Bill Clinton's Epstein hearing proves 1 thing—Trump must testify too

Former President Bill Clinton, shown in 2024.

Even with DOJ redactions, Trump has so much more to answer for

 

by Lisa Needham

Daily Kos Staff

Friday, February 27, 2026 at 6:05:17p MST

REPUBLISHED BY:

Blue Country Gazette Blog

Rim Country Gazette Blog 

On Friday, it was former President Bill Clinton’s turn to be hauled in front of the House Committee to Protect Donald Tru— oh, sorry, it’s the House Oversight Committee.

You can see why one would get confused. After all, how is it that someone who left the White House 25 years ago, a man with less recent and less damning appearances in the Jeffrey Epstein files than the sitting president, has been called before the committee while President Donald Trump has not?

Clinton’s opening statement didn’t pull any punches, calling the committee out for dragging his wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, during the previous day’s hearing. 

“She had nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein. Nothing. She has no memory of even meeting him. She neither traveled with him nor visited any of his properties,” the former president said. “Whether you subpoenaed 10 people or 10,000, including her was simply not right.”

---

Related | Hillary Clinton keeps her cool during bogus Epstein hearing

---

Clinton’s opening statement also said he saw nothing, and did nothing wrong, and that “as someone who grew up in a home with domestic abuse, not only would I not have flown on his plane if I had any inkling of what he was doing—I would have turned him in myself and led the call for justice for his crimes, not sweetheart deals.”

The former president also got in a couple of bangers, including, “Since I am under oath, I will not falsely state that I am looking forward to your questions.” 

And this: “With that, Mr. Chairman, fire away.”

About that Mr. Chairman ...

James Comer chairs the House Oversight Committee.

Republican Rep. James Comer of Kentucky, who apparently assumes everyone is as brick-thick stupid and partisan as he is, continues to try to make us believe that threatening the Clintons with jail time to force them to appear while avoiding even mentioning Trump’s connections to the Epstein files is the real work of justice here. 

He called Friday a historic day and said he was bringing “some of the most powerful people in the world” to testify and that “there are a lot of photos.”

Does he mean a photo like the one the Department of Justice altered to make it look like Clinton, Diana Ross, and Michael Jackson were photographed with Epstein victims, but the people blacked out were actually Ross’ and Jackson’s kids?

Here’s a fun fact about all the photos of Bill Clinton in the Epstein files: They have no dates, no locations, and no context. In contrast, the Department of Justice continues to protect Trump by withholding and removing files that may implicate him, such as files related to a woman who accused Trump of sexually abusing her when she was underage.

It’s almost like the Trump administration, the DOJ, Comer, and everyone else involved in this charade don’t want to acknowledge that Bill Clinton seemingly stopped spending time with Epstein before 2006, when he was indicted for solicitation of prostitution. This is corroborated by flight logs, documents, and correspondence in the Epstein files—but why let a little truth get in the way?

One of the reasons demanding Bill Clinton, but not Donald Trump, sit for sworn testimony is that everybody knows that if there were anything damning about Clinton in the Epstein files, the DOJ would have released it ages ago. 

House members from both parties made mid-hearing statements, and you will not be surprised to learn that Comer’s statement was another opportunity to try to clear Trump. 

He told the press that Clinton said he had never seen evidence that led him to believe Trump was criminally involved with Epstein. 

Rep. Robert Garcia speaks outside the Chappaqua Performing Arts Center where former President Bill Clinton was testifying before House lawmakers as part of a congressional investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein on Feb. 27 in Chappaqua, New York. 

Rep. Robert Garcia of California, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, said this mischaracterized Clinton’s statements about Trump and Comer’s explanation was “not a complete, accurate description” of the testimony. 

James Comer? Lying? To smear a Democrat and protect Trump? Impossible!

Whatever Clinton did say, Democratic Rep. Maxwell Frost of Florida said that Democrats now have “new questions” about Trump’s ties to Epstein. 

Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna of California also pointedly reminded the GOP that by dragging the Clintons in, they seem to have established there isn’t a special “no presidents” rule. 

“Now we have the Clinton rule, which is the presidents and their families have to testify when Congress issues a subpoena,” Khanna said.

Somehow, Comer and the other GOP House geniuses managed to question Bill Clinton for less time than they grilled Hillary Clinton, a person who never met Jeffrey Epstein. It really brings home what a farce this whole thing is.

