Judge Merchan’s sentencing of Donald Trump to an unconditional discharge is criticized as a mockery of the jury’s guilty verdict on 34 counts. The lack of meaningful penalty is deemed unacceptable, especially considering the severity of the crimes. The author expresses outrage at the delayed criticisms from figures like Bill Barr and John Bolton, questioning their motivations and highlighting the potential consequences of inaction. Ultimately, responsibility for this outcome is placed on voters, Attorney General Garland, the Democratic party, and judges who seemingly applied a lenient standard to Trump.
Read More
A multi-agency investigation in Bogalusa, Louisiana, uncovered a drug trafficking operation distributing opioids, marijuana, and other substances, utilizing social media for sales and firearm purchases. The operation led to seven arrests, including that of 25-year-old Mayor Tyrin Truong, who faces charges related to drug proceeds, vehicle theft, and solicitation. Other individuals face drug distribution and conspiracy charges. The investigation is ongoing, with further details to be released.
Read More
Federal prosecutors allege the discovery of additional criminal conduct by New York Mayor Eric Adams, expanding upon the initial September indictment of five criminal counts including bribery and conspiracy. The prosecutors’ assertion, made in response to Adams’ request for more details on the charges, cites an ongoing investigation uncovering further involvement by additional individuals. Adams and his attorney, Alex Spiro, vehemently deny any wrongdoing, with Spiro criticizing the prosecution’s actions as a headline grab. The government’s refusal to provide more specifics is justified by concerns of witness tampering.
Read More
A study reveals a troubling correlation between political donations to the Republican Party and the likelihood of US firms receiving tariff exemptions, suggesting that the process is politically influenced. This exemption approval, which can provide years of financial benefits to companies, appears to favor those who support the Republican Party over those supporting Democrats. Researchers express concern that this politicization undermines the intended impartiality of the tariff exemption process. The reappointment of key personnel within the US trade representative’s office further suggests that this pattern may continue.
Read More
The United States, despite its democratic ideals, functions as a plutocratic oligarchy, a reality exemplified by President Trump’s administration composed of numerous billionaires. This isn’t a new phenomenon; wealthy elites have historically wielded significant political influence, from the nation’s founding to the Gilded Age robber barons. Trump’s second term promises intensified deregulation and cuts to social programs, furthering this oligarchic control. The creation of the “Department of Government Efficiency,” led by Elon Musk, exemplifies this trend, aiming to drastically reduce government spending and regulation. This mirrors past efforts like the Reagan-era Grace Commission, ultimately serving to consolidate power in the hands of the wealthy.
Read More
America’s first Gilded Age (late 1800s) was marked by monopolies, political corruption fueled by wealthy elites, immense inequality, and anti-immigrant sentiment, mirroring current issues. Progressive reforms, including antitrust legislation, income and wealth taxes, and campaign finance restrictions, ultimately curbed these abuses. However, these reforms eroded over time, leading to a second Gilded Age characterized by similar problems. History shows that public pressure and political action can overcome such challenges, as demonstrated by the successes of the early 20th century.
Read More
The House Ethics Committee closed investigations into four representatives—three Republicans and one Democrat—for alleged campaign finance violations. While acknowledging evidence of non-compliance with personal use of campaign funds, the committee found insufficient proof of intentional misuse. The committee cited ambiguous FEC rules and issued updated guidance, prompting criticism that it effectively legalized personal use of campaign funds and disregarded evidence of wrongdoing. This decision, described as a “New Year’s Eve Ethics Massacre,” has been condemned by ethics experts as a failure to hold members of Congress accountable. The committee’s actions have raised concerns about the independence and effectiveness of the congressional ethics process.
Read More
Another Florida state representative has switched from the Democratic to the Republican party, marking the second such instance this year. This action has sparked considerable outrage and accusations of voter fraud, with many questioning the legitimacy of the election process. The argument centers on the idea that voters cast their ballots based on the candidate’s declared party affiliation, only to have that affiliation change after the election, effectively deceiving the electorate.
The widespread anger is palpable, particularly amongst those who feel betrayed by the representative’s actions. The sentiment is that this constitutes a form of political dishonesty, a betrayal of the trust placed in the representative by their constituents.… Continue reading
Donald Trump’s inaugural committee is projected to surpass previous fundraising records, potentially exceeding $150 million. This fundraising includes significant contributions from corporations that previously condemned the January 6th insurrection. These donations appear transactional, with Trump reportedly inquiring about specific corporate contributions and implying repercussions for non-donors. The committee, organized as a non-profit, offers various perks to high-dollar donors, including exclusive events and access to Trump and his administration. While donors remain undisclosed for some time, the influx of corporate money signals a strategic effort to secure favor with the incoming administration.
Read More
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed a complaint alleging that Senator Kyrsten Sinema misused over $200,000 in campaign funds for personal international travel after announcing her resignation. The complaint argues these expenditures, including trips to France, Japan, and the U.K., violate campaign finance laws prohibiting the use of campaign funds for personal benefit, lacking clear connection to official duties. CREW contends this spending warrants investigation by the Department of Justice, despite the Federal Election Commission’s often slow response to such complaints. This is not the first time Sinema’s spending has faced scrutiny.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood