Trump has nominated Billy Long, a former U.S. Representative from Missouri, to head the IRS. I saw the name “Billy Long” and alarms went off. Sure enough, I’ve mentioned him before. This is from 2022, in a post about the specimens who were running to take over retiring Senator Roy Blunt’s seat: “Billy Long is the fellow who resembles a talking potato and who believes abortion rights are the leading cause of mass shooting.”

I’ll come back to Long’s theory connecting mass shootings to abortion. The more pressing issue is that he’s already pressured the IRS to strip the Humane Society of its tax-exempt status.

In 2011, Long signed a letter pushing the IRS to launch a probe of the tax-exempt status of the Humane Society of the United States, a nonprofit that focuses on animal welfare and opposes animal cruelty. The letter followed the Humane Society’s support of a successful Missouri ballot measure strengthening regulations on dog breeders.

The dog breeders in this case were unregulated puppy mills. This has been a contentious issue in Missouri going back years. These puppy mills keep female dogs in tiny, dirty cages so they can produce one litter after another. Often the puppies get sold through legitimate pet stores for a hefty profit. Here are the regulations that Missouri voters approved in 2011:

New regulations pushed by animal advocates, approved by voters and ultimately modified by the legislature limited the number of dogs a breeder could have at any given time. It also banned the stacked cages with wire floors that proved so damaging to paws, required breeders to offer sufficient space for dogs to move in their enclosures and mandated dogs get adequate rest between breeding cycles.

The puppy mills had been an issue going back years, as I remember, but the legislature resisted regulating them. The puppy mill owners had some clout in Jefferson City, and some of the legislators from rural counties didn’t think The Gubmint should be telling folks what to do with their animals. And, unfortunately, the state is still ground zero for puppy mills. Here’s a 2024 report from a St, Louis television station. I take it the laws aren’t really being enforced. And some in the legislature want to weaken the 2011 law.

Anyway, closing down puppy mills and seeing to it dogs are treated humanely is a major focus of the Humane Society. Billy Long thinks this is political extremism that needs to be shut down. Long also signed a separate letter in 2015 demanding the IRS investigate the tax status of the Clinton Foundation.

It’s clear Long won’t be shy about using the IRS to punish nonprofits he doesn’t like, which no doubt is why Trump nominated him. And there’s a pending House-passed bill that would give the Trump administration new powers to rescind the tax status of groups it deems “terrorist supporting organizations,” I’m sure Planned Parenthood, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Sierra Club will be labeled terrorist and denied tax-exempt status. This is serious.

Back to Billy Long’s issues with abortion — if you can’t access the Vanity Fair article I linked in 2022, here’s a Newsweek article for you.

Rep. Billy Long, who serves Missouri, made the startling claims on Columbia radio station 93.9 The Eagle. The 66-year-old said: “It’s a systemic problem. When I was growing up in Springfield, you had one or two murders a year. Now, we have two, three, four a week in Springfield, Missouri, so something has happened to our society, and I go back to abortion. When we decided it was OK to murder kids in their mother’s wombs, life has no value to a lot of these folks.”

Billy Long was born in 1955, Wikipedia says. If you want to check out the homicide rate in Springfield, Missouri, in the 1950s and 1960s compared to now, be my guest. I do know I’ve read that ownership of semiautomatic “assault” weapons was unusual before 1970 or so. It’s also the case that the homicide rate in Missouri has climbed since tne nutjob state legislature voted to eliminate any gun control law they could find. I don’t believe there’s another state that has laxer gun laws than Missouri. They tried to nullify federal gun laws, you might remember, but the courts eventually slapped that down.

So now it’s Pete Hegseth circling the drain, as it were. Along with being utterly unqualified to head the Department of Defense, turns out Pete has a serious and ongoing problem with alcohol that’s been confirmed — off the record — by Fox News employees. Someone also found an old video of Pete trashing Donald Trump. And while no GOP senator is on the record as being absolutely opposed to Hegseth, several are signaling as hard as they can that Hegseth doesn’t have the votes. It appears he has several interviews scheduled with senators today, which may not go well.

Even better, according to several reports, Trump is now consideirng replacing Hegseth with … Ron DeSantis? Seriously?

