The Trump administration staggered through another day of body blows, mostly of its own making. That’s good news for those looking forward to the day when we can begin rebuilding our democracy from the ground up. We can’t count on Trump and MAGA extremists to defeat themselves, but we should leverage their missteps to the maximum extent possible. And the grassroots resistance is doing so every day. Bless everyone for your constancy and determination! You have helped preserve democracy and brought us safely to this moment — so we can continue the fight!
For the first time in more than a year, it seems prudent to caution Democrats against complacency. The grassroots resistance has seized the momentum and captured public sentiment. Trump’s favorability ratings are in a downward spiral. The lesson we should take from our success is not that we can relent. To the contrary, we must double down on our efforts, recommit “our lives and sacred honor” to the battle for democracy, and steel ourselves for bigger fights to come.
And this part is important: While it is appropriate to acknowledge and celebrate our success, we must be prepared for the possibility that things may get worse before they get better. If things get worse, we must not surrender to disappointment or doomsaying. We must maintain perspective, and above all else, we must not quit. We have arrived at this moment with our democracy intact because we persisted during dark days when it seemed as though Trump’s lawlessness could not be stopped.
We now know that Trump and MAGA extremists can be stopped by massive popular protests in which the people withdraw “the consent of the governed” from an illegitimate government.
We also know that Trump and MAGA can be beaten so decisively that they cannot raise claims of voter fraud. The margins of victory on November 4 were so large that Republican resistance to the release of the Epstein files evaporated in 48 hours. The defeat was so stinging that Trump began promoting the Democratic proposal for subsidizing healthcare premiums for tens of millions of Americans.
We know the path forward. We also know how hard we must work to replicate and extend our success. So, as we review today’s dumpster fires in the Oval Office and beyond, it should be with a sense of accomplishment tempered by steely-eyed realism about the challenges that lie ahead. We will meet the moment, so long as we do not relent or surrender to complacency.
The latest poll shows a continued decline in Trump’s favorability rating.
The latest poll regarding Trump’s favorability ratings was his worst ever—and the worst ever for any modern president at this point in their presidency.
The above statement applies to nearly every poll taken during Trump’s second term.
Individual polls are meaningless. Trends among polls are important. Even then, trends are not votes. They inform, not predict.
We should view the latest poll as validation of our efforts and beliefs, nothing more. It guarantees nothing. But it could be otherwise! Trump’s anti-democratic, anti-immigrant, and anti-science agenda could be lifting Trump’s popularity. Instead, Trump is historically unpopular. Let’s accept that fact for what it is, and get back to work!
The poll is here: Gallup, Trump’s Approval Rating Drops to 36%, New Second-Term Low.
While the news in the poll is universally bad for Trump, the following sentence captures just how bad it is:
Republicans’ rating is the lowest of Trump’s second term, while independents’ is the worst in either term.
In short, Trump is losing support among Republicans and has sunk to historic lows among independents. How bad is it? It is so bad that I need to resort to an analogy to general relativity. Einstein predicted a phenomenon known as “frame dragging,” in which the gravitational pull of a rotating object is so strong that it “twists” nearby spacetime, dragging it alongside the massive object as it rotates.
Trump’s unfavorability is so strong that it is “frame-dragging” GOP “safe” seats into the black hole of Trump’s unpopularity.
Federal Appeals Court upholds ruling that Alina Habba was not legally appointed as US Attorney for New Jersey
The US Attorney for the District of New Jersey is one of the most important appointments in the nation because of its proximity to New York and the capital markets. Trump nominated Alina Habba, his former personal attorney, but her nomination stalled in the Senate.
Trump then appointed her as an interim US Attorney. That appointment was subject to a 210-day time limit. When that period expired, Pam Bondi appointed Habba as a “special attorney” with the power to act as the US Attorney for New Jersey and also appointed Habba as her own First Assistant US Attorney.
A defendant indicted by Habba challenged the legality of her temporary appointment. As with Lindsey Halligan, a federal judge ruled that her appointment was illegal. See CNN Politics, Former Trump personal lawyer Alina Habba is unlawfully serving as the US attorney for New Jersey, appeals court says.
The arguments regarding the legality of Habba’s appointment are complex but raise the question of whether the president can circumvent the Senate’s “advise and consent” role. For sound reasons, the federal judge hearing the objection ruled that the appointment was an unlawful attempt to install a US Attorney in violation of the Appointments Clause and its statutory exceptions.
In general, the Constitution requires that the president nominate and that the Senate confirm “officers” of the United States—a classification that includes the office of US Attorney. Under certain limited circumstances and for limited periods, the president can appoint a person to fill a vacancy in an office otherwise subject to Senate confirmation. The statute that governs that process is the Federal Vacancies Reform Act (FVRA).
The qualifications for an appointment to a vacancy under the FVRA are exacting. Habba did not meet those qualifications, so Pam Bondi attempted to circumvent them by appointing Habba as a “special attorney” with the power to act as the US Attorney for New Jersey.
The district court disqualified Habba, and the Third Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling. The procedural holding is complicated (set forth in the footnote below),1 but suffice to say that Trump and Bondi were trying to circumvent the Constitution and the FVRA. Accordingly, the Third Circuit panel affirmed the disqualification of Alina Habba.
For a detailed analysis of the Third Circuit’s opinion, I recommend Joyce Vance’s Substack, Civil Discourse, The Third Circuit Says “No” To Alina Habba as Interim U.S. Attorney for New Jersey.
The federal courts continue to serve as a bulwark in defending the Constitution and the rule of law. The major exception is the Supreme Court, which has transformed itself into an extension of the White House press office. Nonetheless, the disqualification of Habba (as with Lindsey Halligan two weeks ago) is a major setback for the administration’s attempt to run roughshod over the Constitution.
The administration struggles to explain why the “second strike” on survivors was not a war crime or murder
The administration is in full panic mode over allegations that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and others committed war crimes or murder in carrying out a second attack on survivors of an attack on a Venezuelan “drug boat.”
In a matter of hours on Monday, the administration took the following positions:
Hegseth called the WaPo report “fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory.”
Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt then admitted that Admiral Frank “Mitch” Bradley ordered a second strike “under authority granted him by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.”
Hegseth then threw Admiral Bradley under the bus by posting a statement on Twitter that said Hegseth supports Bradley “100%,” including “the combat decisions he has made . . . .”
If you are keeping score, the White House is setting up Hegseth to be the fall guy, while Hegseth is setting up Admiral Bradley to be the fall guy.
Admiral Bradley is heading to Capitol Hill to meet with Senators to provide a briefing on the “second strike.” If Bradley knows what is in his interest, he will resign, lawyer up, and refuse to answer any questions. Any statements he makes will be used against him in his court-martial for murder or war crimes.
According to The Hill, Admiral Bradley said he viewed the survivors as “legitimate targets” because “they could possibly call other traffickers to come get them and their cargo.”
Uh, say what? Bradley thinks that survivors of a shipwreck are “targets” because they might call for someone to rescue them. Really? As I said, Bradley should lawyer up.
Hegseth is also in deep trouble. He apparently gave the order to “kill everyone,” which is not a lawful command under the Pentagon’s policies. The Wall Street Journal published an editorial stating that “the Pentagon’s own law of war manual prohibits ‘hostilities on the basis that there shall be no survivors.” See WSJ, Shooting the Wounded on Drug Boats?
The unlawful targeting of non-combatant civilians is leading to confusion and fear of liability in the military. See The Hill, Pete Hegseth boat strike reports spurs concern over illegal military orders.
As noted in The Hill, a free legal advice service for military personnel has seen a dramatic increase in calls since September, when the boat strikes began. At least two members of the military who believed they could be involved in the strikes have called the service. One soldier who was asked for his opinion about an upcoming strike (but who did not have “veto” power) said he received pressure from others to agree that the strikes were legal:
[A] staff officer — someone meant to apply their niche expertise to a drafted plan . . . was asked to apply their knowledge to a document that designated the individuals being targeted as the enemy, thus allowing the U.S. to attack under the rules of war.
“This person applied their expertise and said, ‘No, this doesn’t meet the standards of my expertise.’ And this person called [for legal advice] because they said, ‘I felt a lot of pressure after I made that decision.”
While the individual’s action did not constitute a veto on the strikes, they said they were pressured by very senior political appointees to show that there was a unanimous agreement among military officers that the strikes are legally compliant.
If the reporting in The Hill is accurate, there appears to be a systemic breakdown among senior commanders who are bending to political pressure—and applying political pressure to subordinates to violate the UCMJ and the law of war. Trump and Hegseth have poisoned the leadership in the Special Operations Command.
Actions like those of Senators Kelly and Slotkin and Reps. Crow, Houlahan, Deluzio, and Goodlander are necessary to remind senior military leaders of the law and of their duty to follow it. We need more members of Congress speaking up, urging members of the military to follow the law.
Concluding Thoughts
The Trump administration is now facing two full-scale, long-term scandals: the cover-up of the Epstein pedophile ring and the war crimes ordered by the Secretary of Defense. Both are tragedies on many levels. Political considerations should be secondary, but using the scandals to break the GOP’s gerrymandered grip on Congress is necessary.
The scandals provide an advantage, and we must use them. Republicans would. Of course, even as we leverage the political fallout from the scandals, we must not forget that Americans are motivated by the economy first and foremost. When we interact with persuadable voters, including during protests, we must not forget to speak to their pain and anxieties by highlighting how Democrats have and will focus on helping Americans to live safer, healthier, and happier lives.
Talk to you tomorrow!
Pro-democracy protest photos
Manchester, VT.
Every Saturday starting in March.
Oakland, CA
Skyline High School in Oakland has had two recent gun-related tragedies, including the murder of a beloved former coach who was featured in an episode of Last Chance U.
The students have organized school walkouts, school board meeting attendance, and other actions to say enough.
Our Monday morning overpass action was expanded into a community event, with folks holding supportive signs along the drive to school. Many people showed up, including four UC Berkeley students, one of whom wrote and read a powerful poem he had written about gun violence. The future belongs to our youth, and I am happy that so many people came out to support that message.
Daily Dose of Perspective
Dumbbell Nebula, 1,200 light-years from Earth.
“Habba is not the Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey by virtue of her appointment as First Assistant U.S. Attorney because only the first assistant in place at the time the vacancy arises automatically assumes the functions and duties of the office under the FVRA. Additionally, because Habba was nominated for the vacant U.S. Attorney position, the FVRA’s nomination bar prevents her from assuming the role of Acting U.S. Attorney. Finally, the Attorney General’s delegation of all the powers of a U.S. Attorney to Habba is prohibited by the FVRA’s exclusivity provision. Therefore, we will affirm the District Court’s disqualification order.”
From Today’s Edition Newsletter via this RSS feed