke and has been since Donald Chump appointed three injustices. Tom Boggioni (RAW STORY) reports on one of them:

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett got a dressing down from a former U.S. attorney for comments she made in her majority opinion on birthright citizenship which handed Donald Trump a win on Friday.

In a highly-criticized response to a dissenting Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, Coney Barrett dismissively wrote, "We observe only this: Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.”

With Coney Barrett relying heavily on the writings of the founding fathers, long before the 14th Amendment was added, University of Alabama Law School professor and ex-U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance begged to differ.

Over multiple posts on Bluesky she first wrote, "If Justice Barrett thinks we need to go back to what the Founding Fathers intended, I’ve got news for her. Their biggest concern was avoiding tyranny. So they created 3 branches of gov’t & divvied up the power the people (that’s us) were allowing the gov’t to use to create order for all of us."

She added, "I think about this a lot, b/c I’m finishing up a book on democracy (I’d love it if you’d preorder it). If you read the Federalist Papers, which all of the conservative justices-good members of the Federalist Society have, you know the FF spilled a lot of ink debating how best to avoid tyranny."

Get the feeling that there were about 100 million more qualified Americans who could have been appointed to the bench?

"The Snapshot" (THE COMMO ILLS):

Thursday, June 26, 2025. It's still the economy, stupid, and MSNBC works hard to shut itself down and go out of business.

Let me start off with something in raised in a few e-mails. I've noted here that there's too much going on to note everything in any snapshot. Rachel Maddow noted that even doing a daily program on MSNBC during Chump's first 100 days didn't provide her with enough time to cover every story -- or even every major story. Lawrence O'Donnell has noted the same. I write one thing a day here (the daily is a nightly on Saturday and Sunday). But there are also at least 24 other posts each day. So there are videos and press releases and other things that go up and cover other topics.

There's a topic that I didn't cover in a snapshot and apparently Jen Psaki did cover it "but I knew you wouldn't post it because of what you said about Jen." I'm going to assume that refers to Ava and my "Media: If MSNBC could just clone Rachel Maddow . . .."

Jen is in danger of losing her job. Ava and I don't do pile ons. When Britney Spears was the source of mockery, we avoided the topic because we don't do pile ons. Otherwise, we might very well have been like so many others and having to issue apologies for the way in which we covered her.

If Jen wasn't in danger of losing her job, we wouldn't have written what we did. As she is currently, she's not prime time. They could switch her to daytime, but she's not primetime. We noted that she's shrinking and not expanding since taking over for Rachel. That is true. We also noted that she's being buried under advice from this exec and that exec and consultants and -- It's too much and it would be too much for anyone. She needs to make clear that she's heard the advice and she's going to use what she can and ignore the rest.

Then she needs to get back in front of the camera and breathe. Don't be pushed around. Don't give up your space. Look into the camera and own the moment.

We wrote that piece because (a) MSNBC is in serious trouble right now -- ways that people don't even know outside the executive offices -- and (b) Jen is not delivering the numbers the network was hoping for and there's talk already of replacing her.

That piece was our flare for Jen. She has continued to be noted here. In fact, a video was posted of her show Tuesday night and Wednesday morning. She needs to center herself and breathe.

That's the only way she's going to hold this spot. If she can't, she can't. That's the Jen aspect of what Ava and I wrote. The part about "MSNBC is in serious trouble right now" is the other reason we wrote. MSNBC has had one identity crisis after another. Joe Scarborough may be seen as a 'consistent' but don't forget he's repeatedly shape shifted himself and, years and years go, would joke and laugh with his 'buddy' and fellow on air Mike Savage.

The network has been poorly run repeatedly. We didn't really watch MSNBC until 2024. We might catch Andrea Mitchell during the day while having lunch. We might catch Chris Hayes at night. Both were dependent upon our speaking schedule that day. I listened to Lawrence O'Donnell's program on SIRIUS XM or caught it via Apple Podcast. When a friend at MSNBC told us how bad things could get, we said we'd take a look at the network and we did.

Most people are suited to host programs during daytime or to nighttime. There's really not overlap. The only one who I know of that could pull off both was Phil Donahue. He demonstrated he could carry a daytime audience for years. He also demonstrated, on MSNBC, that he could carry a primetime audience.