If you were expecting immediate post-hearing fireworks, you’ll likely be disappointed. Let’s be frank: If some bombshell had come out of today’s testimony, Comer and Rep. Nancy Mace would be shouting it from the rooftops.

There was a mid-hearing leak about Clinton’s answer to questions about a photograph the DOJ released, where Clinton is in a hot tub with a woman whose face is redacted. Clinton said he didn’t know who she was and, when asked the inevitable question, said he did not have sex with her. 

There was also a Trump-friendly leak from “sources familiar with the testimony” that claimed Clinton told the panel that Trump revealed in the early 2000s that he and Epstein were no longer best buds because they had a fight about a land deal. 

On second thought, maybe that isn’t as Trump-friendly as the leaker might have hoped, given that Trump has offered up different explanations. Maybe they stopped being friends over a real estate deal in 2004. Maybe it’s that Epstein poached his employees at some undefined time. Or maybe it was that Epstein was creepy to a teenager at Mar-a-Lago in 2007. 

Gosh, if only someone could question Trump under oath about all these different claims. 

---

Related | Trump gives masterclass with Epstein files on how to appear very guilty

---

Comer spoke after the hearing and made clear that he is going to keep questioning everyone except Trump and people in his orbit. Instead, he bragged to the press that “we have two more depositions already booked.” Those big gets? Epstein’s accountant and his lawyer. 

Come on, man. 

Unlike Hillary, Bill Clinton didn’t make any post-hearing statements, so let’s end with this delightfully pointed comment from his spokesman, Angel Urena, earlier in the day. 

The most recent Epstein file release showed the first complaint about Epstein was received by the FBI in 1996, though there was no investigation for about another decade. Urena was asked if Clinton would have known about it.

Urena said that sort of complaint wouldn’t be escalated to the presidential level because “before this White House started telling the F.B.I. what to do” there was “a firewall between law enforcement and the president.”

Sadly, those days are long gone.

A cartoon by Clay Jones.

Sunday, March 01, 2026 at 4:55:14p MST 

Daily Kos 

 

The Generals Said No but Trump Was Bored of Peace with Epstein Closing in.

 

Trump launched his war from a hastily constructed space in Mar-a-Lago with (left) John Ratcliffe, the Director of the CIA, (fourth from right) Secretary of State Marco Rubio, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, and (second from right), Dan Scavino, his golf caddy turned aide. (photo: White House)

 

The peace president has gone to war, again.

 

Philippe Naughton / The Daily Beast 

01 March 26 

America’s top generals have been as clear as they dare in warning Donald Trump off his latest military adventure. But the president wasn’t listening.

Eight weeks after sending helicopter-borne special forces into Caracas to seize Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, Trump has taken his warmongering to a new level with the launch overnight of “major combat operations” in Iran.

The Venezuela raid was well planned, limited in scope, and a clear military success, just the kind of stunt Trump and the former Fox News host who serves as his “Secretary of War” needed to fire up the troops in their new anti-woke army.

But Iran is a whole different matter. There’s a reason why, as Trump put it, the Iranian regime has been able to chant “Death to America” for the past 47 years as it targeted American forces and interests in the region through its network of terror groups and proxy militias.

The last time the United States tried to use military power to deliver regime change in the Middle East, with the ill-fated invasion of Iraq in 2003, its forces were bogged down for eight years. The real winner of that adventure was Iran, which was effectively handed control of the new Iraq after the dismantling of the Baathist regime.

Of course, Iran has been massively weakened over the past couple of years. Hezbollah and Hamas, its main proxy forces, have been all but destroyed by Israel, and while an American bombing raid last June did not actually “obliterate” Iran’s nuclear program, as Pete Hegseth claimed at the time, it did set it back.

Reports from inside the White House say Trump’s military advisers, including Gen. Dan “Raizin” Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have warned the president against a full-scale attack on Iran, briefing not just that it could cost American lives but dangerously degrade already depleted weapons stockpiles. Trump dismissed a Washington Post report that Caine is “against us going to War with Iran” as “100% incorrect.”

It’s possible that Trump will walk away with an “easy” military victory, or that the Islamic regime, once prodded, could fall, as the president suggested in his video address from the White House. That will depend on Iran’s will and ability to resist the warfighting power of the United States and Israel and whatever allies they can persuade to join them in the ominously titled “Operation Epic Fury.”

But it’s far from clear why Trump had to go to war with Iran now, while his son-in-law Jared Kushner and New York property pal Steve Witkoff are still trying to bring the regime to heel. The massive military force gathered in the Middle East and Mediterranean was already sending a pretty clear message to the Mullahs.

In a text message last month to Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, Trump explained that since Norway had denied him the Nobel Peace Prize despite him supposedly ending at least eight wars, “I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace.”

When Trump first entered the White House in 2017, there was widespread fear that the nuclear suitcase would be following around such a volatile president. But he defied expectations and ended up being more cautious militarily than his Democratic predecessor as commander-in-chief, Barack Obama.

The great American peacemaker of the late 20th century was another second-term conservative president, Ronald Reagan, who clearly had an eye on his legacy as he joined with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to limit nuclear arsenals and call an end to the Cold War. 

Trump seems to have gone in the opposite direction in his second term: he wants to blow everything up, to test the limits of his power, as though a switch has flicked in his 79-year-old brain.  And, of course, to finally put his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein on the back page.  

The peace president is bored of peace and the ghosts of young dalliances past are drawing near.

Generalissimo Bone Spurs strikes again.  

LESSONS FROM MINNEAPOLIS: Denver mayor’s executive order limits ability of ICE to operate in city

  

First-term Denver Mayor Mike Johnston, a former educator, superimposed over the Denver City and County Building. 

Local law enforcement will intervene to protect residents from ICE excesses, including arresting federal agents.

Kyle Harris

Feb. 26, 2026, 2:51 pm

Denverite

Denver Mayor Mike Johnston signed an executive order Thursday that attempts to limit the ability of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers to operate in the city. 

The order blocks ICE agents from staging on city property to enforce immigration law if they don’t have a judicial warrant, a court order or other legal mandate. And it empowers Denver Police officers and sheriff’s deputies to arrest ICE agents in some instances.

“When civil immigration enforcement operations disrupt our neighborhoods, they don’t just target individuals — they spread fear, tear families apart, and erode the trust that holds our community together,” the executive order states. “These actions put our residents and law enforcement personnel at risk and undermine the values we stand for as a community. Our responsibility is clear: We will work to protect the people who call Denver home and guard against federal overreach.”

ICE did not immediately respond to request for comment. 

The order was inspired by community members who asked the mayor and city council how they planned to protect residents against a potential immigration surge from President Donald Trump’s administration.

“We've seen Americans like Renee Good and Alex Pretti killed for peacefully raising their voices,” Johnston said at a Thursday press conference.  “And Denverites ask me every day, ‘What will we do if that chaos comes to Denver?’ To answer that question for Denverites today, I will sign Executive Order 152.”

Denver Mayor Mike Johnston holds a press conference to sign a bill prohibiting federal overreach, condemning tactics used by ICE in front of the City and County Building in Denver, Colo., on Thursday, Feb. 26. 2026.

McKenzie Lange/CPR News

The order was informed by Johnston’s conversations with mayors around the country — including Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey — who have been trying to protect their communities from ICE surges. 

Denver City Council members, who have been working on banning law enforcement from wearing facial coverings in response to ICE actions, backed the order. 

“No one should live in fear, not the fear of being separated from their families, not the fear of being targeted because of who they are, and not the fear of systems that are inaccessible,” City Council President Amanda Sandoval said. “Public safety must mean safety for every one of us in every neighborhood.”

And, Sandoval said, that includes safety from law enforcement itself. 

What does the order do? 

The order explicitly states that Denver Police and Sheriff departments must intervene if immigration enforcement agents engage in actions that could kill or seriously injure someone. That could include arresting, citing or detaining federal agents. 

The focus, though, Police Chief Ron Thomas said, would be de-escalation rather than physical or deadly conflict. 

Per the order, law enforcement now explicitly has the right to provide life-saving aid if people are harmed by ICE agents. If agents interfere, Denver Police would be permitted to cite or arrest them. 

“We are not looking to create hostility or to create conflict or to escalate,” Johnston told Denverite. “But when it comes to protecting people's rights, [Denver police] swear an oath to do that and they're going to keep doing that.”

ICE and ERO officers stand in the middle of Park Avenue in Minneapolis, a block away from where Renee Good was killed. Tuesday, Jan. 13, 2026.