Mr. Trump is openly discussing other people for the job, including Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, whom he defeated in the Republican presidential primaries and with whom he has had a contentious relationship. Mr. Trump likes the story of bringing on someone he dominated publicly, and he talked about it with Mr. DeSantis on Tuesday at a service honoring three Florida sheriff’s deputies who were killed in a car crash.

According to Wikipedia, Ron was in the Navy, where he achieved the rank of Lieutenant. He appears to have mostly done legal work for the Navy. He does have executive experience as a governor, which makes him more qualified than Hegseth. But of all people. The issue, of course, is that Trump’s candidate list consists of people he can control or dominate. Ron has two more years to be governor of Florida, but then he’s term-limited from running again. So he might be tempted to take the job, if it’s offered.

Oh, and Trump announced today he’s putting a cryptocurrency guy in charge of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Of course.

At Salon, Heather Digy Parton predicts that in this coming term Trump will get over his shyness about cutting Medicare and Social Security. Trump has a history going back to 2015 of promising to not cut Medicare and Social Security. But his proposed budgets cut the programs every year he was in office, a detail that got through to very few voters, I’m sure. Digby continues,

That last budget was put together by the man Trump is bringing back as his Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and one of the principal authors of Project 2025, Russell Vought. It’s highly questionable whether Vought will be as circumspect about the plans to cut the programs this time or whether Trump will care because all of that was predicated on Trump’s need to run for office again. Without that hanging over their heads they have no need to hold back. Republicans have wanted to do away with those programs since they were first passed. This may be their chance to finally get it done.

See also Nicole Lafond at TPM, House Republican Wants Party To Boldly Own Plans To Gut The Social Safety Net.

Predictably, as soon as it became clear that Trump had secured a right-wing trifecta, whispers of “reform” to the programs returned, the language Republicans like to use to put a positive spin on their interest in slashing programs that benefit America’s most vulnerable, perhaps in order to justify tax cuts for the wealthy or, perhaps, for no real reason at all.

It started with reports of chopping-block conversations among congressional Republicans as they looked for ways to subsidize the extension of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, which primarily benefit those making $400,000 or more a year and are set to expire in 2025. Republicans began making noise about “reforms” to Medicaid and Food Stamps programs, which, of course, serve low-income Americans who need health insurance and can’t afford basic, nutritious food. 

So, yeah, they’re going to try.

To catch up on what’s been going on in South Korea over the past couple of days, see South Korean Leader Will Face Impeachment Vote Over Martial Law Declaration at the New York Times. Note also there’s something hinky going on in France. See No-confidence vote topples French government, plunges country into chaos at the Washington Post.

Regarding the Hunter Biden pardon — I can’t criticize Joe for this, and those throwing fits need to calm down and consider what sort of lower life forms are about to take over the Justice Department. It’s a sweeping pardon to protect Hunter from future political harassment and worse from the humanoid MAGA worms, or whatever they are. See also Paul Campos at Lawyers, Guns and Money and also Jasmine Crockett Has Blistering Message For GOP Pearl-Clutching Over Hunter Biden Pardon by Ben Blanchet at Huffpost.

Speaking of humanoid MAGA worm Pete Hegseth, Jane Mayer reports at the New Yorker that

Hegseth’s record before becoming a full-time Fox News TV host, in 2017, raises additional questions about his suitability to run the world’s largest and most lethal military force. A trail of documents, corroborated by the accounts of former colleagues, indicates that Hegseth was forced to step down by both of the two nonprofit advocacy groups that he ran—Veterans for Freedom and Concerned Veterans for America—in the face of serious allegations of financial mismanagement, sexual impropriety, and personal misconduct.

A previously undisclosed whistle-blower report on Hegseth’s tenure as the president of Concerned Veterans for America, from 2013 until 2016, describes him as being repeatedly intoxicated while acting in his official capacity—to the point of needing to be carried out of the organization’s events. 

Yes, this is just the guy we need in charge of the Department of Defense. See also David Kurtz at TPM.

