thebulwark--2020-09-13--When it Comes to the Midwest, Polls Aren’t Everything

Political polling is an art as much of a science .
Interpreting it is a delicate task .
Analysts and the media can sometimes fall into the trap of a “ mile wide and an inch deep.
” Which is a way of saying that polling , and its revelations , have no real staying power–public opinion can be mercurial .
It is better to know the bottom-up details than the top-down theories .
We are seeing this in real-time as analysts act like Maricopa County in Arizona and Fort Bend County in Florida and Cobb County in Georgia are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Lake County in Ohio and Oakland County in Michigan .
They are nowhere near similar and how these Midwest counties vote will have a big impact on the results of the 2020 presidential election .
That “ mile wide and an inch deep ” got its start from the Platte River in Nebraska .
In the mid-1800s , investors from the eastern side of the country had looked at maps and figured that this 450-mile river from Omaha to Scottsbluff could be reconfigured to run barges and steamboats and even schooners to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But that never happened for one reason : The Platte River is a muddy , wide , shallow , meandering stream with a swampy bottom , and these characteristics made it too difficult to ever be used as a major navigation route .
The old fur trappers and ranchers knew that , but those looking at it from far away didn ’ t .
They thought all rivers are the same .
The media interpretation of the way voters in the Midwest states are leaning right now is evidence that way of thinking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these Midwest suburban counties , Maricopa , Fort Bend , Cobb , Waukesha , et .
al.
, that make them outliers in the political game .
The first is their history and how the citizens of these suburban communities got whacked in the past in so many ways .
In 1980 , the manufacturing jobs downward spiral officially began and the term “ Rust Belt ” was coined .
The 1981-82 recession was the worst economic downturn in the United States since the Great Depression , with a 14 percent unemployment rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parts of the country .
If you were born in 1960 – and are 60 today – you faced a barren job market when you graduated school .
In the 70s and 80s , many Midwest cities were dealing with school desegregation through some form of busing .
In big cities like Milwaukee and Detroit and Cleveland , white people moved to the suburbs or put their kids in Catholic schools .
But the reality of this mess was that the black population didn ’ t like the busing either ; instead of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many thought there were better possible solutions .
From the 1990s until now , this region has also dealt with a higher addiction with opioids , with the foreclosure recession hitting this area earlier and lasting longer , and the COVID-19 has played out that way as well : Milwaukee and Detroit got hit hard four months ago and it looks like it is coming back .
The result of these waves of adversity is a tribal protectionism unique to the Midwest .
These are the people Trump is talking to when he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican pollster Frank Luntz has said that one problem for Trump is that he is talking about problems—violence , rioting—rather than the solution : public safety .
“ Donald Trump is talking about the right topics but using the wrong language , ” he says .
There is a cross-current among voters in Midwest : they support the police , but they also support the racial justice protests and believe the country needs better law enforcement accountability .
Former Trump spokesperson Kellyanne Conway said in late August during a Fox News interview that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vandalism and violence reigns , the better it is for the very clear choice on who ’ s best on public safety and law and order , ” during an interview on Fox and Friends .
But will this line of reasoning play well with people in the Midwest who have been dealing with racial segregation and affirmative action issues for more than 50 years ?
One way to get better details on why this is playing out the way it is , is to look at who is living in these suburbs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Midwest are from there , born in the state they live mostly , with Pennsylvania , Ohio , Michigan and Wisconsin all having around a 75 % of the population from there , 25 % from out of state ratio ( by contrast , Nevada , Florida and Arizona are in the 40/60 range ) .
The Midwest population is also older , and more middle-class , and they ’ re home values much less than the national average .
These states are whiter than the national average as well , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ citizenry any more ( the four states have less than half the 13.5 % national foreign-born average ) .
They also own lots of boats , as there are 4,530 miles of U.S. coastline for the five Great Lakes .
But Trump doesn ’ t seem to be paying attention to the groups he needs to win .
“ While many are looking for signs that Trump is filling in cracks in his base , ” Cooke Political Report analysts Amy Walter wrote recently , “ Trump ’ s real problem is much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because he ’ s losing his 2016 base , but because he has never expanded beyond it.
” There are two things that have been steady that make the law and order arguments by Trump somewhat preposterous in the Midwest .
Crime has been down nationally for a long time , and the suburbs surrounding the big cities in the Midwest have been white for a long time — and with very little change since 2000 .
Kenosha County , Wisconsin – where the latest police brutality protests are taking place — is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Federal Reserve , violent and property crime have dropped more than 50 % in Kenosha County between 2008 and 2018 .
Crimes in the more urban Milwaukee County up the road have dropped by about 30 % during a similar period .
Kenosha County is also still very white .
In 2000 , the county had a population ratio of 88 % white and 5 % African-American .
In 2019 , the county is 87 % white and 7 % African-American .
The Wisconsin “ WOW ” counties around Milwaukee ( Waukesha , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going from high 90s percentile white and one percent black in 2000 , to mid-90s percentile white and two percent black in 2019 .
Most of the counties around Detroit , Cleveland and Pittsburgh are the same .
Over the next few weeks , it is likely the Midwest sensibility will continue .
Biden has been leading in these state polls by close to the same amount ( except Ohio ) since June 1 .
One reason is the voters in these states are likely seeing that placing importance on high crime rates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sense for them , when they live in low crime rate counties with low minority population .
Some Republicans consultants have said that the economy still could be will be Trump ’ s saving grace in these suburbs , but that is uncertain given that COVID-19 is still very much at play with almost 200,000 deaths .
What makes these Midwest suburban voters different is that the real issues they face today — racism , police abuse , economic shift from manufacturing to the service sector , social media censorship and conspiracy theory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before in the past in various formats .
And they are getting tired of the nonsense .
Solutions have been pushed on them in recent years by elitist academics from both political sides giving their views from 30,000 feet .
But those who live in these Great Lakes states have a better understanding of what will , and what will not work , where they live .
Washington Post ’ s Bob Woodward ’ s new book is likely going to keep the COVID-19 issue high in the Midwest .
“ You just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how it ’ s passed , ” Trump said in a Feb. 7 call to Woodward .
“ And so that ’ s a very tricky one .
That ’ s a very delicate one .
It ’ s also more deadly than even your strenuous flu.
” “ This is deadly stuff , ” the president repeated for emphasis .
But while Trump said on Friday that the U.S. was “ rounding the final turn ” in Covid-19 case declines , the number of people testing positive in Wisconsin were hitting record @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had the second-highest single-day count of new cases on Friday with 1,369 , coming close to breaking the record set the day before ( 1,547 ) .
According to the recent projections by the University of Washington epidemiologist researchers , about 70,000 more Americans will die from COVID-19 by election day .
Of the four Midwest swing states , about 5,000 more will die by election day , adding to the 25,000 already dead .
Voters won ’ t be able to hide from this , especially in swing states that have a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
How much death is the President willing to “ downplay ” ?
How much are we willing to let him ?

Political polling is an art as much of a science. Interpreting it is a delicate task. Analysts and the media can sometimes fall into the trap of a “mile wide and an inch deep.” Which is a way of saying that polling, and its revelations, have no real staying power–public opinion can be mercurial. It is better to know the bottom-up details than the top-down theories.
We are seeing this in real-time as analysts act like Maricopa County in Arizona and Fort Bend County in Florida and Cobb County in Georgia are the same as Waukesha County in Wisconsin and Lake County in Ohio and Oakland County in Michigan.
They are nowhere near similar and how these Midwest counties vote will have a big impact on the results of the 2020 presidential election.
That “mile wide and an inch deep” got its start from the Platte River in Nebraska. In the mid-1800s, investors from the eastern side of the country had looked at maps and figured that this 450-mile river from Omaha to Scottsbluff could be reconfigured to run barges and steamboats and even schooners to haul people and goods out west. But that never happened for one reason: The Platte River is a muddy, wide, shallow, meandering stream with a swampy bottom, and these characteristics made it too difficult to ever be used as a major navigation route.
The old fur trappers and ranchers knew that, but those looking at it from far away didn’t. They thought all rivers are the same.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
The media interpretation of the way voters in the Midwest states are leaning right now is evidence that way of thinking persists.
There are several things about these Midwest suburban counties, Maricopa, Fort Bend, Cobb, Waukesha, et. al., that make them outliers in the political game. The first is their history and how the citizens of these suburban communities got whacked in the past in so many ways.
In 1980, the manufacturing jobs downward spiral officially began and the term “Rust Belt” was coined. The 1981-82 recession was the worst economic downturn in the United States since the Great Depression, with a 14 percent unemployment rate that hit the Midwest harder than other parts of the country. If you were born in 1960 – and are 60 today – you faced a barren job market when you graduated school.
In the 70s and 80s, many Midwest cities were dealing with school desegregation through some form of busing. In big cities like Milwaukee and Detroit and Cleveland, white people moved to the suburbs or put their kids in Catholic schools. But the reality of this mess was that the black population didn’t like the busing either; instead of busing their kids to white schools, many thought there were better possible solutions.
From the 1990s until now, this region has also dealt with a higher addiction with opioids, with the foreclosure recession hitting this area earlier and lasting longer, and the COVID-19 has played out that way as well: Milwaukee and Detroit got hit hard four months ago and it looks like it is coming back.
The result of these waves of adversity is a tribal protectionism unique to the Midwest. These are the people Trump is talking to when he boasts protecting the “suburban dream.”
Republican pollster Frank Luntz has said that one problem for Trump is that he is talking about problems—violence, rioting—rather than the solution: public safety. “Donald Trump is talking about the right topics but using the wrong language,” he says.
There is a cross-current among voters in Midwest: they support the police, but they also support the racial justice protests and believe the country needs better law enforcement accountability.
Former Trump spokesperson Kellyanne Conway said in late August during a Fox News interview that “The more chaos and anarchy and vandalism and violence reigns, the better it is for the very clear choice on who’s best on public safety and law and order,” during an interview on Fox and Friends. But will this line of reasoning play well with people in the Midwest who have been dealing with racial segregation and affirmative action issues for more than 50 years?
One way to get better details on why this is playing out the way it is, is to look at who is living in these suburbs. First, the people who live in the Midwest are from there, born in the state they live mostly, with Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin all having around a 75% of the population from there, 25% from out of state ratio (by contrast, Nevada, Florida and Arizona are in the 40/60 range).
The Midwest population is also older, and more middle-class, and they’re home values much less than the national average. These states are whiter than the national average as well, and don’t have much foreign-born citizenry any more (the four states have less than half the 13.5% national foreign-born average).
They also own lots of boats, as there are 4,530 miles of U.S. coastline for the five Great Lakes.
But Trump doesn’t seem to be paying attention to the groups he needs to win. “While many are looking for signs that Trump is filling in cracks in his base,” Cooke Political Report analysts Amy Walter wrote recently, “Trump’s real problem is much deeper. Trump is trailing, not because he’s losing his 2016 base, but because he has never expanded beyond it.”
There are two things that have been steady that make the law and order arguments by Trump somewhat preposterous in the Midwest. Crime has been down nationally for a long time, and the suburbs surrounding the big cities in the Midwest have been white for a long time — and with very little change since 2000.
Kenosha County, Wisconsin – where the latest police brutality protests are taking place — is a perfect example. According to the Federal Reserve, violent and property crime have dropped more than 50% in Kenosha County between 2008 and 2018. Crimes in the more urban Milwaukee County up the road have dropped by about 30% during a similar period.
Kenosha County is also still very white. In 2000, the county had a population ratio of 88% white and 5% African-American. In 2019, the county is 87% white and 7% African-American. The Wisconsin “WOW” counties around Milwaukee (Waukesha, Ozaukee and Washington) are similar, going from high 90s percentile white and one percent black in 2000, to mid-90s percentile white and two percent black in 2019. Most of the counties around Detroit, Cleveland and Pittsburgh are the same.
Over the next few weeks, it is likely the Midwest sensibility will continue. Biden has been leading in these state polls by close to the same amount (except Ohio) since June 1. One reason is the voters in these states are likely seeing that placing importance on high crime rates and racial unrest doesn’t make sense for them, when they live in low crime rate counties with low minority population.
Some Republicans consultants have said that the economy still could be will be Trump’s saving grace in these suburbs, but that is uncertain given that COVID-19 is still very much at play with almost 200,000 deaths.
What makes these Midwest suburban voters different is that the real issues they face today — racism, police abuse, economic shift from manufacturing to the service sector, social media censorship and conspiracy theory craziness moving in — they have faced before in the past in various formats. And they are getting tired of the nonsense. Solutions have been pushed on them in recent years by elitist academics from both political sides giving their views from 30,000 feet. But those who live in these Great Lakes states have a better understanding of what will, and what will not work, where they live.
Washington Post’s Bob Woodward’s new book is likely going to keep the COVID-19 issue high in the Midwest. “You just breathe the air and that’s how it’s passed,” Trump said in a Feb. 7 call to Woodward. “And so that’s a very tricky one. That’s a very delicate one. It’s also more deadly than even your strenuous flu.”
“This is deadly stuff,” the president repeated for emphasis.
But while Trump said on Friday that the U.S. was “rounding the final turn” in Covid-19 case declines, the number of people testing positive in Wisconsin were hitting record levels last week. The Badger State had the second-highest single-day count of new cases on Friday with 1,369, coming close to breaking the record set the day before (1,547).
According to the recent projections by the University of Washington epidemiologist researchers, about 70,000 more Americans will die from COVID-19 by election day. Of the four Midwest swing states, about 5,000 more will die by election day, adding to the 25,000 already dead.
Voters won’t be able to hide from this, especially in swing states that have a high number of elderly and practical people. How much death is the President willing to “downplay”? How much are we willing to let him?


thebulwark--2020-09-14--Trump’s Reckless, Atrocious, Deceitful Rally

President Trump attempted to hold an unmasked , indoor superspreader event in Henderson , Nevada on Sunday night , running afoul of Nevada regulations and his own administration ’ s guidelines .
( Due to meager turn out , I have taken the liberty to downgrade it to a Category 3 minispreader . )
This was Trump ’ s first indoor rally since the Tulsa disaster that cost Brad Parscale his job and after which Herman Cain lost his life .
This latest public-health monstrosity event came on the heels of the president , at a separate maskless gathering earlier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joe Biden for having followed responsible social-distancing protocols .
I tuned in last night because the president ’ s brazenness in the face of this obvious public health threat was a curiosity for me .
Weren ’ t we told that he was a germophobe ?
And didn ’ t he admit to Bob Woodward that he knew the virus was airborne ?
So shouldn ’ t the screaming plebes freak him out a bit ?
Was the germophobe bit also a lie ?
Maybe he just didn ’ t like it when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has his narcissism and deep-seated desire to downplay the virus overwhelmed his germophobia ?
While I wasn ’ t delivered any answers on this point , I was reminded about just how absolutely jarring it is that this man is ostensibly at the helm of our government in these trying times .
For those who have been beaten down by the Trumpian disaster porn , rallies such as this don ’ t really make a mark any longer .
The cable networks and even the three C-SPANs landed on the BORRRRING side of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to air the event .
And for political junkies and Trump-watchers , these rallies increasingly have the feel of a boring nostalgia act with a lead singer halfheartedly crooning his old hits .
And there ’ s something to be said for that .
But it is important to take a moment to shake yourself free from the blunting effect of the orange Trumpian film that has subsumed our daily lives ( and here in northern California , our atmosphere ) .
Seen with fresh eyes , the Henderson rally was truly a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it came amid a pandemic that is still killing a thousand Americans a day and with wildfires making much of the West Coast uninhabitable .
And so over the course of the president ’ s interminable harangue , I began to jot down the moments that stood out , beginning with his foray into the insane # Obamagate conspiracy .
As Trump began a side-bar about Obama supposedly being caught spying on him , he eyed an attendee who was beginning a “ Lock Him Up ” chant .
He then egged on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in which they projected airborne spittle throughout the building in an attempt to will to life the fantasy that their wannabe strongman president might jail his predecessor , the first black president , for an imaginary crime .
This was not the only coronavirus projectile laden with racial invective emitted by the attendees .
Following the removal of a protester—presumably a Black Lives Matter activist , although it wasn ’ t clear from the video—the crowd began bellowing that oh-so-clever parlay : All Lives Matter .
All Lives Matter .
In addition to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president said that his opponent is a Communist ( “ c-word ” ) who would eliminate the suburbs and allow anarchists to burn down Hispanic businesses .
He fabricated a charge about the Democratic governor of Nevada tampering with ballots , declared that football is “ boring as hell , ” made fun of Chris Cuomo ’ s ratings , “ joked ” about running for a third term , and said flag burners should go to jail for one year .
He shouted “ I love the Hispanics , ” lied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , reintroduced the bigoted dog-whistle use of and exaggerated emphasis on the middle name of Barack Hussein Obama ( which he had told Bob Woodward he only does in private ) , said that NASA was almost closed before he got into office and had grass growing on the runways ( ? )
, and he once again implied support for extrajudicial killings by U.S. marshals .
The only time he acknowledged that his campaign event was running afoul of state regs was when he ambiguously implied that he would help attendees if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never recommended that the attendees take any health precautions , despite the advance team building in a nice six-foot bubble between him and his fans .
Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak rightly and responsibly took Trump to task for his insanely reckless behavior in holding the rally at all .
But it is easy for those who cover the politics of this to let that slip into a tit-for-tat between two political actors fighting over pandemic politics in an election year .
This event was so much worse than that .
Everything about it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was so appalling that it would stand out as the single most appalling and reckless political event hosted by any presidential nominee in my lifetime before yesterday by a long shot , if you just didn ’ t count anything else that Donald Trump did .
And that ’ s the problem .
Somewhere along the way he removed many people ’ s ability to be appalled .
We have become numbed .
Too many regional news outlets either won ’ t cover the event at all or will have headlines like “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nevada Rally.
” The national Democrats will let Gov .
Sisolak get in his licks , but otherwise move onto something else .
Just because we have become immune to his behavior doesn ’ t mean it should be treated as if it is one side of a two-sided coin .
Just because he lies so cavalierly doesn ’ t mean he should be allowed to get away with it .
Just because his oh-so-unsubtle race-baiting is part and parcel of his presidency doesn ’ t mean we should just let All Lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Just because we have become bored by our # takes and have run out of new and clever angles for analyzing our malign president doesn ’ t mean we should say nothing at all .
All the president ’ s grotesqueries matter .
This is just the latest .

President Trump attempted to hold an unmasked, indoor superspreader event in Henderson, Nevada on Sunday night, running afoul of Nevada regulations and his own administration’s guidelines. (Due to meager turn out, I have taken the liberty to downgrade it to a Category 3 minispreader.) This was Trump’s first indoor rally since the Tulsa disaster that cost Brad Parscale his job and after which Herman Cain lost his life.
This latest public-health monstrosity came on the heels of the president, at a separate maskless gathering earlier in the weekend, mocking his opponent Joe Biden for having followed responsible social-distancing protocols.
I tuned in last night because the president’s brazenness in the face of this obvious public health threat was a curiosity for me. Weren’t we told that he was a germophobe? And didn’t he admit to Bob Woodward that he knew the virus was airborne? So shouldn’t the screaming plebes freak him out a bit? Was the germophobe bit also a lie? Maybe he just didn’t like it when people of color touched him? Or has his narcissism and deep-seated desire to downplay the virus overwhelmed his germophobia?
While I wasn’t delivered any answers on this point, I was reminded about just how absolutely jarring it is that this man is ostensibly at the helm of our government in these trying times.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
For those who have been beaten down by the Trumpian disaster porn, rallies such as this don’t really make a mark any longer. The cable networks and even the three C-SPANs landed on the BORRRRING side of the ledger: None of them chose to air the event. And for political junkies and Trump-watchers, these rallies increasingly have the feel of a boring nostalgia act with a lead singer halfheartedly crooning his old hits. And there’s something to be said for that.
But it is important to take a moment to shake yourself free from the blunting effect of the orange Trumpian film that has subsumed our daily lives (and here in northern California, our atmosphere). Seen with fresh eyes, the Henderson rally was truly a shocking and unimaginably wheels-off undertaking given that it came amid a pandemic that is still killing a thousand Americans a day and with wildfires making much of the West Coast uninhabitable.
And so over the course of the president’s interminable harangue, I began to jot down the moments that stood out, beginning with his foray into the insane #Obamagate conspiracy. As Trump began a side-bar about Obama supposedly being caught spying on him, he eyed an attendee who was beginning a “Lock Him Up” chant. He then egged on the overwhelmingly unmasked crowd into a frenzy in which they projected airborne spittle throughout the building in an attempt to will to life the fantasy that their wannabe strongman president might jail his predecessor, the first black president, for an imaginary crime.
This was not the only coronavirus projectile laden with racial invective emitted by the attendees. Following the removal of a protester—presumably a Black Lives Matter activist, although it wasn’t clear from the video—the crowd began bellowing that oh-so-clever parlay: All Lives Matter. All Lives Matter.
(At this point it should be noted that the CDC recommends a good way to lessen your coronavirus risk is to avoid gatherings with singing or shouting. If you are going to be in such a location, they recommend a mask.)
In addition to basking in the two racist chants, the president said that his opponent is a Communist (“c-word”) who would eliminate the suburbs and allow anarchists to burn down Hispanic businesses. He fabricated a charge about the Democratic governor of Nevada tampering with ballots, declared that football is “boring as hell,” made fun of Chris Cuomo’s ratings, “joked” about running for a third term, and said flag burners should go to jail for one year. He shouted “I love the Hispanics,” lied about what was said at the DNC, reintroduced the bigoted dog-whistle use of and exaggerated emphasis on the middle name of Barack Hussein Obama (which he had told Bob Woodward he only does in private), said that NASA was almost closed before he got into office and had grass growing on the runways (?), and he once again implied support for extrajudicial killings by U.S. marshals. The only time he acknowledged that his campaign event was running afoul of state regs was when he ambiguously implied that he would help attendees if the governor comes after them. He never recommended that the attendees take any health precautions, despite the advance team building in a nice six-foot bubble between him and his fans.
Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak rightly and responsibly took Trump to task for his insanely reckless behavior in holding the rally at all.
But it is easy for those who cover the politics of this to let that slip into a tit-for-tat between two political actors fighting over pandemic politics in an election year.
This event was so much worse than that.
Everything about it was fucking appalling.
In fact it was so appalling that it would stand out as the single most appalling and reckless political event hosted by any presidential nominee in my lifetime before yesterday by a long shot, if you just didn’t count anything else that Donald Trump did.
And that’s the problem. Somewhere along the way he removed many people’s ability to be appalled. We have become numbed. Too many regional news outlets either won’t cover the event at all or will have headlines like “Donald Trump Makes Appeal to Hispanics At Nevada Rally.” The national Democrats will let Gov. Sisolak get in his licks, but otherwise move onto something else.
Just because we have become immune to his behavior doesn’t mean it should be treated as if it is one side of a two-sided coin. Just because he lies so cavalierly doesn’t mean he should be allowed to get away with it. Just because his oh-so-unsubtle race-baiting is part and parcel of his presidency doesn’t mean we should just let All Lives Matter chants pass by the wayside. Just because we have become bored by our #takes and have run out of new and clever angles for analyzing our malign president doesn’t mean we should say nothing at all.
All the president’s grotesqueries matter. This is just the latest.


Breaking Points

For all the loyalty Donald Trump enjoys from his most sycophantic followers , many prominent figures who famously assisted him have given up on the president altogether .
It ’ s worth taking a look at the breaking points for these various White House staffers , cabinet secretaries , political advisers , and others—the moment when each decided he or she just couldn ’ t stick with Trump anymore .
Because we can learn a lot about Trump and the overall effect he is having on our country by studying what made these individuals—from revered military leaders to Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ men and women who have served Trump and gone on to publicly speak against him , perhaps no one ’ s words carry more weight than Trump ’ s former defense secretary James Mattis .
Theoretically , the “ warrior monk ” General “ Mad Dog ” Mattis , a retired four-star Marine Corps general , who once led Central Command , should have been a good fit inside the Trump administration .
But Trump is a reckless force that not even a military general with 40 years experience could counsel .
Mattis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when the president ignored his advice and abruptly pulled troops out of the Middle East .
Mattis is quoted in Bob Woodward ’ s new book , Rage , as saying , “ When I was basically directed to do something that I thought went beyond stupid to felony stupid , strategically jeopardizing our place in the world and everything else , that ’ s when I quit.
” That ’ s not the only deep disagreement he ’ s had with the president , though .
When Trump used military force to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Lafayette Square , Mattis took the rare step of issuing a public statement on the matter , putting it in no uncertain terms that Trump has crossed an intolerable line .
Mattis said he was “ angry and appalled ” at the president ’ s actions , and “ We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership .
We can unite without him , drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society.
” He went on , “ We know that we are better than the abuse of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Square .
We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution.
” Then he called for the adoption of a “ new path ” that could only be interpreted as one leading away from Trump .
John Bolton arrived at a similar conclusion after working directly with Trump as his national security advisor .
In his book , The Room Where It Happened , Bolton says he decided he had to leave in September 2019 , after Trump made plans to invite the Taliban to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the idea and hoped word of the plans would never get out .
Those hopes evaporated when Trump , without any warning , tweeted about the abandoned project on September 7 .
On September 9 , Trump called Bolton in for a meeting to complain about the press coverage over the canceled meeting and the uproar among Republicans .
Trump accused Bolton of leaking , to which Bolton observed dryly , “ Of course , most of the negative reaction he had brought on himself by his ill-advised tweets.
” “ That was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bolton said .
On September 10 , he delivered his resignation letter at 11:30 a.m. By noon Trump was tweeting that Bolton ’ s services were no longer needed .
“ And with that , I was a free man again , ” Bolton wrote .
Like Mattis , Bolton is calling for a movement to reject Trump .
“ The day after the election , whether Trump wins or loses , we face a real debate , maybe an existential debate , about what the future of the Republican Party is , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I just think it ’ s important for the Republican Party to separate itself from Trump and for the conservative philosophy to separate itself from Trump.
” Other insiders , such as Miles Taylor , former chief of staff to Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly , found themselves similarly making great exertions to block other dangerous Trump plans .
Like many other appointees , Taylor had misgivings about Trump but accepted a government position thinking he could help prevent Trump from acting on his worst impulses .
“ The total @ @ @ @ @ @ @ materialized were enough to crush anyone ’ s hopes about a successful presidency , ” Taylor told The Bulwark .
“ But the one that broke my desire to continue serving was his perverse insistence on resuming family separation at the border—and making it worse .
It was sick , wrong , and un-American .
That ’ s when it became clear that saying ‘ no ’ to Trump was no longer enough .
His magnetic attraction to wrongdoing outweighed any good the ‘ Axis of Adults ’ could do to keep him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Trump ’ s former assistant secretary for counterrorism and threat prevention at DHS , recently told Charlie Sykes on The Bulwark podcast that she distinctly remembers when she felt she had to cut loose .
“ The point at which my position changed and I said ‘ No at this point you are culpable ’ was after El Paso , ” she said , referring to the August 2019 attack by a white man who killed 20 people and injured dozens more at a Walmart in El Paso , Texas .
Echoing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote in a manifesto that “ this attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas.
” “ Post-El Paso , there is no excuse , ” she said .
“ The correlation was so clear that this individual carried out this attack because of this language ” that Trump had used .
She continued , “ We see it on full display this summer , it is part of my own process of coming to grips with the fact that I could not vote for him and not just decide to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Joe Biden is realizing how dangerous his rhetoric is and his unwillingness to change .
It is so clear to me that his values , what he cares about is himself , he cares about his political power , he cares about winning , and at the sacrifice of people dying .
I just can not .
” Neumann resigned in April 2020 and is now working with Taylor on an anti-Trump group called Republican Political Alliance for Integrity and Reform ( REPAIR ) to organize others who have worked for Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and work together to reform the GOP .
Significant cracks have emerged as well in Trump ’ s support among individuals outside the administration .
It was Trump ’ s callousness toward others that moved Stephanie Ranade Krider , executive director for Ohio Right to Life , to quit her job rather than endorse Trump and help him win a second term .
“ You learn to hold certain things in tension , and for me , it came to a point where I couldn ’ t anymore , ” Krider recently told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been this undercurrent where he just does not respect women and he does not like black and brown people .
I can ’ t look at any of his behavior and see evidence of the Holy Spirit in his life .
Nothing about his words or actions are kind or gentle or faithful or full of self-control.
” Krider specifically mentioned Trump ’ s child separation policy and his handling of the killing of George Floyd as reasons for her break .
“ My greatest fear is that in the pro-life movement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve become so tied to the Republican Party and President Trump , they don ’ t all matter to us , ” she said .
Other committed Republicans have found Trump ’ s attitude towards the elections appalling .
Steven G. Calabresi , cofounder of the Federalist Society and a professor at Northwestern University ’ s Pritzker School of Law who supported Trump through impeachment , said in July that Trump ’ s tweets raising the possibility of postponing the election were causes for removal .
“ I have voted Republican in every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Donald Trump in 2016 .
I wrote op-eds and a law review article protesting what I believe was an unconstitutional investigation by Robert Mueller .
I also wrote an op-ed opposing President Trump ’ s impeachment , ” Calabresi wrote .
“ But I am frankly appalled by the president ’ s recent tweet seeking to postpone the November election .
Until recently , I had taken as political hyperbole the Democrats ’ assertion that President Trump is a fascist .
But this latest tweet is fascistic and is itself grounds for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the House of Representatives and his removal from office by the Senate.
” While it ’ s one thing for experts to quietly acknowledge Trump ’ s flaws and put that aside in a faithful attempt to preserve institutional guardrails and pursue policy goals , those who professed there was something redeeming about his personal character don ’ t have the same credibility .
Regardless , the stories they tell to explain their U-turns show that Trump ’ s slavish followers are capable of walking away .
Even the most shameless opportunists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ run out .
Take , for example , Anthony Scaramucci , who professed his “ love “ for Trump in his only press conference during his 11-day stint as White House communications director , and has now remade himself an anti-Trump crusader .
He attributes his turnaround to Trump ’ s racialized attacks on opponents .
Similar reasoning was voiced by Omarosa Manigault Newman , a Trump hanger-on from the first season of The Apprentice who only stuck around on the White House staff for the first season of his presidency .
Omarosa @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choice for America “ and said “ every critic , every detractor will have to bow down to President Trump.
” But in her 2018 memoir of her time in the White House , Unhinged , she describes how she came to realize Trump is “ a racist , a bigot , and a misogynist ” whose actions were “ harming the country , ” and that she “ could no longer be a part of this madness.
” When she was fired by chief of staff John Kelly , she said she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time in nearly fifteen years , I would be free from the cult of Trumpworld.
” Other backers say Trump simply let them down .
Back in 2016 , right-wing provocateur Ann Coulter wrote a book extolling Trump ’ s virtues .
By this year , she ’ d had enough ; she called Trump “ the most disloyal actual retard that has ever set foot in the Oval Office.
” She ’ s mostly upset that Trump didn ’ t deliver on his vows to build the border wall and stop illegal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for supporting the issues that candidate Trump advocated , but I am deeply sorry for thinking that this shallow and broken man would show even some remote fealty to the promises that got him elected , ” she tweeted .
The concept of one-way loyalty is a common theme among those who have abandoned their support for Trump .
The closer one gets to Trump , the more that feeling seems to intensify when they eventually realize their fidelity is unrequited .
In his new book , Disloyal , longtime Trump fixer Michael @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and criminal schemes he participated in service to Trump .
Like Coulter , he didn ’ t wrap his head around breaking with Trump until it was abundantly clear how cravenly he had been used .
Cohen recounts feeling betrayed by Trump when it looked as if he would not be repaid the hush money he paid out of his pocket to conceal Trump ’ s alleged affairs during the election .
Cohen expected a hefty Christmas bonus to recover the funds and when he didn ’ t get it in his 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surprised , ” dismayed , ” “ astounded , ” and “ outraged ” just to name a handful of the words he used to describe his reaction .
“ Something in me was broken by this disrespect and presumption at the whim of now President-Elect Trump , ” he wrote .
“ My payment , and all the hellfire and damnation that ensued , up to and including my circumstances as inmate number 86067-054 in Otisville federal prison , stemmed from that ingratitude and dishonesty.
” Still , Cohen didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agents raided Cohen ’ s apartment in April 2018 .
Cohen wrote that he found himself thinking , “ I was now on the other side of the power dynamic I had exploited so often on behalf of Donald Trump.
” Trump promised Cohen in a phone call , “ I have your back .
You ’ re going to be fine.
” Cohen wrote , “ That was Trump ’ s mantra and exhortation : the President had my back .
If I stayed loyal to Trump , he would stay loyal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the course .
Always stay the course .
Be loyal .
I was going to be fine.
” But that wasn ’ t true .
Cohen was later sentenced to three years in jail .
And Cohen never spoke to Trump again .
First Lady Melania Trump ’ s former friend and confidante Stephanie Winston Wolkoff also recounts the anger and humiliation she felt after being hung out to dry by the Trumps .
Wolkoff , a close friend of Melania ’ s who had previously organized major events , including New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to produce Trump ’ s inauguration events .