Dick Cavett should never have been on prime time. He didn't have the personality. You can argue when the talk show was on PBS, that it didn't matter. But he didn't stick to PBS. I never liked Johnny Carson but he could deliver nighttime. It's a different type of program and more 'in your face.' David Letterman was too large for daytime and bombed when he tried it but when he came back as a nighttime host, he became a legend. Chris Hayes does a nice program. It is not in-your-face. That's not his style. He should have long ago been switched over to daytime where likeable matters so much more. Where likeability matters so much, in fact, that when you lose it -- see Ellen DeGeneres -- you lose your program.

All shows need a POV but prime time talk shows especially need it. Ari, Stephanie, Lawrence and Rachel have that. Joy Reid had it. MSNBC is programming as though FRIENDS and WILL & GRACE will never go off the air. Instead of making a strong programming bloc that would lift the ratings for the network, they're spacing out the real hits and putting Chris and others on in between. Chris is not UNION SQUARE but some of the programs are truly not Must See TV. Again, there should be no space between the heavy hitters. There has been no real thought put into the schedule.

FOX "NEWS" doesn't do that. They know who is daytime and who is nighttime. And their shows have a POV. That's one of the reason their ratings are high. Another reason is a FOX "NEWS" viewer has no life and lives in front of the TV. I can't think of anything worse than watching one show after another like a zombie in front of the TV. I miss Rachel on a daily basis but I'm glad because when she was on daily, it was get the TV on in time for Chris and sail through to the end of Stephanie's program (Nielsen viewer, so the TV had to be on to gather the Nielsen data).

MSNBC has never been run like a real network and heads may roll if they don't get it together. If Jen can reclaim her voice, she's fine on primetime. If she can't, they should switch her to daytime because she has likeability and even buried under 'suggestions,' she remains likeable.

The VA almost got mentioned in a snapshot this week regarding work. There are many things that don't make it into the snapshot when it goes up because there's just too much stuff that we are trying to squeeze in. We're starting with the economy so we'll be dropping that topic into this snapshot.

Donald Chump has ruined the economy. It is not recovering and it honestly can't recover at present. He's too erratic, he's too stupid. And his administration flunkies are too scared to tell him the truth: (in the words of Taylor Swift) You need to calm down. His erratic behavior and his constant threats and insults negatively impact the markets. He's a fool.

Gleb Tsipursky (TIME) notes:

After the Trump Administration intensified its push for federal workers to return to the office, a new study highlights the potential downsides of this mandate.Conducted by Alessandra Fenizia and Tom Kirchmaier, researchers from the George Washington University and the London School of Economics, the study focuses on productivity impacts of work-from-home (WFH) arrangements for public sector jobs. They found that working from home boosts productivity by 12% compared to in-office work.

The prevailing sentiment is that physical presence ensures better accountability and productivity. However, the study’s findings suggest that these arguments might be more rooted in perception than reality.

The study, which evaluated detailed administrative data from police staff alternating between home and office settings, indicates that employees working from home managed more cases per day, without any increase in errors or loss of quality. These findings held true even when researchers controlled for variables such as shift length and nature of tasks, ensuring that the results were not merely artifacts of different work schedules. Moreover, the productivity boost was amplified when tasks were assigned by supervisors rather than through automated systems, suggesting that the structure and management of remote work can play a critical role in maximizing its benefits.

One of the primary reasons for increased productivity was a reduction in workplace distractions. The study found that in the office, employees were more likely to be interrupted by conversations, coffee breaks, and other non-work-related interactions. By contrast, the relative isolation of remote work allowed for sustained focus, contributing to the higher case numbers logged from home. This challenges a common narrative promoted by some legislators, who argue that employees who work from home are more likely to slack off without the direct supervision afforded by office settings.

Rep. James Comer, a Kentucky Republican, for example, during the Jan. 15 2025 “Stay-at-Home Federal Workforce” hearing, blamed service backlogs on officials “coddling federal workers with a perk—telework—that allowed them to shirk their duties.” Similarly, House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana told reporters on Dec. 5 2024 that only “about 1 %” of federal employees are “actually working in the office,” adding that workers must “return to their desks and get back to the work they are supposed to be doing,” a claim that Politifact rated as “Pants on Fire.” However, Fenizia and Kirchmaier’s data showed no such shirking; instead, it demonstrated that remote work can enhance efficiency without sacrificing quality.

