Monthly Archives: January 2025

by - 0 comments

Trump Pursuing a New Tactic to Build His Presidential Library: Lawsuits.

Meta Platforms has agreed to pay about $25 million to settle a lawsuit Trump brought against the company after the social-media platform suspended his accounts following the attacks on the U.S. Capitol that year.

$22 million of the payment will go toward a fund for Trump’s presidential library,. Meta won’t admit wrongdoing under an agreement Trump signed in the Oval Office on Jan. 29.

This follows a Dec. 14 announcement that ABC News would pay $15 million to settle a defamation lawsuit brought by Trump is discouraging. Even more discouraging, however, is word that under the terms of the settlement ABC News will donate the $15 million to Trump’s future presidential foundation and museum.

And now The New York Times reports many executives at CBS’s parent company, Paramount, believe that settling an absurd $10 billion lawsuit against CBS filed before the Nov. 2024 election would increase the odds that the Trump administration does not block or delay their planned multibillion-dollar merger with Skydance. Trump accused CBS of deceptively editing a “60 Minutes” interview with Vice President Kamala Harris. 

“A settlement would be an extraordinary concession by a major U.S. media company to a sitting president, especially in a case in which there is no evidence that the network got facts wrong or damaged the plaintiff’s reputation,” the Times reported on Jan. 30. 

“We once held the office of president, as well as its occupant, in high regard,” Anthony Clark wrote in The Last Campaign: How Presidents Rewrite History, Run for Posterity, and Enshrine Their Legacies. “As we have lowered our opinions of both, presidential libraries, consequently, have grown larger and more powerful—and, not incidentally, less truthful.” As Clark wrote in Salon, presidential centers tend to be “proud, defensive, and a little self-absorbed” and eventually become theme parks with declining numbers of visitors.

The Donald J. Trump Presidential Library Fund Inc. was incorporated in Florida on Dec. 20, six days after it was revealed that ABC News had agreed to donate the $15 million to Trump’s future presidential foundation and museum.

The Wall Street Journal’s Annie Linskey and Rebecca Ballhaus reported “Serious talks about the suit, which had seen little activity since the fall of 2023, began after Meta Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg flew to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida to dine with him in November, according to the people familiar with the discussions. The dinner was one of several efforts by Zuckerberg and Meta to soften the relationship with Trump and the incoming administration. Meta also donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund. Last year, Trump warned that Zuckerberg could go to prison if he tried to rig the election against him. Toward the end of the November dinner, Trump raised the matter of the lawsuit, the people said. The president signaled that the litigation had to be resolved before Zuckerberg could be ‘brought into the tent,’ one of the people said.”

Knowing Donald Trump’s tendency toward grandiosity, he will likely want a supercalifragilisticexpialidocious billion dollar Presidential Monument. The Washington Post reported back in January 2021 that a top Trump fundraiser said the president had told supporters he wanted to raise $2 billion for his presidential library and museum and thought he could collect it in small-dollar donations from his grass-roots supporters. A satirical website was subsequently created showing the contents of a potential Donald J. Trump Presidential Library, with images of “The Wall of Criminality” and the “Alt Right Auditorium”. 

The way we’re headed, presidential centers will surpass Egypt’s pyramids as monuments to the egos of leaders. But as I’ve observed in previous posts, if Donald Trump goes forward with his museum plans, his  former, current and future advisors may have reason to be concerned. Many of the Egyptian pyramids entombed not only the deceased, but also the deceased’s servants.

Source: Putnam Museum

by - 0 comments

Is God Now on the Side of Republicans?

Good God!

Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is now appealing for money in the name of God to support his political action committee, Champion American Values. He just sent me this email plea:

ALL GLORY TO GOD!

If you agree that nothing but faith in God carried the Conservative movement to victory, then join me in praising Him!

SIGN YOUR NAME

PRAISE GOD

“We’re in the fight of our generation — to save America, as we know it — for future generations, and WE need YOU to stay in the fight,” Pompeo begged me.

Clicking on ”Sign Your Name” takes you to a donation page that offers the opportunity to contribute $35 to $500 or more, and if you don’t uncheck a box, it makes your donation a monthly recurring contribution. 

What a racket!

According to OpenSecrets,  a nonprofit  that tracks and publishes data on campaign finance and lobbying, during 2023-2024 Champion American Values raised $8,088,409 and spent $7,535,674. 

It spent just $90,000 in donations to federal candidates:

  • $5000 to Donald Trump
  • $42,500 to Republican candidates for the US House of Representatives
  • $37,500 to Republican candidates for the US Senate

So where did the rest of its spending go?

$4,505,713, or 70.05%, of its total spending, went to fundraising expenses. 

$1,004,735, or 15.62%, went to PAC staff salaries.

$312,260 went to media expenses, including $304,549 to media consulting

$206,509 went to administrative expenses, including travel, lodging, technology and legal services

If you get a fundraising appeal from this outfit, pray to God that you have the fortitude to refuse the plea. 

by - 0 comments

Think Eco-Extremism Is Dead? Not In Oregon.

Oregon Democratic State Senator Jeff Golden of Ashland is confused.

Golden is the chief sponsor of a bill, SB 681, that would prohibit the State Treasurer from renewing investments in or making new investments in a private market fund if the managers of the fund have stated an intention to invest in fossil fuels. Joining him as regular sponsors of the bill are seven other Democrats: Senators Lew Frederick, Khanh Pham, Kathleen Taylor; House members Zach Hudson, Lisa Fragala, Mark Gamba, Travis Nelson.

The bill simply makes no sense. 

In relying on environmental criteria, investing is driven by a political agenda, not the best interests of investors.

In addition, the State Treasurer invests in securities that trade in secondary markets. As the Hewlett Foundation’s Kelly Born and Stanford Law professor emeritus Paul Brest have argued, it is virtually impossible for a socially motivated investor to increase the beneficial outputs of a publicly traded corporation by purchasing, or not purchasing, its stock.

Golden’s bill also undermines logic right off the bat when it justifies itself by citing everything but the kitchen sink as justification for the restrictive policy: 

“Whereas in Oregon, more intense forest fires threaten rural communities and disrupt outdoor recreational opportunities and the tourism industry; smoke from these fires threatens our workforce, our elders and our children; severe droughts constrain our important agricultural and nursery industries and imperil our salmon runs; and businesses are forced to spend millions to mitigate the most pressing climate effects rather than investing in future innovation and opportunities.”

Good grief. 

Then, while it prohibits fossil fuel investments on the one hand; on the other hand it cites the requirement that the State Treasurer is required to manage investment portfolios “so as to maximize investment returns and minimize the risk of loss.” You can’t do both at the same time. 

It also ignores the responsibility of the State Treasurer not to do anything that abrogates the treasurer’s fiduciary responsibilities to make available funds “as productive as possible” and “to diversify the investments of the investment funds”.

The Democrats’ bill is just leftist activism parading as socially responsible investing.

Stop it in its tracks.

 

by - 0 comments

U.S. vs. China: Cutting Our Own Throats

Under Xi Jinping, general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’smilitary might , including its nuclear capabilities, have been expanding rapidly while it “has demonstrated an increasing willingness to use military coercion and inducements to achieve its aims”, according to the U.S. Department of Defense.

China’s dominance in global manufacturing is greater than it’s ever been. Its government subsidies are giving industries leverage to out-compete with American products. It had a nearly $1 trillion trade surplus with the rest of the world in 2024. 

China has an aggressive, global spy network and influence operation aimed at expanding and solidifying its power.

China is supporting the Russian war machine and is openly preparing for a war to take over Taiwan. 

China is aggressively bullying the Philippines and other countries with its claims on the South China Sea. 

The U.S is falling further and further behind China in shipbuilding, threatening maritime security around the world. A new report by the U.S. Trade Representative found, that U.S. international trade is “carried out on vessels made in China, financed by state-owned Chinese institutions, owned by Chinese shipping companies, and reliant on a global maritime and logistics infrastructure increasingly dominated by China.”

All together, China presents a clear and present danger to the United States,

But American consumers continue to subsidize the Community regime by procuring the countries products as though there’s a fire sale, American companies continue strengthening their ties to China and the strongest signal President-elect Donald Trump is sending to China isn’t, “I’m determined to protect American security”, but “Let’s make a deal”. 

Nothing illustrates that better than Trump’s words and actions with respect to TikTok, owned by the Chinese company ByteDance.

In April 2024, with bipartisan concern about the national security threat TikTok posed to the United States and its use as a tool to spread misinformation and propaganda, the House of Representatives voted 360 to 58 in the House and the Senate voted 78 to 18 for a bill requiring the sale of the social media platform to a U.S. company or face a shutdown.

Trump actually tried to ban the app himself in his first term by signing an executive order in August 2020 asserting that the app was capturing mass amounts of information about Americans and raising risks for the country.

“These risks are real,” the order said. “This data collection threatens to allow the Chinese Communist Party access to Americans’ personal and proprietary information − potentially allowing China to track the locations of Federal employees and contractors, build dossiers of personal information for blackmail, and conduct corporate espionage.”

In March 2024, however, Trump flipped his position, saying he was opposed to banning the app or forcing a sale. “Frankly, there are a lot of people on TikTok that love it,” Trump said on CNBC . “There are a lot of young kids on TikTok who will go crazy without it.”

On January 18, TikTok  did shut down, but after Trump promised to issue an executive order on Monday to “extend the period of time before the law’s prohibitions take effect,” it came back up. It announced, “In agreement with our service providers” the company “is in the process of restoring service. We thank President Trump for providing the necessary clarity and assurance to our service providers that they will face no penalties providing TikTok to over 170 million Americans and allowing over 7 million small businesses to thrive.”

The law allows Trump to grant a 90-day reprieve to TikTok, but only if he can certify at that point “evidence of significant progress” toward a sale. During that 90 days, of course, China’s alleged efforts to undermine United States security would continue, an issue of apparently little concern to Trump.

