The Conversation -- April 9, 2025
Trumpity-Doo-Dah. Eshe Nelson, et al., of the New York Times: “Stocks surged on Wednesday afternoon, ripping higher after ... [Donald] Trump said he would back down on tariffs for most of the world for the next 90 days, citing new talks with foreign nations. The S&P 500 climbed over 7 percent in a matter of minutes after Mr. Trump posted the decision on Truth Social, sharply reversing days of losses. But Mr. Trump said that the pause did not extend to China and that he would instead raise tariffs on its exports to 125 percent after Beijing announced a new round of retaliation.... Earlier in the day, when stocks were still oscillating between small gains and losses, Mr. Trump posted ]BE COOL' on his Truth Social platform, before adding, 'THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!!'” ~~~
~~~ Marie: He really gets a kick out of jerking everybody around, doesn't he? This is the dominance game Bouie is writing about here: ~~~
~~~ Jamelle Bouie of the New York Times: “There is no grand plan or strategic vision [to Donald Trump's obsession with tariffs] ... — only the impulsive actions of a mad king, untethered from any responsibility to the nation or its people.... Trump’s tariffs are not a policy as we traditionally understand it. What they are is an instantiation of his psyche: a concrete expression of his zero-sum worldview. The fundamental truth of Donald Trump is that he apparently cannot conceive of any relationship between individuals, peoples or states as anything other than a status game, a competition for dominance.... Trump’s ... obsession with territorial conquest ... is an obvious product of his predatory approach to human interaction. His authoritarian attempts to cow and coerce key institutions of civil society into compliance with his agenda and obedience to his will are, likewise, a kind of dominance game.... He even said as much during an event on Tuesday, when he bragged about the law firms 'signing up with Trump' and said that 'they give me a lot of money, considering they’ve done nothing wrong.'... If we view the president’s actions in light of his psychological need to dominate, it is almost certainly true that his flagrant abuse of the rights of migrants, asylum seekers and foreign-born students in the United States ... is just the beginning.... There is no point at which he can be satisfied.”
Rachel Maddow does a number on ICE fashion model Kristi Noem: ~~~
Jacob Rosen & Melissa Quinn of CBS News: "Federal judges in both New York and Texas have blocked the deportations of Venezuelan men likely to be deported under the Trump administration's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act, again stopping the White House's attempts to remove alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang after the Supreme Court cleared the way for their deportations this week. In one case filed in Manhattan, attorneys for two Venezuelan men who are currently being detained in Orange County, New York, successfully argued to block their clients' deportations and movement outside of the state and the United States. U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein, appointed to the federal bench by President Clinton, granted the temporary relief. After their arrests, both men were first transferred to an ICE detention center in Texas before being moved to New York. One man, who is 21, came to the U.S. to escape Tren de Aragua violence, and the other, who is 32, actively protested the regime of Venezuelan dictator Nicholas Maduro, their attorneys wrote. The new case in Texas was brought on behalf of the same Venezuelans who challenged their potential deportation in Washington, D.C., where the initial block of the deportations was entered by U.S. District Judge James Boasberg before it was lifted by the Supreme Court on Monday in a 5-4 decision. The Texas judge overseeing the petition, Fernando Rodriguez Jr., was appointed to the federal bench by President Trump during his first term."
~~~~~~~~~~
Lily Kuo of the Washington Post: “Trump’s 'Liberation Day' tariffs on 86 countries came into effect at 12:01 a.m. Eastern time on Wednesday, with successive increases taking the duty on all Chinese goods to 104 percent. Beijing, which on Friday announced it would impose a 34 percent tariff on all American goods in return, did not immediately announce any further retaliatory measures Wednesday. But China’s State Council, its equivalent of the cabinet, stressed the importance of the U.S.-China trade relationship and said that differences should be resolved 'through dialogue and consultation.'... At the same time, Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian said China would 'continue to take firm and forceful measures to safeguard its own interests.' Before the tariffs took effect, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt suggested Tuesday that Trump was open to talking — as long as Beijing made the first move.... The mixed signals and the introduction of the tariffs led to another day of significant volatility in Asia, after a day of wild gyrations in U.S. markets.” ~~~
~~~ Marie: What??? Trump creates an international crisis, then insists one of his victims call him first? Is this "High School Dating Game"? ~~~
~~~ The New York Times' live updates are here: “After ... [Donald] Trump imposed a 104 percent tariff on Chinese goods, Beijing announced a levy on U.S. goods of 84 percent. Stocks and bonds slumped as Europe also prepared to retaliate against the United States.”