Many are still hyperventilating at the thought of Kash Patel as head of FBI. And it’s also a scandal that Trump intends to fire Christopher Wray just to replace him with a loyalist. As explained by David Frum at the Atlantic,

For more than four decades before Donald Trump assumed the presidency, the FBI director was a position above politics. A new president might choose a political ally as attorney general, but the FBI director was different. An FBI director appointed by Richard Nixon also served under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter. Carter’s choice remained on the job deep into Reagan’s second term, when Reagan moved him to head the CIA. Reagan’s FBI appointee served through the George H. W. Bush presidency and into the Bill Clinton administration. Clinton fired the inherited official—the first time a president ever fired an FBI director—only because the outgoing Bush administration had left behind a Department of Justice report accusing the director of ethical lapses. (Clinton tried to coax the tainted director into resigning of his own volition. Only after the coaxing failed did Clinton act.)

And so it continued into the 21st century. Except in a single case of serious scandal, Senate-confirmed FBI directors stayed in their post until they quit or until their 10-year term expired. Never, never, never was a Senate-confirmed FBI director fired so that the president could replace him with a loyalist. Republicans and Democrats alike agreed that there must be no return to the days when J. Edgar Hoover did special favors for presidents who perpetuated his power.

Trump fired James Comey to try to shut down the investigation into his ties to Russia, but he was persuaded there would be blowback. So his people gave the excuse that Comey was being fired because he mishandled Hillary Clinton’s investigation. Not that anyone bellieved that was why he was fired, of course. But now Trump isn’t even bothering with an excuse. Wray has two years to go in his ten-year term.

Also note that the same party that has been using “defund the police” against Democratics for way too long are about to completely gut the criminal justice system at the federal level.

And do read Tom Nichols, The Kash Patel Principle, at The Atlantic. No paywall.

In my last post I recommended a piece by Greg Sargent at The New Republic, Mexican President’s Harsh Takedown of Trump Exposes an Ugly MAGA Scam. You might want to review that before reading further.

A couple of days ago Trump posted on Truth Social,

Just had a wonderful conversation with the new President of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo. She has agreed to stop Migration through Mexico, and into the United States, effectively closing our Southern Border. We also talked about what can be done to stop the massive drug inflow into the United States, and also, U.S. consumption of these drugs. It was a very productive conversation!

If you’ve read the Greg Sargent piece, you already know this is bullshit. Here is how President Sheinbaum responded:

En nuestra conversación con el presidente Trump, le expuse la estrategia integral que ha seguido México para atender el fenómeno migratorio, respetando los derechos humanos. Gracias a ello se atiende a las personas migrantes y a las caravanas previo a que lleguen a la frontera.…

— Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo (@Claudiashein) November 28, 2024

Translation:

“In our conversation with President Trump, I explained to him the comprehensive strategy that Mexico has followed to address the migration phenomenon, respecting human rights,” Sheinbaum wrote in a statement on X, formerly Twitter. “Thanks to this, migrants and caravans are assisted before they reach the border. We reiterate that Mexico’s position is not to close borders but to build bridges between governments and between peoples.”

Katie Herchenroeder wrote at Vanity Fair,

Earlier on Wednesday, before Trump posted his statement on Truth Social, his social media site, Sheinbaum said they “had an excellent conversation.”

“We discussed Mexico’s strategy on the migration phenomenon, and I shared that caravans are not arriving at the northern border because they are being taken care of in Mexico,” she wrote on X. “We also discussed strengthening collaboration on security issues within the framework of our sovereignty and the campaign we are carrying out in the country to prevent the consumption of fentanyl.”

She must realize now what a snake Trump is.

The two presidents’ call comes days after Trump announced he would impose, via an executive order on the first day of his presidency, 25% tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada. “This Tariff,” he began, “will remain in effect until such time as Drugs, in particular Fentanyl, and all Illegal Aliens stop this Invasion of our Country!”

Avocados, tequila, and beers like Modelo are some of the products that would likely see price hikes should Trump follow through.

In a letter responding to Trump’s tariff threat, Sheinbaum said her government would retaliate if he moved forward with this stated plan. “For every tariff, there will be a response in kind,” Sheinbaum wrote, according to a statement released by the Mexican Embassy Tuesday morning. “Among Mexico’s main exporters to the United States are General Motors, Stellantis, and Ford Motor Company, which arrived in Mexico 80 years ago. Why impose a tariff that would jeopardize them? Such a measure would be unacceptable and would lead to inflation and job losses in both the United States and Mexico,” she added.