Courtesy: Ben Hovland/Minnesota Public Radio

The department will document ICE activity with body-worn cameras. Police will independently investigate any reported legal violations and will refer potential felonies to the Denver District Attorney or the Colorado Attorney General for prosecution – whether a simultaneous federal investigation occurs. 

City agencies will continue to refuse to share databases or enter into technology use agreements with the Department of Homeland Security or immigration enforcement unless the law explicitly requires them to do so. 

Finally, the order continues to bar ICE from schools, churches, stadiums, libraries and hospitals, and the agency is also barred from racially profiling residents. 

Protecting residents or ‘poking the bear’?

The order immediately made national news, in part because the mayor granted The New York Times an exclusive early interview to break the story.

One reporter asked the mayor whether he was “poking the bear,” and another wondered whether Johnston feared signing the order could provoke President Donald Trump’s administration to invade Denver.

The executive order could pit armed Denver officers against armed federal officers, raising the possibility of a standoff or even a conflict.

When Denverite asked Thomas about the possibility of the executive order leading to a civil war, he said: “I think that that is a reasonable concern, but again, we are experts in de-escalation. That is our value. That is what we will lead with.”

Denver Mayor Mike Johnston holds a press conference to sign a bill prohibiting federal overreach, condemning tactics used by ICE in front of the City and County Building in Denver, Colo., on Thursday, Feb. 26. 2026.

McKenzie Lange/CPR News

He’s also aware ICE has used deadly force against armed residents and understands that could occur with his own officers.

“At the end of the day, I think we're all human, and I think that we're going to hope that humanity prevails,” Thomas said. 

Thomas told reporters he has run multiple “tabletop” scenarios about possible interactions between his officers and ICE, and he’s confident his team will not engage in a fight.  

“We've developed systems that really work for public safety and law enforcement here, and we are going to extend those to the people that do operations here,” Johnston said.

Trump speech moment that had his inner circle 'gnashing their teeth'

 

Is that a smirk on Donnie's face?  The man can't even lie with a straight face.

'Long and lie-filled' address mocks affordability concerns

Tom Boggioni

Senior EditorRaw Story 

According to Financial Times columnist Ed Luce, there was one moment during Donald Trump’s long and lie-filled State of the Union address that will cause his White House no small measure of problems as the president’s poll numbers are in freefall.

Appearing on MS NOW’s “Morning Joe,“ the longtime journalist agreed with co-host Jonathan Lemire that Trump’s speech was “boring” but added that Trump’s comments about affordability was not what his inner circle wanted to hear coming out of his mouth.

“I don't think, you know, this is effective campaigning, although it is campaigning, was him rolling the word affordability around in his mouth, as if it's some very strange word that the Democrats have just learned, and that it isn't really a serious issue at all," he suggested to Lemire.

ALSO READ: There was a ghost at Trump's feast — it will be back to haunt him soon enough

“I imagine Susie Wiles and others were gnashing their teeth as they watched that, because this was clearly supposed to be, at least in part, a speech that set up Republicans for the midterms as serious on questions of affordability,” he added. “And he didn't really do that. 

He told Americans that their prices are all falling. Don't believe your own lying eyes, etc. He at one point said that drug prices have dropped 100 percent, which would mean they're now zero.”

“So you know, I can't I can't get excited about this speech. But I'm and I guess the fact that we're so used to these torrents of lies and the whoppingness of these lies and that it's actually boring, does say something about us and about this president,” he wryly admitted.

Want more breaking political news? Click for the latest headlines at Raw Story.

Despite crises in US, FBI director chugs beer in Italy

 

FBI Director Kash Patel was recorded on Sunday chugging beers with the U.S. Hockey team at the Olympics.

 

Federal Bureau of Incompetence leader guzzles while America burns

by Oliver Willis

Daily Kos Staff

Monday, February 23, 2026 at 11:00:02a MST

 

REPUBLISHED BY:

Blue Country Gazette Blog

Rim Country Gazette Blog

FBI Director Kash Patel traveled to the Olympics in Italy at taxpayer expense and celebrated with the gold-medal-winning hockey team as Americans dealt with international crime, violent threats, and the possibility of war.

Patel was recorded on Sunday chugging beers with the hockey team as part of the celebration of their gold medal win against Canada. During a celebratory phone call with President Donald Trump, Trump tasked Patel with transporting the team to Washington to attend his State of the Union address on Tuesday.