Joe Rennison, et al., of the New York Times: “Another chaotic day of trading on Wall Street ended with a late slide in stock prices, with little letup in the escalating trade tensions and economic anxiety caused by ... [Donald] Trump’s tariffs. The S&P 500 had posted a big gain at the start of trading, rising as much as 4 percent, but the rally faded and stocks slumped in late trading, ending 1.6 percent lower for the day and adding to a string of losses since Mr. Trump announced sweeping tariffs ... last week. Those tariffs are scheduled to take effect at midnight Wednesday, the White House reaffirmed on Tuesday, including raising the tax on goods from China to at least 104 percent. Tuesday’s drop put the benchmark index on the verge of a bear market, defined as a drop of 20 percent or more from its last high. After Tuesday’s drop, the index sits 18.9 percent below its mid-February record, having tumbled more than 12 percent just in the days since Mr. Trump announced his new tariffs.” The AP story is here. (Also linked yesterday.)
It seems that even when a country's representatives do stroke Trump's insatiable ego by calling him first, it does no good: ~~~
~~~ Ari Hawkins, et al., of Politico: “... Donald Trump and his top trade officials say they are negotiating with trading partners to reduce the steep tariffs scheduled to go into effect on Wednesday. But many foreign governments who want to talk are still waiting by the phone.... On top of that, Trump officials have not spelled out exactly what concessions the administration is seeking that could pave the way for a negotiated solution. It’s a sign that even as the administration tries to reassure financial markets, business leaders and fellow Republicans that they have an end game for the market-shaking duties, the White House is still very far from reaching any substantive trade deals with major foreign partners. Rapid progress will be even harder because now the administration is trying to negotiate bilateral deals with nearly 100 countries simultaneously to achieve a murky set of goals.”
David Pierson & Barry Wang of the New York Times: “For years, the world’s two biggest powers have flirted with the idea of an economic decoupling as tensions between them have risen. The acceleration this week, in both actions and words, of their trade relationship’s deterioration has made the prospect of such a divorce seem closer than ever.... With China’s top leader, Xi Jinping, and Mr. Trump locked in a game of chicken — each unwilling to risk looking weak by making a concession — the trade fight could spiral out of control, inflaming tensions over other areas of competition like technology and the fate of Taiwan, the self-governing island claimed by Beijing.”
Back to the Nineteenth Century ~~~
Ana Swanson of the New York Times: “Behind ... [Donald] Trump’s decision to hit some of America’s largest trading partners with stiff tariffs is his fixation on the trade deficit that the United States runs with other nations. But many economists say that is a poor metric for judging the quality of a trade relationship. The steep tariffs, which went into effect on nearly 60 trading partners on Wednesday, were calculated based on bilateral trade deficits, or the gap between what the United States sells to each country and what [that country buys from the U.S]. Mr. Trump has long viewed that gap as evidence that America is being 'ripped off' by other countries....
“But ... bilateral trade deficits crop up for many reasons beyond unfair practices.... [For instance,] the United States ... has substantial trade surpluses with the Netherlands and Singapore.... But that’s ... because those countries are home to major ports that import American goods. The Netherlands unloads U.S. goods in its ports and sends them throughout Europe to other consumers, while Singapore does something similar for Asia. But a trade deficit is calculated based on the country the good reaches first, not its ultimate destination.... [Economists] say that, if Mr. Trump’s tariffs do reduce the overall trade deficit, it will more likely be because they tanked the U.S. economy or drove investors away from the United States by sapping the world’s confidence in the U.S. dollar and its markets.”
