The news cycle on Wednesday was dominated by the Wall Street Journal’s reporting that AG Pam Bondi told Trump in May that his name appeared repeatedly in the “Epstein files.” See WSJ, Justice Department Told Trump in May That His Name Is Among Many in the Epstein Files. (Accessible to all.)
Just last week, Trump falsely denied learning from Bondi that he was mentioned in the Epstein files—yet another lie by a sitting president regarding his potential involvement in a decades-long child sex trafficking operation run by Jeffrey Epstein.
This pattern—Trump lying about the scandal, being caught in the lie, Trump lying about the scandal—will become a regular feature of the Trump presidency for the indefinite future, especially during the hastily called congressional recess. Call it the GOP’s ‘Summer of Discontent.”
See generally, Heather Cox Richardson on YouTube, The Epstein Files Are Not Going Away | Explainer.
But for the fact that Trump lies to the American people with great frequency, the latest lie would be the leading story in every media outlet in America. More importantly, the fact that a sitting president is lying to the American people should be a presidency-ending scandal. But the media accepts that Trump lies incessantly and gives him a pass. His habitual lying is the background to a story, not the story itself.
Tomorrow, the White House press corps will ask Trump more questions and print his answers while omitting the qualifying phrase, “The president, an inveterate liar who can’t be trusted, said [XYZ].”
While there is more to discuss regarding the Epstein revelations, I will first address other important stories related to Trump’s lawlessness and the Supreme Court’s complicity in his efforts to undermine the Constitution. The Epstein scandal and the quest for justice for his victims are important. We cannot allow the scandal to permanently displace other important stories.
I close this newsletter by addressing polling and punditry claiming that Democrats are historically unpopular—a statement that is both true and misleading. Stick around for “Concluding Thoughts.”
GAO rules that Trump is illegally impounding funds appropriated by Congress
I will continue to beat this drum until someone in the mainstream press notices: Trump is violating the Constitution on a daily basis by illegally withholding (impounding) funds appropriated by Congress. Several federal judges have so held. Now, for the third time, the Government Accounting Office has ruled that Trump is illegally impounding funds appropriated by Congress. See K-12 Dive, Trump’s withholding of Head Start funds violated the law, watchdog says.
Per K-12 Dive,
The Trump administration violated the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 by withholding funds meant for early childhood education Head Start programs, according to a decision issued Wednesday by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, an independent federal watchdog organization.
The GAO report is here: Application of Impoundment Control Act to Availability of Head Start Program Funds | U.S. GAO.
Impounding funds flouts Congress’s authority under the Constitution to appropriate funds and violates a post-Watergate reform law, the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, specifically designed to prohibit impoundment. Illegally impounding funds is an impeachable act and was part of the underlying conduct that led to Trump’s first impeachment.
Per the Articles of Impeachment in 2019, Trump committed an impeachable offense, in part, by suspending “the release of $391 million of United States taxpayer funds that Congress had appropriated on a bipartisan basis for the purpose of providing vital military and security assistance to Ukraine to oppose Russian aggression . . . .” See Articles of Impeachment 2019 at Art I, para. 2 (A).
Sadly, Trump’s current impoundment of funds is not limited to Head Start but is a government-wide phenomenon. The DOGE website brags that it “cut” $190 billion in funds previously appropriated by Congress and disbursed by the executive branch. Department of Government Efficiency
The failure of Congress or the media to object to Trump’s repeated violation of the Constitution has resulted in a situation where Trump has unilaterally rewritten its provisions.
Previously, the Constitution provided that Congress appropriates funds via legislation and the president “faithfully executes” the legislation by disbursing the funds as directed. Now Congress appropriates funds, and Trump does whatever the hell he wants with the money, and no one cares.
Sigh. I miss the good old days when violating the Constitution could get a president impeached. Now, it doesn’t even rise to the level of background noise.
#TeslaTakedown reduces Tesla sales, revenue, and profits.
For all of you hardy souls who are diligently engaging in #TeslaTakedown protests, your work is paying off. See CBS News, Tesla profit slumped in second quarter, a sign Musk is hurting the brand.
Per CBS News,
Tesla revenue dropped 12%, and profits slumped 16% in the three months through June as buyers continued to steer clear, and in some cases, turn to more affordable competitors’ offerings.
To be clear, a 12% drop in revenue on a quarter-to-quarter comparison over the prior year is disastrous.
Many in the financial press have previously attempted to deny the link between the protests and Tesla’s slumping profitability. No more. CBS News quoted financial analyst Dipanjan Chatterjee of Forrester Research as follows:
“The perception of Elon Musk, its chief executive, has rubbed the sheen right out of what once was a darling and soaring automotive brand. [Tesla] is a toxic brand that is inseparable from its leader.”
Supreme Court eliminates congressional protections for Consumer Product Safety Commission
The Supreme Court continues its unabashed support for Trump’s unlawful dismantling of independent agencies and commissions. To provide independent government oversight of key business sectors, Congress has created several agencies whose governing board members are protected from removal by the president (except for cause). Under precedent that is nearly a century old, the Supreme Court has upheld those congressional protections for board members of independent agencies.
Until now.
Trump has removed board members in violation of congressional statutory protections. Several weeks ago, the Supreme Court issued a “shadow docket” order that lifted a district court stay that prohibited Trump’s removal of Democratic members of the National Labor Relations Board (the precise type of political interference Congress sought to prevent).
That shadow docket order on an emergency application effectively overruled the (nearly) century-old precedent in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935) (Upholding Congress’s authority to enact laws limiting the ability of the President of the United States to fire the executive officials of an independent agency.)
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued another shadow docket order that cited the previous shadow docket order as precedent for allowing Trump to remove the commissioners of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. See Trump v. Mary Boyle.
In short, the US Supreme Court is overruling century-old precedent on its shadow docket in response to emergency applications that, of necessity, do not provide the Supreme Court with a full record for consideration.
Justice Kagan’s dissent explains the lawless nature of the Supreme Court’s citation of a previous shadow docket order to support the conclusion in a new shadow docket order:
The majority rejects Congress’s design of a whole class of agencies . . . by layering nothing on nothing.
Justice Kagan went on to explain that the Court is using the shadow docket to permit Trump to engage in the wholesale dismantling of congressionally created agencies in violation of the Constitution:
The result—an increase of executive power at the expense of legislative authority—does not stand alone. Just last week, this Court granted another stay allowing the President to ignore a federal statute. That decision permitted the President to push forward in dismantling the Department of Education, even though Congress created that agency and tasked it with performing vital functions.
The continued use of shadow docket emergency orders to allow a significant restructuring of the Constitution is an unlawful and bad-faith exercise of judicial authority. The members of the reactionary majority each lied to the Senate about “respecting settled precedent” and being “neutral arbiter” who “call balls and strikes.” They are, instead, helping Trump implement a reactionary re-interpretation of the Constitution that would horrify the Framers of the Constitution.
Reforming the Court by radically expanding the number of justices and limiting its jurisdiction must be a top priority of the next Democratic president. We missed our previous opportunity to do so in 2021. We must not miss our next opportunity.
Columbia settles antisemitism and DEI claims for $200 million
Columbia has ceded control of portions of its administration, hiring, and curriculum to the Trump administration in order to restart the flow of federal grant money to the university. Columbia and the major media will tell you that the university did not give up control over faculty, curriculum, hiring, etc. Read the settlement agreement for yourself to decide if that is true, beginning at para. 12 and following. See Columbia University Resolution Agreement.pdf.
For example, Columbia must provide a federal oversight monitor with information about student applicantions for admission, including information regarding
rejected and admitted students broken down by race, color, grade point average, and performance on standardized tests, in a form permitting appropriate statistical analyses . . . . Admissions data will also be subjected to a comprehensive audit by the [federal monitor].
There is no innocent purpose for a federal monitor to “audit” Columbia’s admissions decisions. Federal laws are already in place to address unlawful discrimination in admission. The federal government is now serving as the Admissions Committee for Columbia University. If the monitor doesn’t believe that Columbia is admitting enough Young Republicans, Trump will yank Columbia’s leash once again and bring it to heel.
The reward for capitulation is humiliation.