Plus, as was spelled out in the Greg Sargent piece, Mexico has been taking extraordinary measures to apprehend most of the migrants traveling through Mexico and stop them from reaching the United States. “During the campaign, Trump simply pretended none of that was happening.” Sargent writes. “It’s one of MAGA’s biggest deceptions, and his latest scam carries it forward.”  (Why the Biden Administration wasn’t broadcasting the facts about the border from every loudspeaker in the country all year long is another question.)

I don’t know if Trump and Scheinbaum talked about tariffs, but we do know he talked about tariffs to Justin Trudeau. The Canadian Prime Minister traveled to Mar-a-Lago to try to talk sense to Trump and came away unsatisfied.

Today we learned that Trump has named Charles Kushner, Jared’s ex-felon daddy, ambassador to France. Was this a slap back at Emmanuel Macron? 

And we learned that Pete Hegseth’s mother sent him an email accusing him of abusing many women for many years. Your own Mama, Pete. Take it to heart.

Update: Holy bleep — Trump wants Kash Patel to run the FBI.

Your reading assignment today is by Greg Sargent at The New Republic, Mexican President’s Harsh Takedown of Trump Exposes an Ugly MAGA Scam. Very briefly, Trump is threatening Mexico with a 25 percent tariff on all goods imported from Mexico. This is to “force” Mexico to do something about the migrants and fentanyl from “pouring” into the United States. However, Mexico has already done quite a bit to reduce such border crossings, which is why the apprehensions are way down.

During the campaign, Trump simply pretended none of that was happening. It’s one of MAGA’s biggest deceptions, and his latest scam carries it forward. The very idea that Mexico must be bullied with tariffs into cracking down on migrants is designed to imply that it’s doing nothing right now—it’s taking advantage of us, Trump might say—and only his fearsome threats can force it into submission. …

… All this paves the way for larger deceptions later. Bank on it: The moment Trump takes office, the lower apprehension numbers will magically become real metrics. Fox News will start trumpeting them, and Trump will start claiming the border has achieved pacification due to his strength. Indeed, Trump very well may credit his current threat of tariffs with “forcing” Mexico to make the lower numbers of border crossings a reality.

Trump’s greatest talent, other than self-promotion, is his skill at taking credit for other people’s work. Media let him get away with it, of course. Do read the whole Greg Sarget piece.

Along those lines, see Trump team says Israel-Hezbollah ceasefire deal brokered by Biden is actually Trump’s win.

You probably heard that Jack Smith requested the J6 and documents cases be dismissed. Barbara McQuade says,

In fact, this move could be an effort to keep the cases alive in the long term. An interesting tell in each motion is Smith’s request to dismiss the cases “without prejudice.” That means that the cases can be filed again. By dismissing the cases now on his own terms, Smith blocks Trump’s attorney general from dismissing the cases for all time.

In addition, by filing his motions pre-emptively, Smith was able to explain his reasons for dismissing the case, rather than allowing Trump’s future AG to mischaracterize them. According to Smith, he was dismissing the case not because of the merits or strength of the cases, but because he had to. As Smith explains, the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel, whose opinions are “binding” on the special counsel, has concluded that a sitting president may not be indicted or criminally prosecuted under the Constitution. OLC reasoned that criminal charges would make it impossible for a president to carry out his constitutional duties in light of the distraction of preparing a criminal defense, the public stigma that would hamper his leadership role and the obstacles prison would impose on his ability to perform his duties.

But Smith was careful to note that this relief from criminal prosecution is “temporary,” and ends when the president leaves office. Smith cites OLC as concluding that this form of immunity for a sitting president “would generally result in the delay, but not the forbearance, of any criminal trial” That is, Trump gets a reprieve, but only during his term in office.

Trump will be lucky if he’s still alive in four years, considering he must be a massive cardio-vascular event waiting to happen.

In transition news, see Trump team signs some, but not all, critical transition documents. In brief, Trump is keeping the sources for his transition funding secret — we know Trump isn’t paying for this out of his own pocket — and also is refusing to request FBI checks of appointees. Trump wants the background checks to wait until he’s inaugurated, so he can control them, apparently.

Try to have a happy Thanksgiving, and put the catastrophe out of your mind for a bit. It’s going to be a long four years.