Chris Velazco, et al., of the Washington Post: “The iPhone is in many ways the ultimate symbol of the age of globalized supply chains.... Trump has declared an 'economic revolution' that seeks to wipe away that system. Instead, he wants those supply chains and parts suppliers to be inside the U.S., employing American workers. 'The army of millions and millions of human beings screwing in little screws to make iPhones, that kind of thing is going to come to America,' Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said during a TV appearance on CBS News on Sunday.... No matter where those devices are assembled, components such as processors, screens, cameras, memory chips and modems flow from around the world to form finished products. In the case of the iPhone 16 Pro, the total cost of those parts works out to about $507 — just over half of the device’s retail cost, according to data from Counterpoint Research.” ~~~
~~~ Marie: Lutnick's statement was garbled -- after claiming "millions of Americans" soon (within "days or weeks") would have the good fortune to spend their days in sweatshops screwing tiny screws into iPhones, he seemed to imply that, no, no, the millions of Americans would be servicing the robots who did the turnings of the screws. Jon Stewart (segment embedded yesterday) made sport of Lutnick's confused predictions. Stewart was not alone, as RAS highlighted in yesterday's Comments. ~~~
~~~ Jason Koebler of 404 Media: “The idea of a Made-in-the-USA iPhone has been an obsession for politicians for years, a kind of shorthand goalpost that would signal 'American manufacturing is back' that is nonetheless nowhere close to being a reality and would require a nearly impossible-to-fathom restructuring of the global supply chains that make the iPhone possible in the first place. Over the years, economists and manufacturing experts have attempted to calculate how much an American-made iPhone would cost. In recent days a Quora answer from 2018 that suggests an American iPhone would cost $30,000 has gone repeatedly viral.... [Such] articles are good exercises but they are also total fantasy. There is no universe in which Apple snaps its fingers and begins making the iPhone in the United States overnight. It could theoretically begin assembling them here, but even that is a years-long process made infinitely harder by the fact that, in Trump’s ideal world, every company would be reshoring American manufacturing at the same time, leading to supply chain issues, factory building issues, and exacerbating the already lacking American talent pool for high-tech manufacturing.”
Blink, Blink? Ana Swanson & Alan Rappeport of the New York Times: “The Trump administration signaled on Tuesday that it was ready to negotiate deals with countries targeted by sweeping tariffs, saying that 70 governments had approached the United States to try to roll the levies back and that officials would begin talks with Japan, South Korea and other nations. But ... [Donald] Trump and his advisers have been clear that these entreaties will not stop the next round of tariffs from going into effect just after midnight Wednesday, including another 50 percent duty on China. As a result, tariffs on Chinese goods will be at least 104 percent. In a social media post on Tuesday, Mr. Trump said he had 'a great call' with South Korea’s acting president, Han Duck-soo, about trade and tariffs, and that South Korean officials were heading to the United States for talks. He also expressed optimism that a trade war with China could be averted. 'China also wants to make a deal, badly, but they don’t know how to get it started,' Mr. Trump wrote. 'We are waiting for their call. It will happen!'” (Also linked yesterday.)