Trump’s inclination to pacify China and TikTok, reminds me of the protests of young Americans against the TikTok shutdown, favoring their personal TikTok addiction over American security.  These same self-absorbed young people are likely many of the same people who  are sustaining China’s economy by buying massive amounts of cheap fast fashion from Chinese companies like Temu and Shein, despite extensive reports  that the apparel hides the dirty laundry of environmental damage and labor exploitation.

Trump’s moves are not, however, going unchallenged.

Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-Nebraska), chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has urged US companies to halt operations with TikTok. “For TikTok to come back online in the future, ByteDance must agree to a sale that satisfies the law’s qualified-divestiture requirements by severing all ties between TikTok and Communist China,” Ricketts said.

Also breaking with Trump, U.S. Senator Tom Cotton, chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, also issued a stern warning for companies deciding to work with TikTok after its resumption of service. “Any company that hosts, distributes, services, or otherwise facilitates communist-controlled TikTok could face hundreds of billions of dollars of ruinous liability under the law, not just from DOJ, but also under securities law, shareholder lawsuits, and state AGs, Cotton posted on X. “Think about it.”

Meanwhile, TikTok’s CEO is planning to attend a Trump victory rally at the Capitol One Arena in Washington, D.C. tonight (Sunday) and is expected to sit on the dais for Trump’s inauguration on Monday.

It’s a good time to remember Franz Stangl, the commandant of the Nazi concentration camp Treblinka in occupied Poland from Sept. 1942 to August 1943. Gitta Sereny, an Austrian born journalist, biographer and historian. wrote “Into That Darkness” based on interviews with Stangl after the war. Trying to understand how he acclimated to running the camp, she asked him how he managed to do it.  “It was the small steps. Small compromises,” he said. ” You see, if you can get people to stop believing in absolute right and wrong, you can get them to do anything.”

Americans succumbing to the allure of Chinese goods, American companies allowing their drive for profits to justify strengthening China’s economy and American politicians setting aside their legitimate concerns about the challenges from China are guilty of small steps, too.

Stay tuned.

Addendum

In still engaging wholeheartedly with China, American companies are repeating how so many have responded (or not) to Russia’s aggression in Ukraine.  According to Foreign Policy, as of 2023, around 800 multinational companies from Western and like-minded countries were still operating in Russia—either because they decided to stay or because they were still generating revenues there despite having pledged to leave. Around 60 percent of those global firms that operated in Russia before the full-scale invasion began in February 2022 still continue to do so. Second, Germany, the United States, and France are—by far—the top three countries of origin for Western firms that retain a presence in Russia, accounting for around half of them.

What is undeniably true , according to Foreign Policy, is that the hundreds of Western firms staying in Russia are helping Moscow finance the war in Ukraine. The data is eye-popping. In 2022 and 2023, firms from the G-7, European Union, and like-minded economies generated around $370 billion in revenues on Russian soil, which was more than Moscow’s military budget over the same period. In the first two years of the war, Western firms transferred more than $11 billion in corporate taxes to Russian state coffers, with Austrian bank Raiffeisen alone accounting for one-tenth of this amount. The data is not available yet for 2024, but a ballpark estimate suggests that Western firms probably paid another $4-6 billion in corporate taxes, bringing the total to roughly $16 billion funneled to the Kremlin since the invasion began.


by - 0 comments

At Risk: Oregon’s Minority Scholarships are in Jeopardy

Congratulations to Olivia, Rodney, Kayla, Allie, and Sumeyah, the Black United Fund of Oregon (BUF-OR) announced with pride. All earned Amina Anderson scholarships awarded to students to pursue higher education at an accredited college or university within the State of Oregon. To qualify for the scholarship, students must identify as Black, African-American, or of African descent.

Other minority students in Oregon celebrated, too. There was the Oregon Latino Scholarship from the Hispanic Metropolitan Chamber, where applicants must be of Hispanic ancestry and permanently residing in Oregon or Clark County, A total of $117,700 was awarded to 40 students on May 3rd, 2024, during the Chamber’s annual Scholarship Award Luncheon at the Oregon Convention Center, in Portland, Oregon.

There was also the Oregon Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association Scholarship for Chinese high school seniors, and the Full Circle Scholarship from the American Indian College Fund for American Indian and Alaska Native students in Oregon.

I hope they treasured their awards. They may be among the last winners. All college scholarships restricted to minority students in Oregon and other states could soon be on the chopping block.

A lawsuit just filed against McDonald’s in federal court Nashville, TN alleges that the company is discriminating against non-Latinos with its HACER National Scholarship Program. The program offers scholarships between $5,000 and $100,000 to up to 30 outstanding students from across the US with at least one parent of Latino or Hispanic heritage.

“So non-Hispanics—including non-Hispanics with severe financial need and racial minorities like blacks, Arabs, and Native Americans—are flatly barred based on their ethnic heritage,” the lawsuit says. “This kind of discrimination was never lawful.”

The lawsuit was filed by the American Alliance for Equal Rights, led by Edward Blum. His lawsuits against Harvard and the University of North Carolina led to a 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling to stop affirmative action admissions at colleges. Blum has consistently argued against laws and policies that make distinctions based on race or ethnicity in areas such as voting and education.

“Like the vast majority of Americans, I believe that an individual’s race and ethnicity should not be used to help them or harm them in their life’s endeavors,” Blum told The New York Times after the Supreme Court ruling. ” This opinion is the end of the beginning. This issue of race and ethnicity in our public lives is not going to go away.”

The Supreme Court’s ruling has already spurred other nonprofits outside of Blum’s to target what they perceive to be discriminatory scholarships and fellowships. The Equal Protection Project of the Legal Insurrection Foundation, for example, has filed multiple complaints with the U.S. Department of Education’s civil rights office over universities’ minority scholarships and fellowships,

As The Washington Post has observed, the Supreme Court’s decision “is being closely watched because of its possible implications for race-conscious programs in the private sector.”

Get ready for change.

by - 0 comments

Thomas Who? Another Billionaire Trump Backer Emerges

For all his talk about representing the common man, Donald Trump”s bid to return to the White House was bankrolled by a phalanx of American billionaires. The A List included Elon Musk, Woody Johnson, an heir to the Johnson & Johnson fortune, Miriam Adelson, the widow of casino magnate Sheldon Adelson,  and Timothy Mellon.

Now another less widely known billionaire Trump backer has emerged, Thomas Klingenstein.

Thomas Klingenstein

On January 4, 2024, President-elect Donald Trump held a “World Premier Screening” at Mar-a-Lago of a 104-minute film, The Eastman Dilemma: Lawfare or Justice, about attorney John Eastman. Eastman had worked with Trump to devise a plan for then-Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the 2020 election, despite Pence’s lawyer and other lawyers on the White House staff dismissing Eastman’s proposals as illegal and unconstitutional.

The New York Times reported on the showing, but noted, “It is unclear who produced the movie”. A few other media outlets also cited the showing, but none of the stories said who was behind the movie.

Some digging revealed that a lot of people in the constellation of conservative influencers played a role. The website for the film highlights the Madison Media Fund[1]  which “supports freedom focused filmmakers.”

“The Eastman Dilemma: Lawfare or Justice” addresses a critical pain point: the growing reality that attorneys who represent conservative clients are being unfairly targeted and “canceled” by a legal system as it grows increasingly politically biased,” the Media Fund website asserts. 

In addition to highlighting The Eastman Dilemma, The Media Fund website includes a “Producer Circle Film Library: Film collections curated by free speech advocate thought leaders.”

Many of the featured films have conservative or patriotic themes, including films by Dinesh D’Souza, a right-wing conspiracy theorist. D’souza released 2000 Mules, a widely debunked film that falsely claimed paid “mules” illegally collected and deposited ballots into drop boxes that favored Joe Biden in swing states in the 2020 presidential election. 

The Madison Media Fund is registered as a non-profit. In its most recent filing with the Internal Revenue Service, the Irvine, CA-based fund reported no revenue or expenses in 2023. The Executive Director was listed as Garry Depew, but the money behind The Eastman Dilemma likely came from its Executive Producer, Thomas Klingenstein.

Klingenstein is chair of the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank based in Upland, CA. “Scholars at Claremont have long subscribed to the belief that the American republic has been dismantled, the Constitution corrupted by left-wing ideas,”  The New York Times said in a lengthy 2023 piece on the Institute.

The Institute was awarded the National Humanities Medal from President Trump in 2019.  Noteworthily, John Eastman is a long-time senior fellow at the Institute and is the founder and director of Claremont’s Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence.

Klingenstein is a principal in the investment firm Cohen Klingenstein, LLC which, according to Influence Watch, administers a portfolio worth more than $2.3 billion.

He is also founder of the Thomas D. Klingenstein Fund. The Klingenstein Fund donated $100,000 to Public Media Lab for production of Created Equal: Clarence Thomas In His Own Words, a documentary on the life of Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, released theatrically in January 2020 and broadcast on PBS in May 2020.

“We find ourselves in a cold civil war.,” Klingenstein said in a video released by a Super Pac, American Firebrand. “This is a war not over the size of government or taxes but over the American way of life.” “This war is between those who want to preserve the American way of life, and those who want to destroy it.”

“War is not a time for too much civility, compromise, or for imputing good motives to the enemy,” Klingenstein said in another video. In an apocalyptic tone, he added, “You must understand your enemy: education, corporate media, entertainment, big business, big tech. These institutions, together with the government, function as a totalitarian regime.” 

According to the Federal Election Commission, Klingenstein has contributed millions to conservative candidates, organizations and Republican-aligned political committees. A search of Federal Election Commission records reveals a list of 164 individual contributions by Klingenstein to conservative election campaigns during 2023-2024. Major recipients of Klingenstein’s largesse included:

  • Club For Growth Action, a Super PAC focused on defeating big-government Democrats and replacing them with pro-growth conservatives
  • Win It Back PAC,  a conservative Republican Super PAC
  • Make America Great Again Inc., a  Super PAC in support of Donald Trump
  • The Sentinel Action Fund, a conservative Super PAC with a year-round ground game committed to turning out absentee, early vote, and “day of” voters.
  • Turning Point PAC Inc., a Republican conservative Super PAC

According to a Jan. 13, 2024 story in The New Yorker Daily, Klingenstein has also contributed to the American Leadership PAC that planned to spend one million dollars to pressure Republican senators to support Pete Hegseth as Donald Trump’s Defense Secretary. Breitbart News has reported that the targets are senators in Alaska, North Carolina, Louisiana, South Dakota, and Utah.  In the 2022 and 2024 political cycles, most of the PAC’s funding came from Klingenstein and three other wealthy men.

“Pete Hegseth is a warrior against wokeness in our military and will make an excellent Defense Secretary,” a spokesman for the group told Breitbart News. “It’s vital that Senate Republicans stand with President Trump and vote to confirm Pete. We will do everything in our power to help him get across the finish line.”

There are many more substantial Trump donors from the moneyed class that have largely escaped media attention, but you can be sure they are actively playing the influence game. In mid-2024, Forbes identified 26 billionaires who had each given more than $1 million to Trump. You can be sure they all want something.

“These are smart, accomplished people,” New Yorker writer Susan Glasser said on NPR’s Fresh Air program on October 22, 2024. “I think they have a pretty clear read of who Trump is, which is why for many of them, it strikes me as a fairly cynical transaction that they’re making. And that’s what I was told explicitly from some sources that I have among very senior Republicans who have observed up close this donor class. They believe that it was very transactional. And they think that, in fact, they’re purchasing a level of access and seats at the table in a second Trump administration that they simply wouldn’t have had in a continued Biden or Harris administration.”

Watch closely.

[1] The Madison Media Fund is not the same as NY-based Madison Media Group (MMG) 

by - 1 Comment

Dear Trumpers: Is This What You Voted For?

Presidential candidates say a lot of things during the heat of a campaign. Voters have to separate the wheat from the chaff to figure out what among all the proposals are likely to actually be pursued. President-elect Donald Trump has taken things further by revealing his most controversial proposals AFTER the election, saving voters from having to consider whether they make any sense or should influence their vote.

As Tina Brown said today in Fresh Hell, “In Trump Season Two, deranged masculinity is all the rage.” Consider the following items Trump has put forward since the election:

  • Greenland: Trump has refused to rule out the use of force or economic coercion as a means for America to take control of Greenland,  an autonomous territory of Denmark in the polar zone with self-government and its own parliament, a population of approximately 56,600 inhabitants and an official language, Greenlandic, that is spoken by the majority, although a small proportion of the population considers itself bilingual and uses Danish as a parallel language. “Greenland is ours. We are not for sale and will never be for sale,,” said Greenland’s Prime Minister Múte Egede.  “… he (Trump) seems to sincerely believe that strong countries have the right to bully weaker ones. Trump has long insisted that the United States should seize smaller countries’ natural resources, and that American allies should be paying us protection money, as if they were shopkeepers and America were a mob boss,” Jonathan Chait wrote in The Atlantic.
  • The Panama Canal: Trump has refused to rule out the use of military or economic coercion to force Panama to give up control of the Panama Canal that America built more than a century ago. Construction of the canal, an artificial 82-kilometer waterway in Panama that connects the Caribbean Sea with the Pacific Ocean, was officially completed on April 1, 1914 and officially opened to commercial traffic on  August 15, 1914.  On Sept. 7, 1977, President Carter submitted two treaties to the U.S. Senate. The first, called the Neutrality Treaty, stated that the United States could use its military to defend the Panama Canal against any threat to its neutrality, thus allowing perpetual U.S. usage of the Canal. The second, called The Panama Canal Treaty, stated that the Panama Canal Zone would cease to exist on October 1, 1979, and the Canal itself would be turned over to the Panamanians on December 31, 1999. These two treaties were signed on September 7, 1977.  Carter signed the implementation legislation into law on September 27, 1979. When pressed on whether he might order the military to force Panama to give up the canal, or to do the same with Greenland, Trump recently said: “No, I can’t assure you on either of those two.”
  • The Gulf of Mexico: “We’re going to be changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America,” Trump said at a recent news conference. “ … What a beautiful name, and it’s appropriate.” That The body of water has been depicted with that name for more than four centuries.Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) has already proposed a bill that would federally fund the required changes to maps.
  • Making Canada Part of the United States: Trump has threatened to use “economic force” to join Canada and the United States together, implying that the United States would pare back its purchases of Canadian products to force such a move. He has posted maps on social media showing Canada as part of the United States and posted “many people in Canada LOVE being the 51st State.” He has also said, “If Canada merged with the U.S., there would be no Tariffs, taxes would go way down, and they would be TOTALLY SECURE from the threat of the Russian and Chinese Ships that are constantly surrounding them,” he added. “Together, what a great Nation it would be!!!” Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau responded on X, “There isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell that Canada would become part of the United States.”
  • Wind energy: Trump has said he wants the US to move away from wind energy. “We’re going to try and have a policy where no windmills are being built,” he said. In 2023, wind power generated 10% of the United States’ electricity. The U.S. Department of Energy estimates that by 2050, wind power could meet 35% of the country’s electricity demand, unless its growth is stymied by political action. Maybe all this is nonsense, theater of the absurd. Maybe it’s designed to dominate the news cycle, control the narrative, a practice Trump employs with abandon and one which drives out competing coverage of important issues.
  • Lawsuit: And if the above aren’t enough of a contribution to chaos, Trump is pursuing a lawsuit against Ann Selzer, a veteran pollster who predicted Kamala Harris would win Iowa, for fraud, and The Des Moines Register. It’s not enough that he won, I guess.

As Heather Cox Richardson observed in her Jan. 8 Letters from an American, “things that matter deeply to the American people are going largely unnoticed”.[1] Maybe all this is nonsense, theater of the absurd. Maybe it’s designed to dominate the news cycle, control the narrative, a practice Trump employs with abandon and one which drives out competing coverage of important issues. If that’s the case, Trump is succeeding, pushing aside other important issues as his inauguration draws nearer.

In the meantime, it’s discouraging to see some commentators suggest ignoring Trumps bluster. On Jan. 8, Joe Klein, a former Time magazine columnist, wrote a message on his Substack blog saying essentially, “Don’t worry. Be happy”:

“I’ll not fall for the bait. I watched Trump’s press conference. I will take him seriously, but not literally. He’s negotiating. He’s sending messages. And I don’t think the messages are all that terrible. He is haggling for better rates for American ships in the Canal (and perhaps a MAGA project of widening that too-skinny thing). He’s sending a larger message to the Chinese: we’re watching every move you make, especially in the western hemisphere. He is haggling with Denmark: Greenland wants independence, at least a majority of its minuscule (57,000) population does and we’re a more plausible big brother than you. He is poking Canada, provocatively, for better trade deals and more defense spending. He is sending us a message, too: I’m Back and More Vehement Than Ever. All of which conveys three things: confidence, the appearance of strength and a certain crafty craziness.”

Reed Galen, president of JoinTheUnion.us, a pro-democracy coalition, took a different tack in The Guardian, saying we need to be more wary of Trump’s outbursts and threats:

“The guy’s been a troll for nearly 80 years,” Galen said. “The problem is now he happens to be a troll who is about to run, again, the most powerful nation that humanity has ever known. He wants to do this because he wants outrage. He wants, to the extent that he thinks he can induce it, fear or panic. Chaos is the coin of his realm and it always will be because things being out of control is the only way he’s in control.”


[1] According to Richardson, MAGA representatives have been introducing a slew of measures to the new Congress, many of which incorporate the plans of Project 2025 into legislation. They call for turning over immigration to the states, privatizing veterans’ healthcare, and repealing the 1993 National Voting Rights Act, the 2010 Affordable Care Act, and the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.
Bills call for withdrawing the U.S. from the World Health Organization; increasing oil and gas production on federal lands; abolishing the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA); allowing states to spend federal education money on private school vouchers; and removing the protection of transgender rights from schools.
Other measures would revoke security clearances for “certain former members of the intelligence community,” introduce a constitutional amendment to cap the Supreme Court at nine justices, and cut off federal funding to the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office (the office that successfully charged Trump with election interference) and the Fulton County (GA) District Attorney’s Office (the office that has charged Trump with criminal conspiracy).
And MAGA Republicans have proposed a bill to impose a national abortion ban, along with a bill urging Congress to support a consortium of antiabortion doctors for women because, the bill says, “health care should emphasize the whole woman, including her physical, mental, and spiritual wellness,” and “health care for women should also address the needs of men, families, and communities.”
 
 




by - 0 comments

Peak Cringe: A Melania Trump Documentary Is Coming

In today’s political culture, supplicants don’t bother with subtle appeals for favors; they just pay up.

Talk about obsequiousness. 

On Sunday, Amazon announced that its Prime Video streaming service would release a “behind the scenes” documentary about Melania Trump’s life that will be shown in theaters and stream on Amazon Prime later this year. To top it off, Melania Trump will be the film’s executive producer, ensuring it will be a hagiography. 

Adding insult to injury, Amazon has agreed to pay $40 million to Trump for the documentary, according to Puck News, and it will be directed by Hollywood director and producer Brett Ratner,   accused in 2017  by six women, including actress Olivia Munn, of sexual misconduct, according the Los Angeles Times. 

Amazon, founded by Jeff Bezos, who is also the owner of the Washington Post, said it was “excited to share this truly unique story.” 

In May 2025, the New Yorker ran a story noting that just before Christmas, Bezos and Lauren Sánchez, his fiancé, dined with Donald Trump and Melania at Mar-a-Lago. During the meal, according to the Wall Street Journal, Melania told Bezos and Sánchez about a documentary project she was developing based on her own life. Two weeks later, Amazon licensed the film for forty million dollars, nearly three times more than the company had ever spent on a documentary. As much as twenty-eight million dollars of the licensing fee will go directly to the First Lady.

Talk about trying to curry favor with Donald Trump, a famously self-absorbed impulsive, vindictive politician. As Semafor Business said, “An open-air bazaar has replaced a black market of influence-peddling. It’s unsettling to reporters who are used to having to dig around for evidence of pay-to-play.”

If a First Lady documentary is worth doing, others have a considerably stronger claim.

Betty Ford, President Gerald Ford’s wife,  Ford was noted for raising breast cancer awareness following her 1974 mastectomy and was a passionate supporter of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). She also was involved in HIV/AIDS causes and served as the first chair of the board of directors of the Betty Ford Center, which provides treatment services for people with substance use disorders.  

Nancy Reagan, wife of President Ronald Reagan, was an accomplished former actress and a passionate advocate for decreasing drug and alcohol abuse, initiating a campaign to “just say no” to drugs.

Eleanor Roosevelt, wife of President Franklin Roosevelt, was, in her time,  one of the world’s most widely admired and powerful women. During her husband’s presidency she was aggressive advocate of liberal causes, defending the rights of defense of the rights of Blacks and the poor and wrote a widely read daily syndicated newspaper column. After his presidency, she was appointed a delegate to the United Nations,  where she served as chairman of the Commission on Human Rights (1946–51) and played a key role in the drafting and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

There’s even an interesting story to tell about President Woodrow Wilson’s second wife, Edith Wilson. For all intents and purposes she conspired to serve as the “acting president”  for an astonishing 17 months after her  husband suffered a paralyzing stroke in the fall of 1919

First Lady Dolley Madison, the wife of President James Madison, is often credited with saving the portrait of George Washington and other White House treasures when the British attacked the Capitol in 1814. Hillary Clinton, wife of President Bill Clinton, went on to serve as U.S. Secretary of State, a New York Senator and a Democratic candidate for the presidency. Rosalynn Carter, wife of President Jimmy Carter,  was committed to the improvement of mental health care and after her husbands term in office became a strong participant in efforts that, as she said, would result in “good for others” including Habitat for Humanity.

Can you think of one thing that distinguishes Melania Trump, the “I really Don’t Care. Do You?” First Lady, and her life enough to justify a boot-licking Amazon documentary?

I didn’t think so.

by - 1 Comment

Oregon High School NIL Contracts: A Black Hole

Trouble is brewing in Oregon’s high school sports.

Late last year I asked Portland Public Schools for access to all Name, Image and Likeness (NIL) contracts signed by students in the district that have been disclosed to member schools.

“In discussion with staff, I understand that we didn’t identify records of any NIL agreements being shared by students, and I understand we don’t have a formal process to capture this information,” Ryan Vandehey, Public Records Officer and Media Relations Representative with the District, replied initially. “If you’re only looking for copies of agreements, then I think the answer is that we don’t have any records.”

He later added, “I understand from staff that we don’t have any formal process to recognize or collect such agreements, and informally staff could not recall any. It’s possible that a student has such an agreement and either hasn’t shared it with staff or only shared it with school-level staff, but it would take some digging to find that out.”

The fact is, there’s no requirement in Oregon for such contracts to be filed with high schools or for them to be subject to public records requests.

It’s not just Oregon’s college athletes who are reaping financial rewards from the personal branding now allowed in name, image and likeness, or NIL, deals. Some Oregon high school students are on the gravy train, too.

The consequences could be significant ……and worrying.

Just a few years ago, many high schools were hostile to the college NIL option slipping down to the high school level.

“Coaches’ jobs would be impacted dramatically by a policy permitting NIL payments,” noted a 2021 article on the  National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) website. “Between teaching their sports’ fundamentals and nuances, scouting opponents, organizing effective game plans and managing different personalities and priorities to get players striving toward a common goal, coaches must have a firm grasp on a variety of moving parts to be successful. The presence of a single NIL contract within a team dynamic has the potential to affect the attitude and playing style of every player on the team, making each aspect of coaching significantly more difficult to control.”

“It’s certainly not something that any coach is going to be happy to deal with,” said John Holecek, head football coach at Loyola Academy in Wilmette, Illinois. “It’s a complete change, and kids aren’t mature enough to handle it for the most part. Hopefully, that won’t be the case, but you would think there’s going to be some tough situations out there for coaches to deal with.”

Notwithstanding such concerns, Oregon joined the high school money rush on October 10, 2022, when the Oregon School Activities Association (OSAA) adopted NIL rules for high school athletes.[1]

Two Portland-area high school athletes, Jackson Shelstad , a basketball player at West Linn High School , and Sofia Bell, a  basketball player  at Jesuit High School, were the first to take advantage of the new NIL rules in October 2022 when they signed with Portland Gear owner Marcus Harvey to promote his brand. 

As of Sept. 2024, this is what the high school NIL picture looked like across the country, according to Opendorse, used by brands, schools, fans, sponsors and collectives to help athletes build and monetize their name, image and likeness.

With every state and the District of Columbia having their own rules, it’s now really the wild west out there in high school NIL-land. 

HuskerMax, a website that covers University of Nebraska sports, notes that allowing high school athletes to earn NIL money “opens up the potential of leveraging NIL as a recruiting tactic”. An NIL collective, for example, “could offer an NIL deal to a highly rated high school prospect with the undertones that signing with the college team would increase or lengthen the payout”. 

“…that’s what’s happening behind the scenes at every college and with every NIL Collective.,” HuskerMax says. 