No surprise, idiots like Mike Johnson didn't know what they were talking about. By the way, Happy Pride, Mike, happy Pride.

I have no idea if what I'm about to note is going on anywhere other than the VA but we were speaking to a number of veterans last week and many work for the VA.

So Chump and others want to look tough. But they just look inept (yet again).

You're Blake. You work for the VA. The ability to work from home is why you applied and you work for the VA in Atlanta. Or that's where you've 'worked' while working from home. They're insisting that the employees aren't working from home anymore. What they're not making clear is that a number of them are also not working at the VA they work for. Blake working for the Atlanta VA? Blake took that position because he could work from home. But he actually lives in Kentucky.

Guess what? He's not moving to Atlanta. He's not going into the Atlanta VA he works for. He's finding a VA facility in Kentucky that has an empty desk and he's working for the Atlanta VA out of a desk in Kentucky.

Per the findings in the TIME article, that's not helping increase work.

You've really just ticked off your work force and you've done so at a time when you don't need to be doing that since the incoming and soon to be incoming workers are not that motivated to work a job that insults them and some don't want to be in the workforce and you're facing an increasingly less educated work force (the whole trend stories about young male loneliness). And let's also bring in what Paul Krugman pointed out earlier this month:

Young workers always have higher unemployment than workers as a group. College graduates always have lower-than-average unemployment. But normally education trumps age: Even recent college graduates have relatively low unemployment.

But not now. As I suggested, the current unemployment rate for young college graduates isn’t the highest we’ve ever seen. But previous peaks have come at times of general economic distress, like the aftermath of the global financial crisis. Now we have low overall unemployment, only slightly above historic lows, but unemployment among college graduates between 22 and 27 at recession-like levels.

Chump has no clue and what it really underscores to me is Chump's lack of vision.

Yes, he's got Project 2025 and other hate merchants telling him what to do. Even there, he can't stick to the playbook. He has no long term vision and never has. And you can see the impacts that's having on the economy and the markets and the country. Gabriela León (EXPLICAME) reports on Chump's labor 'plans:'

The mass layoff plan promoted by the Trump Administration, known as a “reduction in force,” has returned to the Supreme Court for a final decision. If approved, it would affect 22 government departments, resulting in the termination of thousands of federal employees. However, the consequences could extend far beyond the public sector, according with GoBankingRates.

Although the layoffs focus on federal workers, their ripple effects could reach the broader U.S. labor market. According to employment experts, a significant contraction in the federal workforce could affect job stability, local economic systems, and public confidence.

“Substantial cuts in the federal workforce can generate impacts on job stability, consumer spending, and a widespread sense of insecurity in the job market”, warned Eric Kingsley, partner at Kingsley Szamet Employment Lawyers.

One direct consequence would be increased competition for private sector jobs, especially among skilled federal workers seeking new opportunities. This influx could push down entry-level wages, forcing experienced professionals to accept lower pay.

He's not preparing for that. He has no idea what's going on. This is, please remember, the administration that actually loathes education. That's why they put Linda McMahon in charge of it, a certified idiot who found JOKES FOR THE JOHN too difficult to comprehend. Linda McMahon, the CGI version of Mammy Yokum.

How bad is it? Hugh Cameron (NEWSWEEK) notes:

Business leaders' confidence in the U.S. economy has halved since the beginning of the year, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co., as companies grapple with the impact of President Donald Trump's tariffs and broader geopolitical uncertainties.

The financial services firm's latest Business Leaders Outlook Survey, released Wednesday, found that optimism for the economy fell to 32 percent in June from 65 percent in January. Additionally, 25 percent of respondents said they expect a recession to occur at some point this year, up from only 8 percent in January.

Concerns over the trajectory of the U.S. economy have been fueled largely by Trump's trade agenda, which has led to significant stock market volatility and heightened fears of rising costs for both businesses and consumers. However, these anxieties have been somewhat tempered by the current pause on reciprocal tariffs, as well as the temporary easing of trading tensions between the United States and China.

While the survey was largely conducted prior to the start of the recent conflict between Israel and Iran and was completed before America's targeted strikes over the weekend, this could contribute to these existing economic anxieties.

One expert told Newsweek that a re-escalation would represent "another adverse supply shock to the economy."