Tyler Pager of the New York Times: “Elon Musk slammed ... [Donald] Trump’s top trade adviser [Peter Navarro] as 'dumber than a sack of bricks' on Tuesday, exposing a remarkable rift in the president’s inner circle over the wide-ranging tariffs that have upended the global economy.... The squabble escalated on Monday when Mr. Navarro said on CNBC that Mr. Musk was not a 'car manufacturer' but a 'car assembler' because Tesla, Mr. Musk’s electric vehicle company, relied on parts from around the world. Mr. Musk fired back on Tuesday, calling Mr. Navarro a 'moron' and 'dumber than a sack of bricks' in a post on X.... Later in the day, Mr. Musk doubled down, posting that he wanted to 'apologize to bricks.'... He also used a slur to refer to Mr. Navarro, calling him 'Peter Retarrdo.' The feud between Mr. Musk and [Mr.] Navarro, who has been the architect of many of Mr. Trump’s trade plans, has been simmering for days as the administration’s new tariffs have caused huge losses across global financial markets.... Mr. Musk’s words — though aimed at Mr. Navarro — were a rare criticism of Mr. Trump’s policies from one of his most influential advisers. Mr. Musk ... is estimated to have lost roughly $31 billion since Mr. Trump announced sweeping tariffs on foreign countries on April 2....” An NBC News story is here. (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Marie: If Navarro is a moron & dumber than a sack of bricks because of the tariff policies he has recommended to Trump, it follows that Trump -- who took the dumb advice -- must be a moron, too. Dunnit?
Rob Copeland, et al., of the New York Times: “Wall Street billionaires are not used to being on the outside looking in. But that is where they find themselves after ... [Donald] Trump ignored their appeals to call off his tariff plans which they fear could endanger the economy. With the backdrop of rapidly mounting stock market losses, corporate titans have worked every angle — phone calls, social media and even a typically staid shareholder letter — to try to change Mr. Trump’s mind. The day after the president announced his most sweeping round of tariffs last week, chief executives from major banks, including Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase, had a private meeting with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick organized by a lobbying group in Washington. But Mr. Lutnick was not persuaded to reverse course, three people briefed on the sit-down said. Over the weekend, megadonors to Mr. Trump’s re-election effort tried a different tack, pleading their case in calls to Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, people familiar with the calls said. Those efforts also came up empty. By Monday, hedge fund billionaires — many of whom had been loud and proud boosters of Mr. Trump’s second term — were going public with their cries.” (Also linked yesterday.)
Aris Folley & Sylvan Lane of the Hill: “Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) expressed deep frustration with ... [Donald] Trump’s tariffs during a Tuesday hearing featuring the top White House trade negotiator. 'Whose throat do I get to choke if this proves to be wrong?' Tillis asked U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer during his appearance before the Senate Finance Committee. Tillis, a critic of tariffs and protectionist policies, questioned whether the Trump administration had a coherent strategy to rebalance trade after announcing roughly $600 billion in new import taxes last week.... Tillis is one of seven Republican senators who signed on to a bill from Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) that would cut back the president’s authority to unilaterally impose tariffs.” (Also linked yesterday.)
Donald Trump has launched a global economic war without any allies. That is why — unlike previous economic crises in this century — there is no one coming to save the global economy if the situation starts to unravel. -- John Lipsky of the Atlantic Council ~~~
~~~ David Sanger of the New York Times: “As the breadth of the Trump revolution has spread across Washington in recent weeks, its most defining feature is a burn-it-down-first, figure-out-the-consequences-later recklessness. The costs of that approach are now becoming clear. Administration officials knew the markets would dive and other nations would retaliate when ... [Donald] Trump announced his long-promised 'reciprocal' tariffs. But when pressed, several senior officials conceded that they had spent only a few days considering how the economic earthquake might have second-order effects. And officials have yet to describe the strategy for managing a global system of astounding complexity after the initial shock wears off, other than endless threats and negotiations between the leader of the world’s largest economy and everyone else.... The global trading system is only one example of the Trump administration tearing something apart, only to reveal it has no plan for how to replace it.” Sanger gives a number of examples.
Adam Cancryn & Maya Ward of Politico: “During the first two turbulent months of ... Donald Trump’s term, the White House has shrugged off scrutiny of its most controversial policies with a simple assertion: The American people voted for this. Now, Trump allies and GOP voters spooked by the tariff-induced market crash are beginning to respond en masse: No, we didn’t. Trump won in November because many voters saw him as an antidote to their economic malaise; as a candidate, he frequently promised to lower Americans’ everyday prices. But as president, he has chosen instead to plunge the country into fresh financial chaos, while insisting the market losses as a result of his tariffs are 'medicine' Americans need to take. 'Trump was elected in part to lower inflation and juice the economy,' said GOP pollster Whit Ayres. 'Higher prices and slower growth are exactly the opposite of what Americans voted for.'” (Also linked yesterday.)