I’ve noticed a lot of talk about 2004. After G.W. Bush won re-election he talked expansively about his “political capital” and how he was going to spend it. And he spent it promoting his stupid scheme to privatize Social Security, which flopped miserably and set the stage for a huge Dem win in the 2006 midterms. Many fingers are now being crossed the next couple of years will be a similar story.

The two headlines that stood out for me today were both at WaPo. One is Trump is coming for the executive branch. Does he know what he’s doing? by Dan Balz. The subhead is “The president-elect has signaled he will be destructive, but he seems motivated by retribution rather than saving money.” Seems?  A WaPo headline from yesterday said Trump plans to fire Jack Smith’s team, use DOJ to probe 2020 election. I understand Smith is dismantling his team and plans to leave before Trump is sworn in, so Trump may not get to fire him. The subhead to that story is “The plans show how president-elect Donald Trump wants to use the Justice Department to address his own personal grievances.”

I don’t doubt he intends to use massive amounts of government resources trying to prove the 2020 election was stolen from him. That brings me to the other headline from today, Pam Bondi, Trump’s AG pick, said ‘prosecutors will be prosecuted.’

Bondi said the Justice Department’s special counsel investigation into whether Trump associates coordinated with Russian interference in the 2016 election needed to be dissolved. She declared that the 45th president’s first impeachment in 2019 was a “sham.” And when Trump was indicted four times after leaving office, Bondi was blunt about who deserved legal scrutiny — and it wasn’t the former president.

“The prosecutors will be prosecuted, the bad ones,” Bondi declared on Fox News in 2023, soon after Trump’s fourth set of criminal charges. “The investigators will be investigated.”

You might recall that the 2020 election was already investigated up the wazoo. But maybe now Trump has found people who will fabricate new evidence. Whether this will turn out to be Privatization 2.0 probably depends on how it gets covered by the media, however. In other words, don’t count on it.

Here’s a rather alarming story I’ve seen only in Rolling Stone, for example — Trump Refuses to Disclose Who Is Funding His Transition, by Peter Wade. I knew about some of this, but not all of it.

True to character, Donald Trump is already flouting ethics laws and norms even before he takes office as president in 2025. The president-elect is accepting secret donations to fund his transition while refusing to sign ethics pledges or deliver an ethics plan mandated by the Presidential Transitions Act. The transition also has not signed an agreement with the Federal Bureau of Investigation that would allow the agency to do background checks on Trump nominees.

The transition has missed deadlines in September and October despite transition team leaders Howard Lutnick and Linda McMahon promising to sign memorandums of understanding with the Biden White House that would facilitate the outgoing administration’s collaboration with Trump’s transition team. According to The New York Times, the Trump transition has privately created an ethics code and conflict-of-interest guidance for transition staff, but those documents do not include a legal requirement — a statement regarding how Trump will handle conflicts of interest while in office. ,,,

… Historically, presidential transitions — including Trump’s 2016 transition — have signed an agreement to receive financial assistance from the General Services Administration, which is responsible for monitoring the transition process. By accepting the funds and signing the agreement, transitions are agreeing to abide by certain conditions that would limit individual donations to $5,000 and mandate transparency regarding donors. Without disclosing donors, foreign influence is also a concern since there are no restrictions on international donations to transitions, unlike presidential campaigns. …

… Instead of allowing the F.B.I. to investigate Trump administration nominees’ backgrounds, the transition is conducting private background checks. According to CNN, Trump and his acolytes believe that the F.B.I.’s process is too slow and could get in the way of the work Trump wants to do to implement his agenda. Sources told CNN that behind closed doors, Trump has questioned whether background checks are necessary.

Are we alarmed yet?

And then there are the DOGE boys, Musk and Ramaswamy, who are supposed to be in charge of “government efficiency.” See Matt Ford at The New Republic, The More You Learn About Elon Musk’s DOGE, the Less Sense It Makes. They’re merrily taking a sledgehammer to government bureaucracy. Right now they’re working on smashing muc of the regulatory system and firing the workers maintaining that system. I understand their long-term plans include gutting things like housing assistance (which might put me out of my home) and Medicaid, which among other things pays for most old folks in long-term care facilities. How that goes over with the public may depend on how widely the pain is spread. A lot of the damage done might not be evident right away.