Again, he's too erratic for the markets. He's doing real damage. Fed Chair Jerome Powell sugar-coated it to an extend on Tuesday when appearing before the House Financial Services Committee but he hadn't even been speaking for a full minute before he noted "elevated uncertainty" and, less than a minute later, he was again using the term "Surveys of households and businesses, however, report a decline in sentiment over recent months and elevated uncertainty about the economic outlook, largely reflecting trade policy concerns."

Again, he sugar coated it but the message was not good if you paid attention. He observed, "Policy changes continue to evolve, and their effects on the economy remain uncertain." Erratic. "Inflation remains elevated," that's not good news. Especially since candidate Chump promised to bring prices down but instead, once sworn into office, drove them up and they remain elevated and are impacting consumer confidence. Chump does not know what he is doing and that's how I translate this statement Powell made to the Committee:

The effects on inflation could be short lived -- reflecting a one-time shift in the price level. It is also possible that the inflationary effects could instead be more persistent. Avoiding that outcome will depend on the size of the tariff effects, on how long it takes for them to pass through fully into prices, and, ultimately, on keeping longer-term inflation expectations well anchored.

Yesterday, Howard Lutnick, erratic and shrill Commerce Secretary, was yet again whining that Powell had to cut interest rates. Did Lutnick catch any of Powell's testimony on Tuesday? "For the time being, we are well positioned to wait to learn more about the likely course of the economy before considering any adjustments to our policy stance." Did he catch that? Chump's too erratic and that's why there is so much uncertainty. It's not for nothing that Wall Street came up with TACO ("Trump Always Chickens Out").

'Trump Always Chickens Out' is the phrase bestowed upon him by whom? Wall Street. I've noted hear all along when many outlets were too scared to hold Chump accountable that business doesn't play. Jeff Bezos? He'll whore his ass until it just gapes non-stop with no closure in sight. But the business sector -- especially the business press -- does not fluff and flatter leaders who damage the economy. That's all they care about. And that's why Chump hasn't gotten the same free ride from the business press that other outlets have given him.

Our economy was in pretty good shape. Joe Biden steered us in the right direction and we were recovering economically from the pandemic. All Chump has done since he got in office is weaken our economy. And it's not any better this month than it was last month. There are so many problems facing our teetering economy Jennifer Sor (BUSINESS INSIDER) notes:

The US has flirted with the dreaded S-word for much of this year, and it's not out of the woods yet.

That's according to Torsten Sløk, the chief economist at Apollo Global Management, who thinks the US is at a critical inflection point for stagflation, a dire scenario in which economic growth slows while inflation remains high.

That problem is often regarded as even harder for policymakers to solve than a typical recession, as higher inflation can prevent the Federal Reserve from cutting interest rates to boost the economy.

The scenario has largely been triggered by President Donald Trump's tariffs, Sløk wrote in a white paper published on Monday.

"Tariff hikes are typically stagflationary shocks — they simultaneously increase the probability of an economic slowdown while putting upward pressure on prices," Sløk wrote, adding that consensus forecasts on Wall Street for economic growth had drifted lower this year, while inflation forecasts have edged higher.

Chump is too erratic and is doing real damage to the economy and the American people intuitively understand that. Dan Goldman (DENVER 7) explains, "Consumer confidence in the economy fell in June according to The Conference Board’s monthly Consumer Confidence Survey released Tuesday. It’s the fifth time in the last six months the report has shown a decline and cuts nearly half of the gains from May’s report." It's what Emma Nelson's reporting on today for THE MINNESOTA STAR TRIBUNE about how so many in that state realize that Chump's worsened the economy. Or refer to Martin Sanbu at THE FINANCIAL TIMES:

The Centre for Economic Policy Research, a network of many of Europe’s best economists, has worked up quite a trade in producing “rapid response” economic insights into current affairs. It shone, for example, at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic when unprecedented lockdowns required an entirely new perspective on economic policy. The group’s “rapid response” programme has now produced a 40-chapter ebook, comprising almost 500 pages of analysis, on the economic fallout from the second Trump administration.