Happy Birthday to ??? Jenny Gathright of the Washington Post: “Plans are in motion for a massive event on the National Mall in June to celebrate the Army’s 250th anniversary with live music, fireworks, parachuters landing on the Ellipse — and perhaps the military parade ... Donald Trump has been dreaming about for years.... The news of a potential military parade in D.C. — initially reported by Washington City Paper over the weekend — comes after Trump intended to host one during his first term but backed off amid pushback from the Army and D.C. officials over exorbitant costs and the damage tanks might cause to city roads. Tanks or no tanks, the city can prepare for some kind of massive birthday bash for the Army on June 14, the anniversary of the Continental Congress’s vote to officially create the force.... (That date also happens to be Trump’s birthday.)” Emphasis added. ~~~
Marie: So is this costly bash going to be more about celebrating what George Washington & the Continental Army made possible or commemorating Donald Trump's destruction of all that? See Akhilleus's commentary below.
Yes, It Is "The Dating Game." Michael Grynbaum of the New York Times: “The Trump administration formally barred federal workers from listing their preferred pronouns in email signatures, calling it a symptom of a misguided 'gender ideology.' Some White House officials are taking a similar approach with the journalists who cover them. On at least three recent occasions, senior Trump press aides have refused to engage with reporters’ questions because the journalists listed identifying pronouns in their email signatures. 'As a matter of policy, we do not respond to reporters with pronouns in their bios,' Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, wrote to a New York Times reporter who had inquired about the potential closing of a famed climate research observatory.” MB: I don't know how these people can get more stupid or petty or childish or unserious, but I have every confidence they will find multiple ways to do so.
Andrew Duehren of the New York Times: “The Internal Revenue Service has agreed to help homeland security officials find immigrants they are trying to deport, according to court records, committing to sharing information in what would be a fundamental change in how the tax collector uses its tightly regulated records. In a court filing, the Trump administration said that the I.R.S. and Immigration and Customs Enforcement had reached the agreement on Monday and that the two agencies had not yet shared any information. Under the terms of the deal, a partially redacted version of which was submitted in the case, ICE officials can ask the I.R.S. for information about people who have been ordered to leave the United States or whom they are otherwise investigating. Federal law tightly controls taxpayer information, protecting home addresses, earnings and other data from disclosure even to other agencies within the government. I.R.S. officials have for weeks warned that the Trump administration’s plan to use the I.R.S. to help with deportations could be illegal. The top I.R.S. lawyer was demoted as the agreement came together, and was replaced by a former Trump nominee.” The AP report is here. (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ The New York Times story has been updated. New Lede: “Several top Internal Revenue Service officials, including the acting commissioner, are preparing to quit after the Trump administration pushed the agency to use its protected tax records to help homeland security officials deport immigrants, according to people familiar with the matter.... The deal has fueled further turmoil at the top of the agency, which had already been rocked by mass layoffs and several leadership changes during its busiest period of the year.... Among those leaving is Melanie Krause, the acting leader of the I.R.S., who is expected to take the administration’s latest deferred resignation offer....” ~~~
~~~ Josh Marshall's column is firewalled, but Scott Lemieux has a good chunk of it on LG&$ here: “We know that DOGE is in the process of gutting the IRS. According to internal IRS estimates reviewed by The Washington Post, this internal sabotage is already estimated to have cost the U.S. Treasury more than $500 billion in revenues that otherwise would have been raised by April 15th. But it doesn’t stop at the IRS. DOGE is also in the process of essentially closing down the Tax Division at the Department of Justice. Since the Tax Division is a statutory creation, it can’t literally be shuttered.... What they plan to do is essentially 'reform' and 'reorganize' the Tax Division out of existence.... When you combine this with the gutting of the IRS itself, it basically means a radical diminution of tax enforcement in the United States. If you make more than, say, a million dollars a year, paying taxes is probably going to be voluntary going forward. It’s a new feature of billionairedom.” ~~~
~~~ Marie: I'm not sure how much that will matter for the 2025 tax year. If Trump keeps his tariff program going, we will have fewer billionaires & multi-millionaires, and nearly all of the has-beens probably will be taking whopping legal deductions for the huge Trump Income Losses. One ingenious way to eliminate tax cheats is to strip away everybody's income.