The mass deportations could get very ugly and messy and could cause concern among the not-deported. And the anticipated hit on the economy, especially food prices, should be noted. The bleeping Trump had damn well better notice. And we’ll see how much damage he does with tariffs.

Today’s reading assignmen — Adam Serwer, The Trump-Trumpist Divide at The Atlantic. It makes the point that most Trump voters were either unaware of or did not take seriously his authoritarian, anti-democratic plans. Their reasons for supporting him went from the stupid to the delusional, and they either didn’t hear or refused to believe the warnings about how dangerous he was.

So Matt Gaetz is out as the AG nominee, and Pam Bondi is in. Bondi has been mentioned in this blog before. Back in 2012 while attorney general of Florida she was on the list of speakers for the RNC National Convention. In 2016 it was noted that she dropped a planned investigation into Trump University after receiving a $25,000 campaign donation from Trump. (The donation came from the Trump Foundation, which was a scandal in itself.) And I wrote this in 2018:

… recently Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, a Republican and knee-jerk Trump supporter, needed a police escort to leave a movie theater in Tampa because members of the audience were harassing her. (The film was Won’t You Be My Neighbor?, which makes this story even better.)

After leaving the AG office in 2019 she chaired Trump’s America First Policy Institute and also was on Trump’s legal team in his first impeachment.  Anyway, the point is that she has long-standing right-wing credentials, she’s open to corruption, and she’s tied herself to Trump. Unlike Gaetz and most of the rest of Trump’s appointees, she does have some experience for the job, so I suspect she’ll have no trouble getting confirmed.

I seriously hope Pete Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard are nixed also. Hegseth was an obviously inappropriate appointee when his name was first announced. Since then, more information has come out that suggests he not only should not be given a job in government; he probably needs to be kept under right surveillance.

Senator Tammy Duckworth explains some of the problems with Hegseth’s appointment here.

And this is from The Guardian:

Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s pick for defense secretary, has written in a book that he could imagine a scenario in which the US armed forces would be used violently in American domestic politics.

Hegseth, a former elite soldier turned rightwing Fox television personality, is Trump’s choice to lead the Pentagon which controls the gigantic American military – by far the largest armed force in the world.

In one of his five published books he wrote that in the event of a Democratic election victory in the US there would be a “national divorce” in which “The military and police … will be forced to make a choice” and “Yes, there will be some form of civil war.”

Hegseth’s 2020 book exhorts conservatives to undertake “an AMERICAN CRUSADE”, to “mock, humiliate, intimidate, and crush our leftist opponents”, to “attack first” in response to a left he identifies with “sedition”, and he writes that the book “lays out the strategy we must employ in order to defeat America’s internal enemies”.

And of course there’s also the little matter of sexual assault allegations. This guy is pure poison. See also Donald Trump’s Most Dangerous Cabinet Pick by Jonathan Chait and What Pete Hegseth’s Nomination Is Really About by Hanna Rosin at The Atlantic.

There’s such an avalanche of crazy coming out of the “transition” that it’s hard to keep up. But for right now I just want to focus on one small part of what’s going on. Let’s start with Oliver Milman at Mother Jones, Repealing Biden’s Climate Bills Won’t Kill Clean Energy, But It May Cripple US Manufacturing. Milman begins,

The United States’s blossoming emergence as a clean energy superpower could be stopped in its tracks by Donald Trump, further empowering Chinese leadership and forfeiting tens of billions of dollars of investment to other countries, according to a new report.

Trump’s promise to repeal major climate policies passed during Joe Biden’s presidency threatens to push $80 billion of investment to other countries and cost the US up to $50 billion in lost exports, the analysis found, surrendering ground to China and other emerging powers in the race to build electric cars, batteries, solar and wind energy for the world.   …

… Under Biden, the US legislated the Chips Act, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and the Inflation Reduction Act, all aimed in varying degrees to deal with the climate crisis while also bolstering American manufacturing.

The IRA alone, with its major incentives for clean energy, is credited with helping create around 300,000 new jobs, with the vast majority of $150 billion in new manufacturing investment flowing to Republican-held districts.

See Where the Chips Act Money Has Gone at The Verge for more details into exactly where the new manufacturing investments have flowed so far. Back to Oliver Milman:

Trump, however, has called this spending wasteful and vowed to erase it. “I will immediately terminate the green new scam,” the president-elect said shortly before his election win. “That will be such an honor. The greatest scam in the history of any country.”