Among other things, the analyses put numbers on views we have also developed here at Free Lunch. For example, even if you think it’s a good thing to expand manufacturing as a share of the economy, Michael Strain’s chapter shows that Trump’s radical trade policy is unlikely to boost US manufacturing output or jobs by much (a possibility I discussed here and here). The ebook also features a very important chapter by John Coates, which goes through the economic costs of undermining the rule of law (it was evident the Trump administration was doing so within days of taking office). Anna Maria Mayda and Giovanni Peri show how the crackdown on immigrants will shrink the US economy, a theme also addressed by my Free Lunch co-conspirator Tej last Sunday.

Other chapters explore the prospects for groups that Trump’s policies are supposed to help, in particular the middle class and those in rural areas. The answer is: not well. Richard Baldwin highlights how many more middle-class Americans are working in services, not in manufacturing, and therefore stand to lose out in purchasing power when tariffs make manufactured goods more expensive and do nothing for service sectors. Mary Hendrickson and David Peters examine the fallout for rural areas from tariff retaliation against US agricultural exports (as well as immigration crackdowns and healthcare subsidy cuts). As they remind us, US farmers only got through the US-China trade war of the first Trump administration thanks to financial support from the federal government.

Another issue negatively impacting the economy is Chump's immigration actions.

And we're back to MSNBC.

And . . . It's MORNING JOE. I don't like Joe personally. I was planning on ignoring the show -- and had since and his wife groveled in front of Chump.

But that segment? Better than anything MSNBC offered yesterday -- excepting Lawrence and Stephanie.

What we got instead was Abortion Barbie.

Remember that? Remember her?

If not, it's not your fault. But I'll help you out with nobody's first name: Wendy.

In 2014, MSNBC hosts actually called her "Abortion Barbie." She was going to shake up Texas and be the way forward and let's grab the smear that Republicans are using against her and reclaim it and . . .

They worked awfully hard to make Wendy Davis a star. And Ava and I pointed out in the middle of all that garbage was that they were destroying Wendy's campaign:

Davis needs to lower the stardom and demonstrate how she can be a work horse.

She needs to lose the ridiculous hair, she's not Donald Trump's ex-wife, and either pull it into a ponytail (which Texas women relate to) or get it cut.

She needs to tone down the make up as well.

She's a little too 'starish' currently for Texas.

And Greg Abbott?

Greg Abbott is in a wheel chair. He has been since 1984. From that wheel chair, he's been on the state supreme court and successfully and repeatedly run for attorney general. That's the kind of can-do spirit that Texans admire.

Cecile Richards is deeply stupid.

Making Wendy Davis a media star only made her a vapid blond with big hair.

If Cecile knew a damn thing about Texas politics, she would have already realized that Greg Abbott's not going to be beaten by a glossy 8 x 10 photograph.

And yet there was MSNBC yesterday. Jen and Chris the worst of the offenders but pretty much everyone but Lawrence and Stephanie (I didn't catch Ari's show so I don't know what he did) lying and lying and fluffing and fluffing.

Zohran Mamdani 'won' the NYC Democratic Party's mayoral primary. (Predicted to win, results aren't in and it could actually be weeks.)

He did not become Mayor of NYC on Tuesday though you have to forgive aged idiots like Bernie Sanders -- our old racist, Bernie, 'endearing' himself yet again to Black voters yesterday with his rude and dishonest remarks -- for thinking Zohran is the mayor.

MSNBC on airs like Chris and Jen lying about what a huge victory this was and blah blah blah and come from behind and --

Stop lying. Do you think your viewers don't remember you bringing him on your MSNBC programs over and over? There were at least nine serious candidates in that primary. But if you watched MSNBC, you only heard, day after day, from and of Zohran.

Oh, you did hear about Cuomo, they were eager to attack Cuomo daily.

Near the end, the week before, Brad Lander made it into MSNBC's news cycle for one day because of an action he took to defend immigrants that made national news. Otherwise, they would have continued to ignore him as they did throughout the campaign.

What hurts your ratings, MSNBC?

Looking like cheap little whores and, Chris and Jen, that's what you looked like as you went on and on thinking the viewers at home hadn't watched your shows for the last month and seen all the whoring.

There were the whores back again.

Doing to Zohran yesterday what they did to Wendy Davis.

Zohran did not have the popular backing he needed -- in the first round, he got 43 percent to Cumo's 36 percent. He could have.

If he'd been stronger on immigration, he could have.

What's especially sad there is that when he was running for office in 2020, he was much stronger and much clearer on the issue of immigration.

With Brad -- a Socialist just like Zohran -- making so many stronger moves and remarks demonstrating his support for immigrants, his large number of supporters are watching to see what they think of Zohran. In the first round, Brad got 11 percent of the vote. The bulk of that support was because Brad ran on an issue (a fact that eludes old man Bernie -- and please read Elaine's "We do not need an 87 y.o. president -- pack it in" from last night and grasp that Bernie is not needed anymore, we do not need that tired old man running for president again -- that is as insane as Bernie himself is).

And MSNBC, the network that made Zohran their personal choice, could have helped him yesterday in the general election by addressing actual issues.

But the idiots of MSNBC saw fit to try to do another star creation. It failed Wendy Davis and left Texas under the control of Greg Abbot (still under that control, by the way). But they just know what works, right?

Yesterday was not the time for star making and star making isn't really needed in a politician to begin with.

What was needed was discussing real issues. Not generic statements. Not trash about how this primary proves something!!!!!

What it appears to have proven is that rank choice voting -- something I've supported for decades and what we use each year when polling our community for their top ten on books of the year -- is not going to work.

I'm not saying that because of who appears to have won.

I'm saying that because it's Thursday morning and it may be weeks before we actually have a winner.

That's not really a selling point for rank-choice voting. NYC is a city. I favor rank-choice voting and favor it nationwide. But I'm going to be rethinking that now because I'm not in the mood to wait weeks after a presidential election to find out who won.

And are we we aware that the figures I used on percentage -- the same ones the media's using -- aren't accurate because they don't include ballots still enroute in the snail mail?

That got ignored -- the nonsense of waiting weeks for the actual results -- but it also ignores that NYCers aren't voting on prom king. They're voting for issues. They will be doing that in the general election. And your fluffing a thirty-something isn't helping him.

Brad, in the first round, was a serious challenge to Zohran and Andrew. And that was because of his positions, statements and actions on the immigration issue.

Trying to make Zohran twinkle won't produce winning results in the general election. But MSNBC wants to be a star maker so they did nonsense and fluff when they could have been devoted to actual issues and expanding support for Zohran that way.

It's moments like these that make me think maybe MSNBC does need to go off the air. That's what the worry is right now. Not low ratings. The suits are worried that MSNBC will actually go under.

We got Jen talking campaigning with Zohran -- gushing. The primary is over and no one needs the bragging or the spit shining. It's not going to help Zohran. You had him right in front of you, Jen, and you could have made a real difference by drilling down on policy. Instead, you came off like a fan girl airhead.

If that's what MSNBC has to offer, go ahead and shut it down.

But the same time they offered that garbage, they also had Lawrence and Stephanie offering these two segments.

That's real. THE MORNING JOE segment we highlighted earlier is real. Not a MORNING JOE fan but we'll highlight them as opposed to the crap fluff that too many MSNBC programs keep churning out and doing so at their own risk.

Let's wind down with this from Senator Adam Schiff's office.

Watch his remarks here.

Washington, D.C. – Today, during the Senate Judiciary Committee’s judicial nomination hearing, U.S. Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) pressed Emil Bove, President Donald Trump’s nominee for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, on whether he suggested that DOJ attorneys should ignore court orders.

Key Excerpts:

On Bove suggesting he would ignore court orders to advance President Trump’s immigration agenda:

Schiff: […] In the complaint, it says Bove stated that DOJ would need to consider telling the courts “fuck you” and ignoring any such court order. Did you say anything of that kind in the meeting?

Bove: Senator, I have no recollection of saying anything of that kind, to the extent I usually —

Schiff: Wouldn’t you recall, Mr. Bove, if you said or suggested during a meeting with Justice Department lawyers that maybe they should consider telling the court “fuck you”? It seems to me that would be something you’d remember, unless that’s the kind of thing you say frequently.

Bove: Well, I’ve certainly said things encouraging litigators at the department to fight hard for valid positions that we have to take in defense of our clients.

Schiff: And have you frequently suggested that they say “fuck you” and ignore court orders? Is that also something you frequently do such you might not remember doing it in this occasion?

Bove: No. And as I explained, I have never directed —

Schiff: So, did you or did you not make those comments during that meeting?

Bove: Which comments, Senator?