Epstein scandal developments
Remember, the Epstein scandal is about a decades-long sex trafficking operation in which rich and powerful men commercialized the rape of girls. Disclosure of the Epstein files will help convict the perpetrators and deliver a small measure of overdue justice to the victims.
On Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump was told in May that his name was included in the Epstein files. See WSJ, Justice Department Told Trump in May That His Name Is Among Many in the Epstein Files. (Accessible to all.) When asked in July if AG Pam Bondi told him that his name was in the files, Trump lied and said, “No, no.” See Newsweek, Donald Trump Responds When Asked If He Was Told His Name Was in Epstein Files.
In addition, the WSJ reported that FBI Director Kash Patel told others that Trump’s name was included in the Epstein files.
After Trump learned that his name was in the Epstein files, Pam Bondi and Kash Patel announced that the Epstein investigation was closed, that there was no “client list,” and that the files did not provide a basis for prosecuting anyone. (“We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.”) The patently false memo is here: FBI Memo | July 2025.
The revelations contradicting the cover-up by Trump, Bondi, and Patel will continue to leak over Congress’s summer recess, resulting in incremental damage to Trump and Republicans, in general.
For example, on Wednesday evening, Lawrence O’Donnell interviewed attorney Bradley Edwards, who represents hundreds of Epstein’s victims. The remarkable interview is here: Lawrence O’Donnell, The Last Word, Congress can subpoena Epstein birthday book from Epstein estate, Epstein victims’ lawyer says.
In the interview, Bradley Edwards reveals that Epstein’s victims helped to assemble the “birthday book” that contains the “birthday card” sent by Trump to Epstein. Edwards also explained in detail how Congress or other interested parties could easily subpoena the Epstein “birthday book,” which could easily prove (or disprove) Trump’s claim that his alleged birthday card to Epstein “does not exist.”
It’s only going to get worse for Trump and his defenders. It will be a long, hot summer.
Concluding Thoughts.
Several days ago, I commented on reporting (and polling) suggesting that the Democratic Party is suffering from historically low favorability ratings. I noted that part of the unfavorability rating stems from Democrats being upset that their leaders are not being aggressive enough in resisting Trump.
On Wednesday, Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo addressed the same point in his editor’s blog. See Talking Points Memo, How Is It Going for the Democrats?
Josh Marshall writes,
[T] he low public standing of the Democratic Party itself . . . is very real. As I’ve argued before, when you look closely at those numbers, their main driver is Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents who don’t think incumbent Democrats have the will for or interest in fighting.
So, this number has always looked different to me than it does to some others. How people see incumbent Democrats isn’t the most important thing to me. It’s how many voters want some version of the government built on the things Democrats say they support.
Most of the current unpopularity is based on people who don’t think the current officials can do their job effectively.
In other words, some of the unpopularity of the Democratic Party stems from Democrats themselves, who want more of the Democratic agenda and resistance to Trump, not less, from incumbents who are failing to demonstrate the fighting spirit that animates the party’s grassroots base.
Of course, the analysis is not that simple. There are many factors at play. But every Democrat I know is unhappy with their congressional leaders, who seem to “go along to get along” rather than fighting tooth and nail to oppose every nomination, bill, and resolution sponsored by Republicans. That frustration doesn’t mean that Democratic grassroots members will vote for Republicans in 2026. Far from it!
So, as we rightly take confidence from the GOP’s disastrous polling on issues, we must also be cognizant that the Democratic “brand” is suffering. The question of “why” is something that we should take seriously, but not panic over. What we see in town halls, rallies, and special elections is real—and generally favorable for Democrats. That doesn’t mean we can relent. To the contrary, we must take nothing for granted. The stakes are too important.
I think most Democrats intuit the above and are neither over-confident nor under-confident, even as we bemoan the gobsmacking news that greets us each day.
Stay strong, everyone! We will make it through this together!
Talk to you tomorrow!
Daily Dose of Perspective
Below is a portion of the North America Nebula, located approximately 1,600 light years from Earth. This image reminds me of Milton’s lines from Paradise Lost,
Darkness profound Cover’d th’ Abyss:
but on the watrie calme
His brooding wings the Spirit of God outspred . . .
From Today’s Edition Newsletter via this RSS feed