Did Trump just blink? It sure seems like he did. If he did, he quickly unblinked. All of which suggests that the administration is in disarray. I know, I know. The administration is always in disarray. But, as discussed below, the administration is losing or is in retreat on multiple fronts—driven by his historic unfavorability ratings, his incoherent ramblings in public appearances, his frequent unexplained absences from public view, his consistent losses in every court except the Supreme Court, the weakening economy, his stubborn use of illegal tariffs to punish American consumers, and his assault on US cities through ICE and CBP.
Trump is in trouble politically, and he knows it.
Of course, when Trump is losing, his standard response is to create new controversy, so we cannot let our guard down. But it could be otherwise. Trump could be winning, proceeding apace without resistance. But millions of Americans, grassroots organizations, state governors, legal advocacy groups, law firms, businesses, and immigrants are pushing back against Trump’s unlawful agenda. And that resistance is paying off.
Did Trump blink?
As reported by the NYTimes,
With the government shut down for a sixth day, President Trump briefly dangled the possibility of a negotiation with Democrats, only to pull back several hours later — insisting that Democrats must end the standoff first before he would be willing to make a deal on health care. Earlier, he had suggested that he was open to a deal on the extension of Affordable Care Act subsidies, the first indication that he was willing to negotiate.
The first rule of negotiations is that you can never withdraw the terms of a proposed compromise. They immediately become “the floor” for a final resolution. Trump’s public indication of a willingness to concede on the key issue for Democrats means that Democrats must hold out for victory on healthcare subsidies.
In another indication of weakness on the shutdown front, the White House “corrected” Trump’s claim that shutdown-related terminations have already begun. See Al Jazeera, White House reverses Trump claim firings have begun amid gov’t shutdown | Government News.
The White House’s effort to do damage control comes as polling shows that Trump is losing on the metric that matters to him most: public support. See The Hill, Trump, GOP face higher disapproval in shutdown.
Democrats held tough again on Monday as they voted against the Republican continuing resolution that would implement the cuts contained in the March 2025 continuing resolution. As before, all Democrats voted against the Republican resolution, except for Senators Fetterman and Cortez Masto. Independent Angus King, who caucuses with Democrats, also voted for the Republican continuing resolution. In short, Republicans are (currently) eight votes short of passing the continuing resolution in the face of the filibuster.
As I noted yesterday, the shutdown fight may last a while. We need to remain strong, but we should be feeling confident about our performance to date.
Trump floats the idea of pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell
Proving that he is completely out of touch and increasingly desperate, Trump floated the idea of pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell. He floated the idea in response to a question by CNN’s Caitlin Collins, who asked about the possibility of a pardon. The following exchange occurred:
Trump: I haven’t heard the name in so long. I’d have to take a look at it.
Caitlin Collins: But she’s convicted of child sex trafficking.
Trump: Yeah, I mean, I’m gonna have to take a look at it.
Got that? Trump is at least “considering” pardoning a convicted child sex trafficker—which means he is 100% going to issue her a pardon.
Trump must be petrified of the dirt that Ghislaine Maxwell can spill if he is willing to pardon her after running on a promise of releasing the Epstein files. Although Trump was circumspect in discussing the Epstein files when running for office, his campaign surrogates—like Kash Patel—said that Epstein’s “black book” should be released “on day one.”
The portion of Trump’s base that voted for him because of his promise to release the Epstein files is significant enough to have made a difference in the election. And now, they aren’t forgetting Trump’s promise, which is why Speaker Mike Johnson continues to hold the House in recess during a government shutdown.
In short, Trump believes that the blowback he will receive from pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell will be less damaging to him than allowing Maxwell to testify against him. Per PBS, 75% of all Americans support releasing the Epstein files, including 67% of Republicans!
Trump is terrified and will continue to require Republicans to defend highly unpopular positions to defend the secrets in the Epstein files.
After a string of losses, Trump attacks judges and threatens to invoke the Insurrection Act
The surest sign of a loser is to blame the umpires or referees. If you are Trump, you blame the judges. See Politico, Judges appointed by Trump keep ruling against him. He’s not happy about it. Trump’s henchman, Steven Miller, has gone so far as to claim that federal judges ruling against Trump are engaged in “insurrection” and are “genuinely disgusting.” See Stephen Miller Sparks Fury With Attack on Trump-Appointed Judge: ‘Genuinely Disgusting’.
No one ever accused Steven Miller of being charming or self-aware, but any idiot knows that attacking a federal judge who is actively hearing matters in which you (or your boss) is a defendant is a bad idea. After Judge Karin Immergut ruled that the Trump administration could not federalize the Oregon National Guard for deployment in Portland, the Trump administration had the brilliant idea to send federalized California National Guard troops to Portland.
Judge Immergut was not amused. In fact, she was flabbergasted that the Trump administration would attempt to circumvent her order by swapping California National Guard troops for Oregon National Guard troops. See OregonLive.com, Judge issues new broader order barring any National Guard from relocating to Oregon.
Per Oregon Live, Judge Immergut said the following to the DOJ attorney:
It is not appropriate to bring federalized military into Oregon at this time. I’m troubled by the direct contravention of my (prior) order.
You’re an officer of the court. Do you believe this is an appropriate way to deal with a judge’s order that you disagree with?
There is not a legal basis to bring federalized National Guard members into Oregon. You have to have a colorable claim that Oregon conditions require it, but you don’t, so why is this appropriate?
As noted previously, Judge Immergut was appointed by Trump in 2019.
Meanwhile, in Illinois, a federal judge declined to issue immediate emergency relief prohibiting the deployment of National Guard troops from Texas to Chicago. However, the judge also cautioned the administration against such deployment, stating that an order could be forthcoming after hearing.
Per NPR, U.S. District Judge April Perry allowed the Trump administration until 11:59 p.m. on Wednesday to respond to the lawsuit and set a date for oral arguments to take place, at 11 a.m. Thursday.
In apparent disregard of the Judge’s cautionary advice, the Trump administration is moving Texas National Guard troops into Chicago as we speak. Judge Perry will soon learn that, unless you specifically prohibit the Trump administration from taking an action under judicial review, it will nonetheless take the action.
Meanwhile, the ACLU and other advocacy organizations have filed suit in federal court to restrain ICE and CBP from using unlawful force—read “brutality”–against peaceful demonstrators. See ACLU Illinois, Protesters and Members of the Press Challenge First Amendment Violations by Federal Forces at ICE Facility in Broadview, Illinois.
Separately, Illinois and Chicago have filed suit challenging ICE’s aggressive treatment of protesters. See Talking Points Memo, Chicago Tells Of Escalating State Violence, Including A Killing, As It Challenges National Guard Occupation.
The evidence that the plaintiffs in the above two suits will present to the judges is dramatic and disturbing. We should expect immediate intervention by the federal courts. Whether court orders will stop the brutality remains to be seen, but the good news is that the state, city, and private organizations are pushing back against ICE’s tactics.
Other signs of resistance
The key to restraining Trump’s lawless agenda is an upwelling of resistance by individuals and institutions committed to defending the rule of law. We are seeing new examples every day. Here are a few:
A federal prosecutor in Virginia is resisting pressure to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James for baseless allegations of mortgage fraud. See MSNBC, Top prosecutor refusing to charge New York AG despite Trump pressure.
Per MSNBC,
Prosecutor Elizabeth Yusi of the Eastern District of Virginia has reportedly told colleagues she sees no probable cause to seek charges against James for mortgage fraud and plans to inform Lindsey Halligan, whom Trump recently named acting U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, of her conclusion in the coming weeks.
The sources told MSNBC they’re bracing for Yusi to be fired over the decision and noted that Halligan, who had no prosecutorial experience prior to her appointment, has been closely monitoring the case against James.
You will recall that no prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia would take on the assignment of seeking an indictment against James Comey, so acting US Attorney Lindsey Halligan presented the case to the grand jury. It appears that Halligan may need to present evidence to the grand jury regarding Letitia James’ alleged mortgage fraud. When this sad chapter in our history is closed, the high likelihood is that the relevant state bar associations will disbar Lindsey Halligan.
Speaking of bar associations, kudos to the New York City Bar Association for taking a stand against Trump’s extrajudicial killings of people on Venezuelan boats in international waters. The NYC Bar Association issued a detailed analysis of the illegal actions against vessels in international waters, here: Unlawful Attacks on Venezuelan Vessels | New York City Bar Association.
The statement is significant for two reasons. First, it is a detailed discussion of the facts and law at issue. As such, it is a valuable source for anyone interested in defending the rule of law, but especially news organizations that seem more interested in publishing videos of exploding boats than discussing Trump’s unlawful actions. The statement by the NYC Bar Association refocuses the story on the illegal nature of Trump’s actions—which is where the focus belongs!
Second, we need more bar associations, law firms, and lawyers to speak out against Trump’s lawlessness. Trump is an expert at dividing and conquering weak members of professions, industries, and organizations. The NYC Bar Association is leading by example, upholding the best traditions of the legal profession! Thank you, NYC Bar Association!
Speaking of Trump dividing and conquering weak members of professions, the law firm of Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft was one of Wall Street’s oldest and most powerful law firms. It capitulated to Trump’s demands to abandon its commitment to diversity in hiring and retention of lawyers. The firm also promised to provide $100 million in free legal services to causes specified by Trump.
Ever since it made a deal with the . . ., er Trump, Cadwalader has been losing lawyers. On Monday, a legal outlet reported that a group of 37 finance lawyers is departing Cadwalader for the firm Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe. The departing group represents roughly 10% of Cadwalader’s lawyers! See Above the Law, Cadwalader’s Mass Exodus Continues: Nearly 40 Lawyers Jump To Top 50 Biglaw Firm In Practice Group Raid.
Notably, the Orrick law firm did not capitulate to Trump, and Orrick has a long-standing tradition of promoting diversity in hiring and retaining attorneys. Just sayin’ . . . . .
Opportunity for Reader Engagement
In case you missed it, I joined US Representative Mike Levin (D-CA) and Katherine Pichardo, Executive Director of Latino Victory, to discuss California’s Proposition 50 and the unique role that Latino voters will play in upcoming elections. See Latino Victory, The Fight for Prop 50: Robert Hubbell & Rep. Mike Levin.
If you want to help pass Proposition 50, Latino Victory is offering the following opportunities. (Please note the urgent need for Spanish-speaking volunteers for phone banks!)
· Volunteer & Phonebank (Spanish shifts): Sí a la Prop. 50 — bancos telefónicos en español
· Volunteer & Phonebank (non-Latino audience): Mobilize — Yes on Prop. 50 CA Dems
· Spread the word with the Social Media Toolkit: Yes on 50 — Stop Election Rigging Toolkit
PostCardsToVoters
CAN YOU HELP? These two elections will be VERY CLOSE!! Even writing 5 postcards helps. Every postcard could be a vote!
PostcardsToVoters.org volunteers are writing to Pennsylvania Democrats to ask them to vote YES to retain three Democrats on the PA Supreme Court to keep the majority. The Republicans are trying to confuse voters so they can win a NO vote and take the majority to gain the power to gerrymander for 2 or 3 more US House seats for Trump for 2026 or 2028. We can’t let that happen! PTV volunteers are also writing to NJ Democrats asking them to get out to vote for Mikie Sherrill for NJ Governor. We must keep our NJ Trifecta! Her opponent is terrible.
Both elections are crucially important. Return writers can use Web Abby which is really easy to use to get addresses and script. New volunteers can get started by sending an email to join@tonythedemocrat.org. Postcards work!
Concluding Thoughts
Trump is so frustrated over losing in court that he mused about invoking the Insurrection Act in response to a reporter’s question. (“I’d do it if it was necessary. So far, it hasn’t been necessary.”)
To state the obvious, there is no basis for invoking the Insurrection Act. But, to allay fears, invoking the Insurrection Act is not “declaring martial law.” The purpose of invoking the Insurrection Act is to re-establish the regular operations of the courts and civilian authorities. (The Economic Times: “Civilian institutions are not dissolved, and the military is only there to support, not supplant, local government.”)
But to state the even more obvious, invoking the Insurrection Act would be like pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell—an idiotic move that would serve only to make Trump and the Republican Party more unpopular than they already are.
As I noted several days ago, there is no such thing as a “red” or “blue” state. Every state has substantial numbers of Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Libertarians, etc. Invoking the Insurrection Act would anger everyone across the political spectrum.
So, if you see a wave of doomsaying prompted by Trump’s offhand comment to a reporter about the Insurrection Act, rather than shrinking away in fear or anxiety, we should be thinking, “Go ahead! Make my day!” We are not potted plants, we are not sheep. We have agency and are the source of all governmental power. If Trump chooses to abuse that power by treating the American people like subjects and vassals, he will find out how quickly the people can withdraw their consent. Peacefully, of course, but with breathtaking speed.
Stay strong, everyone. Together, there is nothing we cannot do!
Protest Photos
Below, Eugene, Oregon:
Below: Ashville Bridge Brigade:
Below, Washington Heights, Inwood Indivisible
Below, Coolidge Bridge, Northampton, MA on Thursday 10/2025
Lots of waves, honks, and smiles, smiles, smiles.
And, some angry Trumpists. We blow them kisses.
Below, Solo protest Sunday mornings in Tenny’s district
Daily Dose of Perspective
Two clusters of gravitationally bound stars sparkle in the night sky.
From Today’s Edition Newsletter via this RSS feed