Schiff: You really need me to repeat it? Did you suggest, as Mr. Reuveni wrote, that DOJ would need to consider telling the courts “fuck you” and ignore any such court order?

Bove: I did not suggest that there would be any need to consider ignoring court orders. At the point of that meeting, there were no court orders to discuss.

Schiff: Well, did you suggest telling the courts “fuck you” in any manner?

Bove: I don’t recall.

Schiff: You just don’t remember that. Well, let me ask you this. It also says in the complaint, “Bove indicated and stressed to all in attendance that the planes needed to take off no matter what.” These are the planes that a judge was ordering not be used to render people to a maximum-security prison outside the country. Did you say during that meeting, did you stress to all in attendance that the planes needed to take off no matter what?

Bove: Senator, your characterization is not accurate.

Schiff: It’s not my characterization. It’s the characterization of a decorated prosecutor who was in that meeting. Are you saying that he’s lying?

Bove: As I said at the beginning of the hearing —

Schiff: No, no, I’m not interested in what you said the beginning of the hearing. I’m interested in whether you stressed to people in attendance that the planes needed to take off no matter what. Did you say that?

Bove: I certainly conveyed the importance of the upcoming operation.

Schiff: Well, don’t paraphrase here. Did you tell people in attendance the planes needed to take off no matter what?

Bove: I don’t recall the specific words that I used.

Schiff: Wouldn’t you recall saying that if you had instructed that the planes needed to take off no matter what, including whether the court ordered otherwise? You wouldn’t remember that?

Bove: This is a mischaracterization, Senator, there were no court orders at this point.

Schiff: Well, there was a court order. Wasn’t there?

Bove: No, that’s —

Schiff: Wasn’t there a court order by Judge Boasberg. If not in this specific case, then in related cases that that people not be sent out of the country until the court could rule? Wasn’t there a court order?

Bove: Not at the time of that meeting, Senator.

On calling for the meeting notes referenced in the whistleblower’s report on Bove:

Schiff: […] Let me ask you this, Mr. Bove, if there are notes of that meeting, will you provide them to this committee?

Bove: I defer to the committee and to the executive branch on the procedure.

Schiff: And if the committee requests them, will you provide those notes to the committee?

Bove: I defer to the executive branch on the handling of that request.

Schiff: And let me ask you about notes from another meeting, which are contesting here, and that is the meeting over the decision to dismiss the case in New York, the corruption case against the mayor of New York. According to Ms. Sassoon, the U.S. Attorney at the time, during the meeting with Adams’ attorneys, where she described Adams’ attorneys repeatedly urging what amounted to a quid pro quo, that you admonished one of the lawyers in the room to stop taking notes. Is that true?

Bove: I don’t believe I instructed that attorney to stop taking notes. I did remark on the fact that he was taking extensive notes, yes.

Schiff: And why did it concern you that he was taking notes of that meeting?

Bove: Because at that point in the meeting, we were discussing who was responsible for media leaks, and I was making the point that only the prosecutors had created an extensive record that could support detailed leaks.

Schiff: And you were concerned, were you, that information about this potential quid pro quo might become public? Was that the concern?

Bove: I’ve explained that there was no quid pro quo.

Schiff: Will you provide the notes of that meeting, which you, according to the U.S. Attorney, instructed be collected at the end of the meeting?

Bove: I think a member of my staff may have given that instruction outside my presence, and I defer to the committee and the executive branch on records requests and how there should be handled.

[…]

Schiff: […] I’ve requested the notes from two pivotal meetings that go to the heart of the nominee’s credibility. The meeting over the decision to drop charges against the mayor of New York, and the meeting in which the whistleblower alleges that the nominee suggested ignoring court orders and telling the courts, essentially, “fuck you.” The witness has said that the decision whether to turn off those notes will determine or depend, I guess, on whether there’s an assertion of privilege of some kind. And we have the great, good fortune at this moment to have the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General here with us today. We can resolve this right now. I would ask through the chair whether the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General will approve the provision of these notes to the committee. They could be provided to the chair and the Ranking Member in camera, if necessary, so that the question that Senator Kennedy asked about whether there was some illicit bargain, and that my colleagues have asked, can be resolved. If there are detailed notes of these meetings, it will give us an answer to who’s telling the truth here.

###

Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Imbeciles Appear Before Congress" and the following sites updated: