At the Bulwark, Jonathan Last referred to the situation in Chicago as the “Chicago Rubicon.”
I don’t like sending out “emergency” newsletters, but I’ve had my eye on the situation in Chicago all day and tonight Texas National Guard troops arrived on Illinois soil, in defiance of the wishes of the Illinois governor and the Illinois National Guard’s adjutant general.
This moment has elevated the crisis so that it is no longer just a conflict between the federal government and a state, but between two states. We now have armed soldiers from the state of Texas eagerly volunteered by their governor to impose the president’s will on the citizens of Illinois.
I don’t want to be alarmist, but this is an emergency. It is incumbent on us to name the thing we are seeing and be unflinching as we describe it.
Do read the whole Bulwark post, because it describes how the people of Chicago have been assaulted and terrorized by ICE and Customs and Border agents. And I say “terrorized” is the correct word. At this point these federal agents are nothing but state-sponsored terrorists pursing a political agenda. DHS has released a statement “debunking” what they call “Governor Pritzker’s Lies” — i.e., events widely reported by many eyewitnesses and news media. But DHS is just making claims with no proof. All those terrified children who were zip tied and taken from their parents were Tren de Aragua, apparently. And something blatantly unconstitutional doesn’t become okay on Kristi Gnome’s say so.
We also might ask that if all this federalization of Guard is about some “migrant crisis,” how much sense does it make to send Texas Guard to Illinois? I thought the border was in Texas?
And Trump called for Governor Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Johnson to be jailed. For what? Presidents aren’t supposed to say things like that, you know. Trump just can’t tolerate disagreement. The closest thing I could find to a previous president actually prosecuting political enemies was when the Wilson Administration prosecuted Eugene Debs for making an anti-war speech in 1918. Debs had been a candidate for president on the Socialist Party of America ticket, although not in 2016.
But then there’s the shutdown. The most positive thing I’ve read today is The Shutdown, Zombie Politics and How Trump Stumbled Into Not Being All-Powerful by Josh Marshall. He says the Democrats are “winning” the shutdown, as much as one can say a shutdown is “won.”
But the clearest sign is on the core issue on which Democrats are making their fight: health care. As Jon Cohn notes, Democrats are winning this part of the fight hands down. The most eye-popping sign of that is that even Marjorie Taylor Greene has now endorsed their position on Obamacare subsidies. And it’s not just that. Republicans seem to have essentially no position on the merits of the health care question other than yelling about the shutdown itself. The extension of Obamacare subsidies extension is so popular that Trump himself has now twice gone off the handle and said he wants to cut a deal extending them or providing more health care coverage only to be reined in by White House staff or congressional Republicans.
The Trump Administration has been threatening for days to just fire a lot of federal employees. But they haven’t. And then there were headlines about how the White House had decided that furloughed employees weren’t entitled to back pay. And I’m thinking, does the White House believe this helps their side of the argument? On what planet?
At MSNBC, Hayes Brown points out that the terrible things the White House is blaming on Democrats are terrible things that Republicans have long wanted to do. Like shrink the workforce or let food aid run out. See also Paul Waldman, Trump Is Not Very Good at This.
I assume you say some of the video clips of Pam Bondi testifying to the Senate yesterday. Clearly, Bondi is sunk in lies and corruption up to her mascara. See Steve Benen for some highlights. See also this video for a review of all the questions Bondi refused to answer.
“This is supposed to be an oversight hearing” — Schiff helpfully ticks through all of the incriminating questions — and there are many of them — that Bondi refused to answer during today’s hearing
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) October 7, 2025 at 1:29 PM
MTG used to really push my buttons, I would deliberately avoid outrage videos where she was the star. She's become a lot more subdued, less public, and perhaps a bit wiser in choosing her battles.
I was screaming at Pam Bondi last night, acting out all the ways I thought the oversight people should've dealt with her. Putting people like her – rabid attack dogs – in a steel cage is the approach I would take. And then egg her on, saying "you're not ugly enough. Let's see more lies and ugliness. The cameras are rolling.". Bark, bark, bark. Get her foaming at the mouth for the world to see. Democrats have got to stop playing polite, by the rules, and show these evil clowns, for real, that they can dish it out too, where it hurts.
As for Chicago, I hope those 800 generals are paying attention, and planning an intervention.
Jay Kuo, Pam Bondi is a Piece of Work
Bondi showed us all that she and her fellows aren't there to do a job – just like her boss they're there to put on a show. She was in such desperate need for a prompter on that stage.
I hope that fact becomes more clear to everyone by the day.
NBCNews had a piece about how Trump is trying to invoke the Insurrection Act, so I assume his language is intended to lay out a fictional narrative in which MAGA will pretend he is justified in doing so.
So, telling lies, calling for governor/mayor to be jailed, saying they are refusing to protect federal lives and property, is all in line with that narrative, "since the city and state refuse to help…", and I think he believes the SCOTUS will back him. I don't know if anyone is insane enough to go alone, other than he and Miller, but it sounds like they're both having wet dreams about it.
A psychic looks at Pam Bondi. It's all about power for her, retribution, visciousness.
The word 'leverage' comes to mind. TX sends a few hundred troops to Chicago to do what? Protect ICE from the Antifa inflatable frog? Yeah, Miller will want a show of force, tanks in the streets if he can arrange it. It does not matter if the citizens make a visible show of opposition or not. As I see it…
If Chicago sponsors a peaceful show of opposition, and the TX National Guard tries to shut it down, it will be a black eye for Trump to use the military against civilians. If the Mayor and Governor persuade people to just stand down, the troops will have nothing to do. Things fizzle out, like they did in LA. The opposition is still present, but not making themselves a target.
Miller wants to use a few hundred troops to stifle the dissent of many thousands to create a specticle that will drive millions into submission. In tact, it becomes a game of whack-a-mole that Miller can't win. Opposition shows up, gets media attention. Miller calls out the military, opposition evaporates. Miller arrests some vocal leaders, tries for a criminal indictment, Grand Jury rejects for lack of proof. Rinse and repeat all over the country.
Trump is going to try to criminalize peaseful protest. I don't think it will fly with a Grand Jury, federal judge, and jury. Trump has to start whacking people (dead) and that kind of press will demolish Republicans in the election next year. The ploy (IMO) is to drive nonviolent opposition into being invisible, with no influence. That means frighten people into not speaking out, control the mediea to suppress stories of people who are in opposition, control social media to erase opposition. In less than a year.
Can it be done? In theory, yes. What happened with Kimmel says in practice, in this country, in that limitied time, no.