After a video of the moment circulated on social media, Patel pushed out a defensive post about his behavior.

“For the very concerned media - yes, I love America and was extremely humbled when my friends, the newly minted Gold Medal winners on Team USA, invited me into the locker room to celebrate this historic moment with the boys- Greatest country on earth and greatest sport on earth,” he wrote.

Earlier in the day as he hung out at the Olympic Games, Patel had posted a message in his official capacity about the alleged would-be shooter that was intercepted on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.

Patel’s party trip not only coincided with the shooter’s apprehension, but also as global tensions are increasing because Trump has been threatening military action against Iran. Such an attack could lead to violence against U.S. citizens via retaliation in the form of terrorism or other means.

Similarly, as Patel was enjoying himself watching the Olympics, Americans living in Mexico were being warned by the federal government to shelter in place in response to increased drug gang violence after the leader of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel was killed by the Mexican army.

And, of course, Nancy Guthrie's abductor has yet to be apprehended. 

Patel’s trip was already under criticism for the luxury nature of the FBI director’s travel. After reports emerged of the use of taxpayer-funded jet travel for these purposes, the Trump administration lashed out at reporters.

On Thursday, FBI Assistant Director for Public Affairs Ben Williamson insisted that Patel’s trip to Italy was part of his official duties.

“No, it’s not a personal trip. Director Patel is on a trip that was planned months ago. It includes: partner meetings with Italian law enforcement and security officials (they invited the Director last July), meeting with Ambassador Fertitta (as a follow up to our law enforcement roundtable he hosted in January), meetings with Legal staff, and more,” he wrote on X.

Williamson apparently didn’t realize that his boss would soon be recorded smashing beers in a locker room, undermining his attempt at spin.

Back when he was a civilian in 2023, Patel criticized then-FBI Director Christopher Wray for using “a government-funded G5 jet to go to vacations” and suggested grounding the plane. But after being appointed by Trump and securing approval by the Senate Republican majority, Patel has clearly dropped his concerns about the use of federal resources for personal travel.

In fact, in addition to his Olympic trip, Patel has been using a Gulfstream to fly to work while also enlisting FBI agents to ferry his girlfriend around.

The hockey party is just the latest in a year filled with Patel bumbling through his position. But the writing was on the wall about how he would handle the job before he was even officially sworn in.

Patel is a right-wing conspiracy theorist, who spent years publicly attracting Trump detractors and pushing myths and falsehoods related to Trump. His qualification to lead the FBI was loyalty to Trump and his dedication to writing pro-Trump fan fiction—not in law enforcement.

Using taxpayer resources for a beer-soaked international party merely confirms the worst fears about putting Patel in such an important position.

 

“Kash Patel’s girlfriend, your ride is here."  She must be some kind of special. 

by Jack Ohman 

Republican Judge lays it on the line

 

GAZETTE BLOG EDITOR'S NOTE: Retired United States Court of Appeals Judge J. Michael Luttig, appointed by Republican President George H. W. Bush, made an inspiring acceptance speech last week upon receiving honorary membership to the New York Bar Association.  

In presenting the award, Bar Association President Muhammad Faridi noted: 'In a recent essay, Judge Luttig quoted Thomas Paine’s Common Sense: “For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other.”' That simple proposition—that in a free country, the law must be king—is the animating principle behind tonight’s honor."  

Judge Luttig's urgently inspiring remarks are a call to action for every American, and are a must-read for any and all Americans as we face an authoritarian administration and a challenging mid-term election which the president is sure to disrupt and delegitimize.  

Please take a few moments to read his words below:

"We must find the courage to speak truth to power now, today."

Now, friends, listen not for my words, but for the words of George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Thomas Paine.  Listen for the words of Abraham Lincoln and for the words of Martin Luther King, Jr.  And hear.

“These are the times that try men’s souls” — as were the times that tried our souls 250 years ago.[1] In these times, as in those, and in those times 163 years ago, we “are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether this nation, or any nation so conceived . . . in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal can long endure.”[2]

As we dedicated ourselves here before, we must now “here dedicate ourselves again to the great task that yet remains before us – that this nation, under God, and this government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”[3]

Since its very Founding, America has been the envy of the world and the beacon of freedom and liberty because of the shining light of its Democracy and its Rule of Law.  But today, as we celebrate the 250^th Anniversary of America’s birth, America is not that same envy to the world and not that same beacon of freedom and liberty to the world that it has been since its beginning.

We pray that tomorrow America will once again assume its deserved place as the envy of the world.

January 6, 2021, was a dark day in American history. On that day, the 45^th President of the United States instigated a war on America’s Democracy and forced upon this nation an unpeaceful transfer of power for the first time in almost 250 years.  From that day until this day, he has persisted in the prosecution of that war, presenting himself to America and to the world as a “clear and present danger to American Democracy.”

Four years later, on January 20, 2025, the same man, the 47^th President of the United States and now wannabe king, declared war on the Constitution, the Rule of Law, and the nation’s Federal Judiciary.

“But where, say some, is the King of America? I’ll tell you, friend, he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the Royal Brute of Great Britain. . . .  Let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarchy, that in America the law is king. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other. But lest any ill use should afterwards arise, let the Crown at the conclusion of the ceremony be demolished, and scattered among the people whose right it is.”[4]

The Founders believed that were such a demagogue ever to come into power in America, he would, having once been elected “and at a second or third election outvoted by one or two votes, pretend false votes, foul play, and hold possession of the reins of government.”[5]

The Founders of this, the greatest nation on earth and the greatest experiment in self-government in all of civilization, feared this man who has waged these wars on America’s Democracy and Rule of Law, and they feared these times.  They believed these times would mark the end of the nation they had founded.  Alexander Hamilton writing to George Washington in 1792:

Those then, who resist a confirmation of public order, are the true Artificers of monarchy . . . When a man unprincipled in private life desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper, possessed of considerable talents, having the advantage of military habits—despotic in his ordinary demeanour—known to have scoffed in private at the principles of liberty—when such a man is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity—to join in the cry of danger to liberty—to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion—to flatter and fall in with all the non sense of the zealots of the day—It may justly be suspected that his object is to throw things into confusion that he may “ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.

A half century later, a young man of mere twenty-eight years who would one day become the 16^th President of the United States also foretold of this “danger” to the Republic “from within”:

We toiled not in the acquirement or establishment of them–they are a legacy bequeathed us, by a once hardy, brave, and patriotic, but now lamented and departed race of ancestors. Their’s was the task (and nobly they performed it) to possess themselves, and through themselves, us, of this goodly land; and to uprear upon its hills and its valleys, a political edifice of liberty and equal rights; ’tis ours only, to transmit these . . . to the latest generation that fate shall permit the world to know.

At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! . . .

At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time or die by suicide.

I hope I am over wary; but if I am not, there is, even now, something of ill-omen, amongst us. I mean the increasing disregard for law which pervades the country; the growing disposition to substitute the wild and furious passions, in lieu of the sober judgment of Courts; and the worse than savage mobs, for the executive ministers of justice.[6]

The “danger from within” has arrived and America’s time of testing has come.

What, then, must we do if we are to bequeath this “political edifice of liberty and equal rights” to our descendants, this legacy that was bequeathed to us by “our once hardy, brave, and patriotic, race of ancestors”?[7]

We must “dedicate ourselves to the great task that yet remains before us” 250 years later. “[‘T]is ours only, to transmit this ‘goodly land’ and this ‘political edifice of liberty’ . . . to the latest generation that fate shall permit the world to know.”[8]

We must, finally, summon the courage that has eluded us in our all-consuming fear.  Americans must summon from deep within the courage that was once our Founders’ courage when, “with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, they mutually pledged to each other their Lives, their Fortunes and their sacred Honor.”[9]

The time has come again, as it has come before, when the “appalling silence of the good people” is now “betrayal.”

We must stand, raise our voices, and speak out against what we are witnessing in America today. We must “break the silence of the night.”[10]

For, as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., warned, “In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”[11]

If we but find the courage to speak truth to power now, today, as did the Founders and our ancestors when their time of testing came, the United States of America will endure forever as the beacon of freedom and liberty to the world.  America will once again be the envy of the world.

Trump Says He Wants to Cancel Elections, but Here Is the Real Threat

 

"It will be incumbent on all of us...to see the administration’s efforts for what they are and to fight back."

 

Sean Morales-Doyle / The New York Times 

 15 February 26

 

President Trump has dropped unsubtle hints about his desire to cancel the November elections. “We [shouldn't] have to even run against these people,” he said in a speech last month. “I won’t say cancel the election; they should cancel the election.” Mr. Trump didn’t stop there. “When you think of it, we shouldn’t even have an election,” he mused a week later.