But then the press started looking into spending irregularities around her productions .
Wolkoff believes she was unfairly set up to take the blame due to her lack of experience in the political world .
“ Melania and the White House had accused me of criminal activity and publicly shamed and fired me and made me their scapegoat , ” Wolkoff told MSNBC ’ s Rachel Maddow .
“ At that moment in time , that ’ s when I pressed record .
She was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ willing to let them take me down.
” As she writes in her tell-all , Melania and Me , “ It was the worst mistake of my life to get involved with Melania and the Trumps : emotionally , mentally , physically , financially , socially , professionally.
” “ In fact , I wish I had never met her , ” Wolkoff wrote .
These tales are easily lost in the deluge of news pouring out of the Trump Administration .
Such complaints are routinely dismissed by Trump ’ s latest surrogates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump taps out tweets disparaging the character of these former loyalists and , just like that , their names melt into the social media white noise of the Trump era .
Except when you take a step back , a few common chords ring through and rise above the petty back and forth .
We should pay attention because it matters far more than Trump ’ s personal relationships with these people .
The people most willing to assist Trump tell us he is a person with disastrous foreign policy ideas .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constitution and displays a lack of empathy or concern for the humanity of others .
He threatens our democratic process .
He expects his allies to accept blame for his misdeeds .
The characters are different , but all their stories are the same .
Trump pushes people to take unethical , dangerous , and even criminal actions for his benefit .
That ’ s just who Trump is .
He tries to corrupt those around him .
This is why—in addition to the desire to sell books—so many people have been coming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disenchantment with Trump .
They know that if he gets a second term , he will keep corrupting America , too .

For all the loyalty Donald Trump enjoys from his most sycophantic followers, many prominent figures who famously assisted him have given up on the president altogether. It’s worth taking a look at the breaking points for these various White House staffers, cabinet secretaries, political advisers, and others—the moment when each decided he or she just couldn’t stick with Trump anymore. Because we can learn a lot about Trump and the overall effect he is having on our country by studying what made these individuals—from revered military leaders to Trump’s sleazy surrogates—finally snap.
Of the men and women who have served Trump and gone on to publicly speak against him, perhaps no one’s words carry more weight than Trump’s former defense secretary James Mattis. Theoretically, the “warrior monk” General “Mad Dog” Mattis, a retired four-star Marine Corps general, who once led Central Command, should have been a good fit inside the Trump administration.
But Trump is a reckless force that not even a military general with 40 years experience could counsel. Mattis walked out on Trump in December 2018 when the president ignored his advice and abruptly pulled troops out of the Middle East. Mattis is quoted in Bob Woodward’s new book, Rage, as saying, “When I was basically directed to do something that I thought went beyond stupid to felony stupid, strategically jeopardizing our place in the world and everything else, that’s when I quit.”
That’s not the only deep disagreement he’s had with the president, though. When Trump used military force to disperse protesters in Washington, D.C.’s Lafayette Square, Mattis took the rare step of issuing a public statement on the matter, putting it in no uncertain terms that Trump has crossed an intolerable line.
Mattis said he was “angry and appalled” at the president’s actions, and “We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society.” He went on, “We know that we are better than the abuse of executive authority that we witnessed in Lafayette Square. We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution.” Then he called for the adoption of a “new path” that could only be interpreted as one leading away from Trump.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
John Bolton arrived at a similar conclusion after working directly with Trump as his national security advisor. In his book, The Room Where It Happened, Bolton says he decided he had to leave in September 2019, after Trump made plans to invite the Taliban to Camp David public.
Bolton vociferously opposed the idea and hoped word of the plans would never get out. Those hopes evaporated when Trump, without any warning, tweeted about the abandoned project on September 7. On September 9, Trump called Bolton in for a meeting to complain about the press coverage over the canceled meeting and the uproar among Republicans. Trump accused Bolton of leaking, to which Bolton observed dryly, “Of course, most of the negative reaction he had brought on himself by his ill-advised tweets.”
“That was my last conversation with Trump,” Bolton said. On September 10, he delivered his resignation letter at 11:30 a.m. By noon Trump was tweeting that Bolton’s services were no longer needed. “And with that, I was a free man again,” Bolton wrote.
Like Mattis, Bolton is calling for a movement to reject Trump.
“The day after the election, whether Trump wins or loses, we face a real debate, maybe an existential debate, about what the future of the Republican Party is,” he said. He added, “I just think it’s important for the Republican Party to separate itself from Trump and for the conservative philosophy to separate itself from Trump.”
Other insiders, such as Miles Taylor, former chief of staff to Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, found themselves similarly making great exertions to block other dangerous Trump plans. Like many other appointees, Taylor had misgivings about Trump but accepted a government position thinking he could help prevent Trump from acting on his worst impulses.
“The total tonnage of bad Trump ideas that never materialized were enough to crush anyone’s hopes about a successful presidency,” Taylor told The Bulwark. “But the one that broke my desire to continue serving was his perverse insistence on resuming family separation at the border—and making it worse. It was sick, wrong, and un-American. That’s when it became clear that saying ‘no’ to Trump was no longer enough. His magnetic attraction to wrongdoing outweighed any good the ‘Axis of Adults’ could do to keep him on the right track.”
Elizabeth Neumann, Trump’s former assistant secretary for counterrorism and threat prevention at DHS, recently told Charlie Sykes on The Bulwark podcast that she distinctly remembers when she felt she had to cut loose.
“The point at which my position changed and I said ‘No at this point you are culpable’ was after El Paso,” she said, referring to the August 2019 attack by a white man who killed 20 people and injured dozens more at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas. Echoing Trump’s language, the shooter wrote in a manifesto that “this attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas.”
“Post-El Paso, there is no excuse,” she said. “The correlation was so clear that this individual carried out this attack because of this language” that Trump had used. She continued, “We see it on full display this summer, it is part of my own process of coming to grips with the fact that I could not vote for him and not just decide to do a write-in candidate but to vote for Joe Biden is realizing how dangerous his rhetoric is and his unwillingness to change. It is so clear to me that his values, what he cares about is himself, he cares about his political power, he cares about winning, and at the sacrifice of people dying. I just cannot.”
Neumann resigned in April 2020 and is now working with Taylor on an anti-Trump group called Republican Political Alliance for Integrity and Reform (REPAIR) to organize others who have worked for Trump and wish to support Biden in 2020 and work together to reform the GOP.
Significant cracks have emerged as well in Trump’s support among individuals outside the administration.
It was Trump’s callousness toward others that moved Stephanie Ranade Krider, executive director for Ohio Right to Life, to quit her job rather than endorse Trump and help him win a second term. “You learn to hold certain things in tension, and for me, it came to a point where I couldn’t anymore,” Krider recently told Christianity Today.
“Always, there has been this undercurrent where he just does not respect women and he does not like black and brown people. I can’t look at any of his behavior and see evidence of the Holy Spirit in his life. Nothing about his words or actions are kind or gentle or faithful or full of self-control.” Krider specifically mentioned Trump’s child separation policy and his handling of the killing of George Floyd as reasons for her break. “My greatest fear is that in the pro-life movement and the evangelical church, we’ve become so tied to the Republican Party and President Trump, they don’t all matter to us,” she said.
Other committed Republicans have found Trump’s attitude towards the elections appalling.
Steven G. Calabresi, cofounder of the Federalist Society and a professor at Northwestern University’s Pritzker School of Law who supported Trump through impeachment, said in July that Trump’s tweets raising the possibility of postponing the election were causes for removal.
“I have voted Republican in every presidential election since 1980, including voting for Donald Trump in 2016. I wrote op-eds and a law review article protesting what I believe was an unconstitutional investigation by Robert Mueller. I also wrote an op-ed opposing President Trump’s impeachment,” Calabresi wrote. “But I am frankly appalled by the president’s recent tweet seeking to postpone the November election. Until recently, I had taken as political hyperbole the Democrats’ assertion that President Trump is a fascist. But this latest tweet is fascistic and is itself grounds for the president’s immediate impeachment again by the House of Representatives and his removal from office by the Senate.”
While it’s one thing for experts to quietly acknowledge Trump’s flaws and put that aside in a faithful attempt to preserve institutional guardrails and pursue policy goals, those who professed there was something redeeming about his personal character don’t have the same credibility. Regardless, the stories they tell to explain their U-turns show that Trump’s slavish followers are capable of walking away. Even the most shameless opportunists can usually tell when their opportunity has run out.
Take, for example, Anthony Scaramucci, who professed his “love“ for Trump in his only press conference during his 11-day stint as White House communications director, and has now remade himself an anti-Trump crusader. He attributes his turnaround to Trump’s racialized attacks on opponents.
Similar reasoning was voiced by Omarosa Manigault Newman, a Trump hanger-on from the first season of The Apprentice who only stuck around on the White House staff for the first season of his presidency. Omarosa once described Trump as “the right choice for America“ and said “every critic, every detractor will have to bow down to President Trump.” But in her 2018 memoir of her time in the White House, Unhinged, she describes how she came to realize Trump is “a racist, a bigot, and a misogynist” whose actions were “harming the country,” and that she “could no longer be a part of this madness.” When she was fired by chief of staff John Kelly, she said she felt relief: “For the first time in nearly fifteen years, I would be free from the cult of Trumpworld.”
Other backers say Trump simply let them down.
Back in 2016, right-wing provocateur Ann Coulter wrote a book extolling Trump’s virtues. By this year, she’d had enough; she called Trump “the most disloyal actual retard that has ever set foot in the Oval Office.” She’s mostly upset that Trump didn’t deliver on his vows to build the border wall and stop illegal immigration. “I will never apologize for supporting the issues that candidate Trump advocated, but I am deeply sorry for thinking that this shallow and broken man would show even some remote fealty to the promises that got him elected,” she tweeted.
The concept of one-way loyalty is a common theme among those who have abandoned their support for Trump. The closer one gets to Trump, the more that feeling seems to intensify when they eventually realize their fidelity is unrequited.
In his new book, Disloyal, longtime Trump fixer Michael Cohen lays out all the various unethical and criminal schemes he participated in service to Trump. Like Coulter, he didn’t wrap his head around breaking with Trump until it was abundantly clear how cravenly he had been used.
Cohen recounts feeling betrayed by Trump when it looked as if he would not be repaid the hush money he paid out of his pocket to conceal Trump’s alleged affairs during the election. Cohen expected a hefty Christmas bonus to recover the funds and when he didn’t get it in his 2016 Christmas card he said he was “surprised,” dismayed,” “astounded,” and “outraged” just to name a handful of the words he used to describe his reaction.
“Something in me was broken by this disrespect and presumption at the whim of now President-Elect Trump,” he wrote. “My payment, and all the hellfire and damnation that ensued, up to and including my circumstances as inmate number 86067-054 in Otisville federal prison, stemmed from that ingratitude and dishonesty.”
Still, Cohen didn’t openly turn against Trump until after FBI agents raided Cohen’s apartment in April 2018. Cohen wrote that he found himself thinking, “I was now on the other side of the power dynamic I had exploited so often on behalf of Donald Trump.” Trump promised Cohen in a phone call, “I have your back. You’re going to be fine.” Cohen wrote, “That was Trump’s mantra and exhortation: the President had my back. If I stayed loyal to Trump, he would stay loyal to me. I had to stay the course. Always stay the course. Be loyal. I was going to be fine.” But that wasn’t true.
Cohen was later sentenced to three years in jail. And Cohen never spoke to Trump again.
First Lady Melania Trump’s former friend and confidante Stephanie Winston Wolkoff also recounts the anger and humiliation she felt after being hung out to dry by the Trumps.
Wolkoff, a close friend of Melania’s who had previously organized major events, including New York’s famed Met Gala, agreed to produce Trump’s inauguration events. But then the press started looking into spending irregularities around her productions. Wolkoff believes she was unfairly set up to take the blame due to her lack of experience in the political world.
“Melania and the White House had accused me of criminal activity and publicly shamed and fired me and made me their scapegoat,” Wolkoff told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow. “At that moment in time, that’s when I pressed record. She was no longer my friend and she was willing to let them take me down.”
As she writes in her tell-all, Melania and Me, “It was the worst mistake of my life to get involved with Melania and the Trumps: emotionally, mentally, physically, financially, socially, professionally.”
“In fact, I wish I had never met her,” Wolkoff wrote.
These tales are easily lost in the deluge of news pouring out of the Trump Administration. Such complaints are routinely dismissed by Trump’s latest surrogates as sour grapes from disgruntled former employees. Trump taps out tweets disparaging the character of these former loyalists and, just like that, their names melt into the social media white noise of the Trump era.
Except when you take a step back, a few common chords ring through and rise above the petty back and forth. We should pay attention because it matters far more than Trump’s personal relationships with these people.
The people most willing to assist Trump tell us he is a person with disastrous foreign policy ideas. They say he shows disrespect for the Constitution and displays a lack of empathy or concern for the humanity of others. He threatens our democratic process. He expects his allies to accept blame for his misdeeds.
The characters are different, but all their stories are the same. Trump pushes people to take unethical, dangerous, and even criminal actions for his benefit.
That’s just who Trump is. He tries to corrupt those around him. This is why—in addition to the desire to sell books—so many people have been coming out in recent weeks to explain their disenchantment with Trump. They know that if he gets a second term, he will keep corrupting America, too.


thebulwark--2020-09-14--Trump’s Too-Little, Too-Late Evictions Order

Earlier this month , the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) issued a document entitled “ Temporary Halt in Residential Evictions to Prevent the Further Spread of COVID-19.
” Note that this is not an executive order .
It does not even contain President Trump ’ s signature .
But it was issued pursuant to the precise statutory authority that empowered Trump to impose a national quarantine and other public safety measures back in February—powers that he has refused to use , to the detriment of millions of Americans who fell sick and tens of thousands who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” also underscores the veritable mess that Trump has made of the principles of federalism—a once-hallowed tenet of conservative constitutional theory , under which sovereign power is carefully reserved to the states except in exceptional circumstances of national importance .
The CDC ’ s order is arguably flawed as a matter of policy , and possibly as a matter of law .
It states that , through December 31 , 2020 , “ a landlord , owner of a residential property , or other person with a legal right to pursue eviction or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ covered person from any residential property in any jurisdiction to which this Order applies.
” The order doesn ’ t “ relieve any individual of any obligation to pay rent.
” Nor does it provide funding to landlords so they can make ends meet in the interim .
And it doesn ’ t refer to any express authority from Congress that would allow an executive branch agency to enjoin evictions .
Rather , the CDC purports to have issued the order under Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act , a law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ the Surgeon General , with the approval of the Secretary ” of Health and Human Services , “ to make and enforce such regulations as in his judgment are necessary to prevent the introduction , transmission , or spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the States or possessions , or from one State or possession into any other State or possession.
” In this case , the HHS secretary passed this immense statutory authority on to one of its agencies , the CDC , which issued the order .
Here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tenth Amendment to the Constitution , public health—like traditional police powers—is the responsibility of the states , not the federal government .
The regulations implementing the 1944 statute nonetheless allow the feds to step in upon a finding that local efforts are “ insufficient to prevent the spread of .
.
.
communicable diseases.
” In its order , the CDC underscores that “ COVID-19 presents a historic threat to public health ” and pronounces that , despite the “ best efforts ” of government , “ COVID-19 continues to spread and further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too late .
Consider what the Trump administration didn ’ t do with its statutory powers .
As early as January , President Trump didn ’ t heed the warnings of U.S. national security officials that the coronavirus was a serious global threat .
Instead , he repeatedly praised China ’ s handling of the virus before eventually imposing a limited ban on travel from China on January 31 , when the U.S. cases were still in the “ single digits.
” On February 4 , the Food and Drug Administration issued an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ test , but instead of preparing to test Americans on the massive scale that was required in order to contain the virus , the CDC issued very narrow guidance recommending testing only for those who recently traveled to China ’ s Wuhan province or were in contact with an infected person .
On February 11 , there were only 11 cases in the United States .
By the end of March , confirmed cases in the United States surged past 100,000 .
By February 16 , the United States was conducting approximately 2.4 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recorded its first case on the very same day as the United States—was by then administering 154.7 test per million people .
In June , HHS announced that it was planning to end federal funding for coronavirus testing sites by the end of the month .
As of this writing , there have been more than 6.5 million confirmed coronavirus cases in the United States and nearly 200,000 deaths .
Of course , the testing failures are only the beginning of Trump ’ s colossal COVID malfeasance .
He did not manage the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( PPE ) and medical supplies—prompting Democratic senators to demand an investigation into reports that federal officials were seizing supplies as “ political favoritism , cronyism , and price-gouging via third-party sellers.
” By July , Trump was urging states to reopen while the country was reporting over 60,000 new cases a day .
On September 1 , the Federal Emergency Management Agency announced it would halt funding for cloth face masks and other PPE in public schools , public housing , and courthouses .
The principles of federalism recognize that states have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ things , we have 50-plus election systems in this country and an Electoral College that can decide the presidency contrary to the national popular vote tally—but , as I argued back in May , if there were ever a time for a president to invoke his statutory powers to protect the public at large , this is it .
Trump didn ’ t do it .
Rather than invoke the Public Health Service Act to fight COVID-19 when there was still time to save tens of thousands of lives , Trump left states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , his administration is invoking that authority—but for the purpose of fighting evictions , many of which are a terrible economic consequence of the administration ’ s disastrous handling of the crisis .
Meanwhile , this president has trampled on states ’ and municipalities ’ rights to police the streets and maintain order in the midst of local riots .
The federal government does not have “ police power ” outside of federal property or federal territories like Washington , D.C .
When Trump sent federal law enforcement to police federal courthouses in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solid constitutional ground .
But Trump ’ s invocation of “ Operation LeGend ” to send federal law enforcement to places like Chicago , Albuquerque , and Kansas City—over local governments ’ objections—was a horrifying assault on federalism .
His recent ( and likely empty ) threat to cut federal funding to Democrat-run cities allegedly marked by “ anarchy , violence , and destruction ” demolishes respect for federalism altogether , ushering in an era of exclusively red-versus-blue politics that disregards institutional , legal , and historical norms .
The CDC ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Act .
But instead of protecting the public ’ s health against a disease that ignores state borders , the order operates as a painful reminder of this president ’ s catastrophic failures and abuses to date , and a rallying cry to future Congresses of the need for legislation to ensure that the next “ worst of the worst ” president can not manage to destroy what generations of Americans have fought so hard to build .

Earlier this month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a document entitled “Temporary Halt in Residential Evictions to Prevent the Further Spread of COVID-19.” Note that this is not an executive order. It does not even contain President Trump’s signature. But it was issued pursuant to the precise statutory authority that empowered Trump to impose a national quarantine and other public safety measures back in February—powers that he has refused to use, to the detriment of millions of Americans who fell sick and tens of thousands who died.
The so-called “agency order” also underscores the veritable mess that Trump has made of the principles of federalism—a once-hallowed tenet of conservative constitutional theory, under which sovereign power is carefully reserved to the states except in exceptional circumstances of national importance.
The CDC’s order is arguably flawed as a matter of policy, and possibly as a matter of law.
It states that, through December 31, 2020, “a landlord, owner of a residential property, or other person with a legal right to pursue eviction or possessory action, shall not evict any covered person from any residential property in any jurisdiction to which this Order applies.” The order doesn’t “relieve any individual of any obligation to pay rent.” Nor does it provide funding to landlords so they can make ends meet in the interim. And it doesn’t refer to any express authority from Congress that would allow an executive branch agency to enjoin evictions.
Rather, the CDC purports to have issued the order under Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act, a law that dates back to 1944 and authorizes “the Surgeon General, with the approval of the Secretary” of Health and Human Services, “to make and enforce such regulations as in his judgment are necessary to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the States or possessions, or from one State or possession into any other State or possession.” In this case, the HHS secretary passed this immense statutory authority on to one of its agencies, the CDC, which issued the order.
Here’s the rub. Under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, public health—like traditional police powers—is the responsibility of the states, not the federal government. The regulations implementing the 1944 statute nonetheless allow the feds to step in upon a finding that local efforts are “insufficient to prevent the spread of . . . communicable diseases.” In its order, the CDC underscores that “COVID-19 presents a historic threat to public health” and pronounces that, despite the “best efforts” of government, “COVID-19 continues to spread and further action is needed.”
Too little, too late.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
Consider what the Trump administration didn’t do with its statutory powers. As early as January, President Trump didn’t heed the warnings of U.S. national security officials that the coronavirus was a serious global threat. Instead, he repeatedly praised China’s handling of the virus before eventually imposing a limited ban on travel from China on January 31, when the U.S. cases were still in the “single digits.” On February 4, the Food and Drug Administration issued an emergency use authorization for a CDC coronavirus test, but instead of preparing to test Americans on the massive scale that was required in order to contain the virus, the CDC issued very narrow guidance recommending testing only for those who recently traveled to China’s Wuhan province or were in contact with an infected person.
On February 11, there were only 11 cases in the United States. By the end of March, confirmed cases in the United States surged past 100,000.
By February 16, the United States was conducting approximately 2.4 tests per million people. South Korea—which recorded its first case on the very same day as the United States—was by then administering 154.7 test per million people. In June, HHS announced that it was planning to end federal funding for coronavirus testing sites by the end of the month. As of this writing, there have been more than 6.5 million confirmed coronavirus cases in the United States and nearly 200,000 deaths.
Of course, the testing failures are only the beginning of Trump’s colossal COVID malfeasance. He did not manage the national supply chain for personal protective equipment (PPE) and medical supplies—prompting Democratic senators to demand an investigation into reports that federal officials were seizing supplies as “political favoritism, cronyism, and price-gouging via third-party sellers.” By July, Trump was urging states to reopen while the country was reporting over 60,000 new cases a day. On September 1, the Federal Emergency Management Agency announced it would halt funding for cloth face masks and other PPE in public schools, public housing, and courthouses.
The principles of federalism recognize that states have rights—that’s why, among other things, we have 50-plus election systems in this country and an Electoral College that can decide the presidency contrary to the national popular vote tally—but, as I argued back in May, if there were ever a time for a president to invoke his statutory powers to protect the public at large, this is it. Trump didn’t do it.
Rather than invoke the Public Health Service Act to fight COVID-19 when there was still time to save tens of thousands of lives, Trump left states to fend for themselves. And now, his administration is invoking that authority—but for the purpose of fighting evictions, many of which are a terrible economic consequence of the administration’s disastrous handling of the crisis.
Meanwhile, this president has trampled on states’ and municipalities’ rights to police the streets and maintain order in the midst of local riots. The federal government does not have “police power” outside of federal property or federal territories like Washington, D.C. When Trump sent federal law enforcement to police federal courthouses in Portland, Oregon, he was on solid constitutional ground. But Trump’s invocation of “Operation LeGend” to send federal law enforcement to places like Chicago, Albuquerque, and Kansas City—over local governments’ objections—was a horrifying assault on federalism. His recent (and likely empty) threat to cut federal funding to Democrat-run cities allegedly marked by “anarchy, violence, and destruction” demolishes respect for federalism altogether, ushering in an era of exclusively red-versus-blue politics that disregards institutional, legal, and historical norms.
The CDC’s order finally invokes the Public Health Services Act. But instead of protecting the public’s health against a disease that ignores state borders, the order operates as a painful reminder of this president’s catastrophic failures and abuses to date, and a rallying cry to future Congresses of the need for legislation to ensure that the next “worst of the worst” president cannot manage to destroy what generations of Americans have fought so hard to build.


thebulwark--2020-09-14--Trump Is Building His Wall Out of Red Tape

It ’ s no secret that President Trump failed to deliver on his 2016 promise to build his wall across the U.S-Mexico border .
And the president kicked off his 2020 general-election campaign in equally bad faith last month by turning a naturalization ceremony into a re-election prop , and even failing to inform all the participants that they ’ d appear in a partisan event viewed by millions .
The spectacle was Trump ’ s latest attempt to brand himself as tough on illegal immigration , but welcoming of those who “ come in the right way.
” But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the curtain , and you ’ ll find a wall of red tape designed to keep legal immigrants out .
Just days before the Republican convention , U.S .
Citizenship and Immigration Services ( USCIS ) was ready to furlough nearly 70 percent of its staff to avoid a financial shortfall , a move that would have slowed the processing of immigration petitions to a trickle .
But even after news broke that the agency miscalculated and had a modest surplus to last to the end of the fiscal year , Congress needed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to avert cuts at the eleventh hour .
Now , even with the furloughs called off , USCIS warns it will slow down services and may still cut staffing next fiscal year in order to stay afloat .
Yet even with these looming cuts , USCIS has proposed new plans for “ continuous immigration vetting , ” requiring petitioners to submit their DNA and other biometric information .
In other words , USCIS insists it has the resources to expand vetting , but not to maintain services for the millions of people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other benefits each year .