“Loopholes abound, says HuskerMax. “If you’re a big-time recruit, get an agent and a lawyer ASAP.”

The NIL game can also divert the attention of high school athletes by pressing them to be more active on social media, a distraction with potential negative implications. After all, high-profile athletes need to do more than be standout players to attract attention. They can, for example, sign deals with brands to promote their products on their social media channels, get paid to share their training routines and design and sell custom merchandise like jerseys and posters.

But maintaining an aggressive social media presence is demanding and can become a job in itself. It can also pressure high school athletes, many of whom are still maturing and not yet legal adults, to adopt a persona that may not be consistent with their true self. 

John E. Johnson, J.D. , a former athletic director at an Overland Park, Kansas high school, cautioned on the website of the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS), which promotes high school athletics and activities, that NIL programs at high schools are counterintuitive to the positive traditional notions of education-based athletics. 

High school students with NIL contracts may also come up against a coach’s controls, Johnson wrote.  Under such circumstances, can/will a coach effectively control. 

  • Earned playing time,
  • Fair and deserved discipline of the player if necessary, or
  • Leading the team and community through any resentment of other athletes and families directed at the athlete with an NIL deal.

NIL deals can also spur intense competition between in-state high schools and between states with differing rules.

When I attended a private New England prep school (a long time ago), it was common for the school to poach star athletes from public schools with a post-grad year and a full scholarship offer as inducements. Some public schools also recruited athletic standouts from other districts, encouraging them to live with a relative in the new district to qualify for attendance.

Luring out-of-district and out-of -state athletic stars is still common today.

In 2024, Jada Williams was a senior basketball player at La Jolla Country Day School, a private school in San Diego, California. She was originally from a suburb of Kansas City, Missouri, but the state didn’t allow NIL, so she headed West to a state and school where she could capitalize on what she figured was her NIL value. At La Jolla, Williams signed NIL deals with Spalding, Gym Shark and Move Insoles, generating more than six figures a year. 

How many Oregon high schools have students with similar deals? Who knows?

The existence of some high school athletes’ NIL deals in Oregon is clear, but the OSAA rules have a gaping loophole. Students are required to disclose a proposed contract to their school, but the school is not required to keep a copy or make it available for public inspection. Nor is the student required to notify the OSAA of a contract/agreement or provide a copy of the agreement to the organization. 

That means public high schools, public school students and the OSAA can, and do, stymie efforts to seek disclosure of such contracts. 

Such secrecy, particularly at public schools, is trouble waiting to happen.

The Oregon School Activities Association (OSAA) can remedy that by requiring that student athletes signing NIL contracts provide copies to their schools and that member schools make any NIL contracts entered into by their students public records.

It’s the right thing to do.

[1] The following is intended to offer guidance to students, parents, and member schools regarding Name, Image and Likeness (NIL).
A student may earn compensation from the use of their Name, Image, Likeness (NIL) provided that: 

  1. (a)  The compensation (or prospective compensation) is not contingent on specific athletic performance or achievement (e.g. financial incentives based on points scored) 
  2. (b)  The compensation (or prospective compensation) is not provided as an inducement to attend a particular member school or to remain enrolled at a particular member school (“Undue Influence”). 
  3. (c)  The compensation (or prospective compensation) is not provided by the member school or an agent of the member school (e.g. school booster club, foundation, employee, etc.) 
  4. (d)  The student-athlete discloses any proposed agreement/contract to the member school at which the student is enrolled and/or participating. 

In seeking compensation for Name, Image and Likeness (NIL):
(a) The student shall not use OSAA or member school marks, logos, insignias in NIL activities. 

  • (b)  The student shall not wear apparel or equipment which includes OSAA logos or member school markers and/or logos for the purpose of NIL activities. 
  • (c)  The student shall not reference the OSAA or member school name and/or mascot for the purpose of NIL activities. 
  • (d)  The student shall not use a member school’s district facilities and/or equipment for the purpose of NIL activities. 
  • (e)  The student shall not use school practice and/or game film for the purpose of NIL activities. 
  • (f)  The student shall not promote any services and/or products during team activities. 
  • (g)  The student shall not promote activities, services, or products associated with, but not limited to,: 
  • (i)  Adult entertainment products or services; 
  • (ii)  Alcohol, tobacco, nicotine and vaping products; 
  • (iii)  Cannabis products; 
  • (iv)  Controlled dangerous substances; 
  • (v)  Prescription pharmaceuticals; 
  • (vi)  Political parties and/or candidates; 
  • (vii)  Any product illegal for people under 18; 

(viii) Gambling, including sports betting, the lottery, and betting in connection with video 

games, on-line games and mobile devices; (ix) Weapons, firearms, and ammunition. 

The student and their family are encouraged to seek legal counsel and tax advice when considering NIL activity, along with guidance from their member school. 

NOTE: Compliance with these policies does not ensure maintenance of eligibility under the eligibility standards of other high school state activity associations or entities such as, but not limited to, the NCAA, NAIA, NJCAA etc. Students are encouraged to communicate with those organizations to ensure any activity complies with those eligibility standards.