These remarks have caused understandable concern, but they are empty threats. Mr. Trump’s power depends on the appearance of winning elections, and he knows it. He’s obsessed with convincing the world he won in 2020. And control over elections is dispersed among thousands of officials across the country, making cancellation impossible.

But more to the point, it’s election subversion, not cancellation, that is the real authoritarian move. The goal is to keep elections going but without unseating those in power.

Look around the world. Vladimir Putin hasn’t canceled an election. Iran has regular elections. In the 21st century, the name of the game is “competitive authoritarianism,” in which democratic institutions and elections persist, but are hollowed out by authoritarian incumbents. Elections — even if they’re rigged — give rulers legitimacy.

Mr. Trump’s call last week to “nationalize” elections — arguing that Republicans should “take over” voting — more closely reflects how he could subvert the electoral system. The president has no lawful authority for such a takeover: Under our Constitution, states and Congress set the rules that govern elections. Under our laws, state and local officials run our elections. Still, his administration has taken dozens of actions to undermine elections that, together, show that an attempted election “takeover” may be underway.

There’s Mr. Trump’s executive order from last March attempting to institute a “show your papers” rule requiring Americans to produce a passport or a similar document when they register to vote. This policy would block the votes of millions of citizens who lack ready access to those documents. A version of this rule is at the core of the SAVE Act, legislation that Mr. Trump is pushing his colleagues in Congress to pass.

There are the Justice Department’s efforts to vacuum up personal information on voters and force purges. The federal government lacks the know-how, the tools and the legal authority to conduct such purges, creating the real risk that eligible voters will be knocked off the rolls.

Then, there are the attacks on the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. Last year, the administration fired or sidelined its election security personnel and defunded its election security operations, which state officials relied on for critical intelligence and support. This eliminates a crucial line of defense against cyberthreats, which are constantly evolving.

And, of course, Mr. Trump teed up the interference campaign on Day 1 of this administration when he pardoned the people responsible for the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol — sending a clear message to would-be election subverters that he will have their back.

We have every reason to expect more actions like these in the coming months. A few weeks ago, Mr. Trump reiterated his threats to prosecute election officials who ran the 2020 election. Just days later, F.B.I. agents seized ballots and election records from 2020 in Fulton County, Ga. As federal officials collect personal voter data from the 11 states that have agreed to share their voter registration lists, we are likely to hear officials claim, falsely, that there are multitudes of noncitizens on the rolls. And there is a growing fear that Mr. Trump may try to illegally deploy federal forces to interfere at the polls in November.

But there’s also plenty of evidence from the past year that we have the power to fight back — if we don’t get sidetracked by Mr. Trump’s threats to cancel elections. 

So far, three different courts have blocked the “show your papers” requirement in Mr. Trump’s executive order, along with other provisions that would suppress voting or threaten election integrity. While some states have acquiesced to the Justice Department’s requests for voter information, election officials of both parties from 27 states and the District of Columbia have refused — and, so far, courts have approved those refusals.

On the state and local level, officials are already banding together to fill the void left by the dismantling of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. Mr. Trump’s attempts at retributive prosecutions have largely fallen flat. And not only are there clear laws barring ICE agents from the polls and prohibiting interference by federal agents in elections, but the recent events in Minneapolis serve as a reminder that peaceful protest and public mobilization can force the administration to change course.

And the SAVE Act — which attempts to carry out Mr. Trump’s “show your papers” rule via legislation — can still be stopped. The first version of the bill died in the Senate last year after it generated widespread public resistance. It should face the same fate this year. Congress, unlike Mr. Trump, does have the authority to regulate our elections. But the bill’s failure is a perfect illustration of why our nation’s founders put that power in the hands of a bipartisan legislative body and not in the hands of a single partisan actor.

We are still nine months out from Election Day, but it seems that every day we get a new elections-related headline from this administration. That’s not an accident. The campaign to rig our elections is well underway. We are already seeing how effective people can be in pushing back, whether on the streets of Minneapolis or at town halls hosted by their representatives in Congress. It will be incumbent on all of us — election officials, advocates, state law enforcement and voters — to see the administration’s efforts for what they are and to fight back.

Remember Minneapolis!