Even more troubling is the fact that USCIS operates almost entirely on user fees , and this is just the latest example of the agency spending applicant ’ s money on bureaucratic hurdles that wall them off from the American dream .
For example , last fall the agency quietly rolled out a policy to reject applications if a space is left blank—even if the field is not applicable to the petitioner .
So if you ’ re an applicant with no middle name , apartment number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you must write “ N/A ” in all those fields or be rejected .
If your child has no employment history , it ’ s not enough to write “ N/A , ” in the employment field alone—you must also fill in the blank dates .
Make sure you ’ re writing “ N/A , ” and not “ NA , ” or you could still be declined .
While the no-blank policy itself officially targets asylum seekers and undocumented crime victims , lawyers have reported that other applications have been rejected on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says that Congress granted USCIS enormous leeway in deciding how immigration applications are prepared , but now the agency is using this discretion to create what he calls “ a bizarre data entry obstacle course.
” “ Applicants who clearly qualify under the law are getting turned away for absurd reasons , ” Brown tells me .
“ I ’ ve talked to doctors , engineers , very smart people who ’ ve tried to prepare applications on their own and they give up and come to me because the instructions are so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Other sources of waste are less overt and operate under pretenses that might seem valid , such as investigating fraud .
Three years ago , USCIS began requiring staff to completely reinvestigate applications for visa extensions , even if nothing about the cases had changed .
A few months later , the agency forced green card applicants who had already been rigorously screened to sit through time-consuming in-person interviews .
These policies are a major reason why USCIS processing costs for the five most common forms it receives increased by $ 503 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely to balloon to even higher levels if other Trump administration policies take full effect .
One of the most sweeping of these is the president ’ s public charge rule , which adds new forms that take roughly 18 hours to complete and doubles green card paperwork .
The policy attempts to assess an applicant ’ s likelihood of welfare use as a basis for denial .
But before the rule , petitioners were already required to demonstrate that they have the financial resources to support any family members they sponsor .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the public charge rule and other USCIS requirements resulted in her submitting 78 pages of documents with 14 signatures for one client .
USCIS staff will be tasked with scrutinizing these applications .
All of the new waste clogging the system has caused net processing times to surge by 25 percent between fiscal years 2017 and 2019 .
Such delays disrupt the livelihoods of U.S. citizens and immigrants alike .
Take the experience of Patrick and Liza Stifter , a St. Louis couple who married in July 2018 .
Liza , who was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ permit to legally work while her green card petition was pending .
The forms say that applicants should receive their work permits within 90 days .
The Stifters waited nine months .
Patrick , who was starting optometry school , recounted the difficulty of Liza being unable to work .
“ We barely scraped by off my part-time job and student loans , ” he told me .
But processing has grown even slower since mid-June , when USCIS literally shut off numerous green card and work permit printers after canceling contracts with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ result , USCIS failed to print thousands of documents that had already been approved , causing many legal immigrants to become undocumented as their papers expired .
Afterward , USCIS proceeded to charge applicants more for worse service , jacking up fees in an effort to raise $ 1.2 billion dollars .
Come October , marriage-based green card fees will jump from $ 1,760 to $ 2,830 and naturalizations from $ 725 to $ 1,170 .
These excessive fee hikes could likely backfire by pricing out applicants .
But even if these projections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t even specify what it intends to do with 64 percent of its added revenue and made no promises of using any of it to improve services There ’ s an old adage that you should never attribute to malevolence what can best be explained by stupidity .
But there comes a point where the distinction hardly matters anymore , and it ’ s reasonable to wonder if the people in charge are weaponizing bureaucratic incompetence to achieve their own malicious ends .

It’s no secret that President Trump failed to deliver on his 2016 promise to build his wall across the U.S-Mexico border. And the president kicked off his 2020 general-election campaign in equally bad faith last month by turning a naturalization ceremony into a re-election prop, and even failing to inform all the participants that they’d appear in a partisan event viewed by millions.
The spectacle was Trump’s latest attempt to brand himself as tough on illegal immigration, but welcoming of those who “come in the right way.” But turn off the cameras and pull back the curtain, and you’ll find a wall of red tape designed to keep legal immigrants out.
Just days before the Republican convention, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) was ready to furlough nearly 70 percent of its staff to avoid a financial shortfall, a move that would have slowed the processing of immigration petitions to a trickle. But even after news broke that the agency miscalculated and had a modest surplus to last to the end of the fiscal year, Congress needed to twist the agency’s arm to avert cuts at the eleventh hour. Now, even with the furloughs called off, USCIS warns it will slow down services and may still cut staffing next fiscal year in order to stay afloat. Yet even with these looming cuts, USCIS has proposed new plans for “continuous immigration vetting,” requiring petitioners to submit their DNA and other biometric information.
In other words, USCIS insists it has the resources to expand vetting, but not to maintain services for the millions of people who apply for citizenship, work permits, and other benefits each year. Even more troubling is the fact that USCIS operates almost entirely on user fees, and this is just the latest example of the agency spending applicant’s money on bureaucratic hurdles that wall them off from the American dream.
For example, last fall the agency quietly rolled out a policy to reject applications if a space is left blank—even if the field is not applicable to the petitioner. So if you’re an applicant with no middle name, apartment number, or prior spouses to list, you must write “N/A” in all those fields or be rejected. If your child has no employment history, it’s not enough to write “N/A,” in the employment field alone—you must also fill in the blank dates. Make sure you’re writing “N/A,” and not “NA,” or you could still be declined. While the no-blank policy itself officially targets asylum seekers and undocumented crime victims, lawyers have reported that other applications have been rejected on these grounds.
Immigration attorney Nathan Brown says that Congress granted USCIS enormous leeway in deciding how immigration applications are prepared, but now the agency is using this discretion to create what he calls “a bizarre data entry obstacle course.” “Applicants who clearly qualify under the law are getting turned away for absurd reasons,” Brown tells me. “I’ve talked to doctors, engineers, very smart people who’ve tried to prepare applications on their own and they give up and come to me because the instructions are so poorly written and the process seems unintelligible.”
Other sources of waste are less overt and operate under pretenses that might seem valid, such as investigating fraud. Three years ago, USCIS began requiring staff to completely reinvestigate applications for visa extensions, even if nothing about the cases had changed. A few months later, the agency forced green card applicants who had already been rigorously screened to sit through time-consuming in-person interviews. These policies are a major reason why USCIS processing costs for the five most common forms it receives increased by $503 million between 2016-2019.
These costs are likely to balloon to even higher levels if other Trump administration policies take full effect. One of the most sweeping of these is the president’s public charge rule, which adds new forms that take roughly 18 hours to complete and doubles green card paperwork. The policy attempts to assess an applicant’s likelihood of welfare use as a basis for denial. But before the rule, petitioners were already required to demonstrate that they have the financial resources to support any family members they sponsor. Houston-based immigration attorney Emily Neumann revealed that the public charge rule and other USCIS requirements resulted in her submitting 78 pages of documents with 14 signatures for one client. USCIS staff will be tasked with scrutinizing these applications.
All of the new waste clogging the system has caused net processing times to surge by 25 percent between fiscal years 2017 and 2019. Such delays disrupt the livelihoods of U.S. citizens and immigrants alike. Take the experience of Patrick and Liza Stifter, a St. Louis couple who married in July 2018. Liza, who was born in Ukraine, petitioned for a permit to legally work while her green card petition was pending. The forms say that applicants should receive their work permits within 90 days. The Stifters waited nine months. Patrick, who was starting optometry school, recounted the difficulty of Liza being unable to work. “We barely scraped by off my part-time job and student loans,” he told me.
But processing has grown even slower since mid-June, when USCIS literally shut off numerous green card and work permit printers after canceling contracts with vendors to save money. As a result, USCIS failed to print thousands of documents that had already been approved, causing many legal immigrants to become undocumented as their papers expired.
Afterward, USCIS proceeded to charge applicants more for worse service, jacking up fees in an effort to raise $1.2 billion dollars. Come October, marriage-based green card fees will jump from $1,760 to $2,830 and naturalizations from $725 to $1,170. These excessive fee hikes could likely backfire by pricing out applicants. But even if these projections are correct, the agency won’t even specify what it intends to do with 64 percent of its added revenue and made no promises of using any of it to improve services
There’s an old adage that you should never attribute to malevolence what can best be explained by stupidity. But there comes a point where the distinction hardly matters anymore, and it’s reasonable to wonder if the people in charge are weaponizing bureaucratic incompetence to achieve their own malicious ends.