25 Comments

jack smith may have saved the indictments v trump...but i believe (and please correct me if i'm wrong), the statue of limitations will kill them before jan 2029

in re tariffs--these are yet another trump grift...tariffs create the opp for trump to be 'gratuity-ed' by various people/industries to be 'exempted' from the tariffs...pure grift, plain and simple-- one has to understand the sociopathic mind of trump in order to predict what/why he's going to do what he'll do (the why with him is always $$ and 'for me')...trump views all of 'murrika and its treasury and assets as HIS...NATO not paying enough?...fuckyou, pay me...china, canada and mexico not stopping immigrants and fentanyl and wont pay to build a wall?...fuckyou, payme...you say you dont want to pay the tariffs which are going to end up in my pockets somehow?...fuckyou, pay me...place got hit by lightning?...yeah, yeah

once one understands that everything TFA does is because EVERYTHING BELONGS TO HIM, everything is mine, MINE, MIIIIIIIIINNNNE, it all becomes very clear and very predictable...he's not psychological rocket surgery, and i cant believe i'm the only one who's figured this out 🤷🏼‍♂️

Expand full comment

This quote is from the UK paper Express. It's an old word made new again - goes along with 'enshittification'.

In what appeared to be a reaction to the election outcome, Susie Dent tweeted: “Word of the day is ‘recrudescence’ (17th century): the return of something terrible after a time of reprieve.” The post, seemingly a subtle jab at Trump’s victory, sparked a flurry of responses from her followers, with some expressing anger at her implied criticism.

Expand full comment

So, Jack Smith has given Trump** another incentive to break, avoid, skirt, bend, or manipulate the 22nd Amendment?

Expand full comment

Heh, yeah, I thought of that but forgot to mention it. Thank you! Also oy.

Expand full comment

I thought you did:

"...when Trump leaves office in 2032 or whenever."

I think he'll be found guilty only posthumously.

Expand full comment

👍👍👍👍👍

Expand full comment

Any statute of limitations in play?

Expand full comment

I was gonna write about this! It’s so unprecedented but there’s a school of thought that immunity should freeze it. Another possible court battle…

Expand full comment

Tariffs exist for only two reasons: *low* tariffs to act as sales taxes for general revenue, or *high* tariffs to *PROTECT* an existing domestic supplier (agriculture or manufacture). They don't magically, instantly, *create* any new businesses to make up the lost supply

Expand full comment

Drumpf will find a way to kill this case forever.

Expand full comment

scotus

Expand full comment

So, how do we make our opinions known to the DNC and let them know we're watching them? Who do we call? What would be a good thing to say?

Expand full comment

Democrats.org

LIGHT 'EM UP!

Expand full comment

Thank you! I have my eyes open for exactly this… anyone know how to find your local DNC member…?

Expand full comment

DEMOCRATS.ORG

Expand full comment

Thanks, but do they actually list the DNC members there?

Expand full comment

Acerbic and on point! Nicely done

Expand full comment

Love TFN!

Expand full comment

Thank you!

Expand full comment

Pretty sure Jack is thinking, "Bring it on, mofo" - great point, btw. Cost cuts both ways.

Expand full comment

What's the first thing i do after reading this blog? Scroll up to see what the footnotes refer to, of course! Who's with me?

Expand full comment

I just now realized that the footnotes are linked. And pop up!

I usually read the email then go straight for the comments (via the heart).

I should read in the browser.

Expand full comment

Try reading the footnotes as you see them.

Expand full comment

Good morning!

Expand full comment

Better, at least.

Expand full comment