Michael Bender & Sheryl Stolberg of the New York Times: “The Trump administration has frozen more than $1 billion in funding for Cornell and $790 million for Northwestern amid civil rights investigations into both schools, two U.S. officials said. The funding pause involves mostly grants from and contracts with the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Education and Health and Human Services, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the unannounced decision. The moves are the latest and largest in a rapidly escalating campaign against elite American universities that has resulted in billions in federal funds being suspended or put under review in just over a month. Other schools that have had funds threatened include Brown, Columbia, Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania and Princeton. Cornell and Northwestern are both facing investigations into allegations of antisemitism and into accusations of racial discrimination stemming from their efforts to promote diversity.”
Erwin Chemerinsky & Lawrence Tribe in a New York Times op-ed: “Of all the lawless acts by the Trump administration in its first two and a half months, none are more frightening than its dumping of human beings who have not had their day in court into an infamous maximum-security prison in El Salvador — and then contending that no federal court has the authority to right these brazen wrongs. In an astounding brief filed in the Supreme Court on Monday, the solicitor general of the United States argued that even when the government concedes that it has mistakenly deported someone to El Salvador and had him imprisoned there, the federal courts are powerless to do anything about it. The Supreme Court must immediately and emphatically reject this unwarranted claim of unlimited power to deprive people of their liberty without due process.... Why hasn’t the Trump administration acted to secure [Kilmar] Abrego Garcia’s release?... The answer can only be that it is using this case to establish a truly chilling proposition: that no one can stop the Trump administration from imprisoning anyone it wants anywhere else in the world.”
Gaya Gupta & Angie Hernandez of the Washington Post: “When Amir Makled, a civil rights lawyer representing a pro-Palestinian activist, handed over his passport for review at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport on Sunday, he was immediately flagged and led to an interview room for further questioning. The federal border officers told Makled, a U.S. citizen, that they knew he was a lawyer with prominent cases, the Dearborn-based attorney recounted in an interview with The Washington Post. The officers told him he could either hand over his phone and passcode, or they would confiscate it and return the device back to him later. Makled refused, and after nearly two hours, he said, he was allowed to leave with his phone. But Makled and other legal experts said they believe that his questioning is part of an alarming pattern of American lawyers facing retribution for representing clients whose interests conflict with ... Donald Trump’s agenda.”
Adam Liptak of the New York Times: “The Supreme Court on Tuesday blocked a ruling from a federal judge in California that had ordered the Trump administration to rehire thousands of fired federal workers who had been on probationary status. The court’s brief order said the nonprofit groups that had sued to challenge the dismissals had not suffered the sort of injury that gave them standing to sue. The practical consequences of the ruling may be limited, as another trial judge’s ruling requiring the reinstatement of many of the same workers remains in place. Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, but she gave no reasons. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said the court should not have ruled on such an important issue in the context of an emergency application. The order was the latest administration victory in the Supreme Court in a case arising from ... [Donald] Trump’s recent blitz of executive orders. Like others, though, it was technical and tentative. The justices said their order would remain in place while the case moved forward.” The AP story is here. (Also linked yesterday.)
Chicken Supreme Tops the Menu at Johnny's Cafe. Adam Liptak of the New York Times: “The court led by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. over the last two decades has not been known for its modesty or caution. Its signature move has been bold assertions of power backed by sweeping claims about the meaning of the Constitution.... But as the first wave of challenges to ... [Donald] Trump’s blitz of executive orders has reached the justices, a very different portrait of the court is emerging. It has issued a series of narrow and legalistic rulings that seem calculated to avoid the larger issues presented by a president rapidly working to expand power and reshape government.... The justices’ new approach appears to have multiple goals: to stay out of the political fray, to maintain their legitimacy and, perhaps most important, to avoid a showdown with a president who has relentlessly challenged the legitimacy of the courts.” (Also linked yesterday.)
Zach Montague of the New York Times: “A federal judge in Washington rejected the White House’s effort to keep The Associated Press from routinely covering ... [Donald] Trump, siding with the wire service and finding that it had faced political retaliation over its editorial decisions.... [The White House had] cited the wire service’s refusal to adopt the administration’s renaming of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.... The order dealt a blow to Mr. Trump, who, in a departure from decades of tradition, has moved to leverage access to White House events as a way of asserting more direct control over coverage of his administration. The dispute has raised profound questions about the independent news media’s role in shaping public opinion and the lasting implications of the president’s effort to determine how he is portrayed. Judge Trevor N. McFadden of the Federal District Court for the District of Washington wrote in his opinion that the Trump administration must 'immediately rescind their viewpoint-based denial' of The Associated Press from the White House press corps.” The CBS News report is here. MB: Trump appointed McFadden. (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Marie: Once again, raspberries to all of the White House press corps for failing to support the AP by boycotting the briefing room. Special shout-out to the reporter who asked, as the first question of Trump the Tariff Terrorist on AF1 Sunday, "How was your golf tournament today?" (See Jon Stewart video, embedded Tuesday.)
Rachel Weiner & Ian Duncan of the Washington Post: “Three air traffic control managers with responsibility for Reagan National Airport have been pushed out of their roles in the wake of a violent altercation in the tower, the Federal Aviation Administration confirmed Tuesday. The changes come a week after a supervisor in the tower was arrested and accused of punching another controller in the face over a minor dispute about work, and they follow efforts by the FAA to reduce stress among staff still grappling with January’s catastrophic midair collision of a passenger plane and a military helicopter. The district manager and two assistant managers were offered reassignment elsewhere.” (Also linked yesterday.)
Derek Hawkins of the Washington Post: “Under the stained glass and towering arch ceilings of Washington National Cathedral, hundreds of Secret Service members paid their respects Tuesday to an agent who came to symbolize the elite agency’s commitment to bravery and sacrifice in the face of danger. Secret Service agent Clint Hill had hurled himself atop President John F. Kennedy’s uncovered limousine when Lee Harvey Oswald opened fire on the presidential motorcade in Dallas in November 1963. His attempts to shield Kennedy and first lady Jacqueline Kennedy from the shots that killed the president inspired thousands of Secret Service agents who came after him, while the experience left Hill, who died Feb. 21 at his home in Belvedere, California, at age 93, with a deep guilt that haunted him late into his life.”
~~~~~~~~~~
Montana. Erin Reed of Erin in the Morning: "On Tuesday, Montana’s House considered Senate Bill 164, legislation that would classify gender-affirming care for transgender youth as felony child endangerment. The bill would not only target doctors and nurses, but also parents — including those merely passing through the state. Though the vote was expected to be close, a powerful floor speech from Representative SJ Howell prompted a wave of Republican defections. The bill was defeated 40–58, becoming one of several anti-trans proposals to fail this year following strong speeches by Montana’s transgender and nonbinary lawmakers.... The victories in Montana stand in stark contrast to the handful of Democrats and pundits suggesting that transgender people are a political liability.... Montana’s trans and nonbinary legislators only underscore the point—defending transgender people is not just morally right, it is politically possible." ~~~
~~~ Marie: Maybe somebody should tell that to White House press secretary & self-righteous pouty girl Miss Karoline Leavitt, who "as a matter of policy" will not even respond to reporters' inquiries when the reporters specify a pronoun. A pronoun. Or, I beg your pardon; I should not have specified a pronoun.
Share Article 