If Trump kills the program, this would not only erase the jobs that would be funded by the Chips Act. It would also keep American companies reliant on foreign sources for components, including microchips and batteries, that we could be making here. Basically, it would undercut domestic manufacturing on a massive scale and put the U.S. on the road to being one of those shithole countries Trump likes to complain about. Not to mention there are also national security issues regarding being able to provide our own microchips and batteries.

Politico reports that Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo “is aiming to commit nearly every unspent dollar in its $50 billion microchip-subsidy program before President-elect Donald Trump takes over in January, an effort that would effectively cement a massive industrial legacy before the GOP can reverse course.”

The Chips money alone is a massive undertaking. Congress allocated $50 billion in subsidies for semiconductor manufacturing and R&D. So far only two companies have received binding awards from the Department of Commerce’s manufacturing program. To hit her target, Raimondo still needs to nail down contracts with Intel, Micron, Samsung and SK hynix — multibillion-dollar deals that have, at times, been rocky and required renegotiations.

Surely the heads of those companies know the offer will likely be off the table after Trump takes office. But just watch — as manufacturing plants open, Trump will take credit for them.

Today Trump affirmed that he still plans mass deportations, and his plans involve him  using presidential emergency powers and “military assets.” Whether there is much more to these plans is hard to tell. Josh Kovensky at TPM writes,

For Trump, the lack of seriousness or specifics here is tangled up with the broader point: he wants “military assets,” whatever that may mean, in the United States. And, he wants you to know about it.

Policy shops staffed with officials from Trump’s first administration spent much of the once and future President’s time in the political wilderness drafting plans for domestic deployment of the military. One piece invoked War on Terror-era legal justifications to argue that the President could use active duty soldiers to conduct domestic immigration enforcement.

See Trump’s immigration crackdown is expected to start on Day 1 at Politico to appreciate the complexity of this issue. It’s going to be a mess.

A sign of the times — Sweden issues pamphlet telling citizens what to do if Russia attacks.

A Message from Vlad — This is from a few days ago. I don’t know why I didn’t notice it before.  Fred Kaplan at Slate writes,

First, Putin waited two days before congratulating Trump on his victory. One can imagine Trump receiving phone calls from kowtowing leaders the world over—Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky, Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, the Palestinian Authority’s Mahmoud Abbas, the chief of NATO, the European heads of state—all the while wondering about the man whom he’s admired publicly and privately for the past eight years: When is Vladimir going to call?

Then, in response to Trump’s claim that during their phone call, he asked—in some accounts, warned—Putin not to escalate the war in Ukraine, a Kremlin spokesman denied that the two had spoken on the phone at all. (Putin issued his belated congratulations at a news conference.)

I don’t know who’s telling the truth, a practice for which neither man has a sterling reputation. But either way, in the next few weeks, when Putin orders 50,000 fresh recruits (including 10,000 imported North Korean soldiers) to go on the next rampage—ousting Ukrainian soldiers from the thin slice of Russian territory they hold, then retaking soil across the border in Donbas province—he can tell a complaining Trump that he doesn’t recall any such conversation. If Trump thinks Putin actually will refrain from stepping up attacks on Ukraine as a friendly favor … well, maybe our once-and-future president will learn a lesson about the limits of personal relations in the face of perceived national interests early in his second term.

The final twist of this saga came on Monday, when Nikolai Patrushev, an aide to Putin who was previously director of Russia’s Federal Security Service, made the following comment in an interview with the Moscow newspaper Kommersant:

The election campaign is over. To achieve success in the election, Donald Trump relied on certain forces to which he has corresponding obligations. As a responsible person, he will be obliged to fulfill them.

This is a mind-blowing bit of psychological warfare! The Russians are basically telling Trump: We put you in office. Now it’s time for you to pay us back.

No pressure or anything.

This is what I’m finding particularly disturbing today:

The Trump transition team is compiling a list of senior current and former U.S. military officers who were directly involved in the withdrawal from Afghanistan and exploring whether they could be court-martialed for their involvement, according to a U.S. official and a person familiar with the plan. 

Officials working on the transition are considering creating a commission to investigate the 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan, including gathering information about who was directly involved in the decision-making for the military, how it was carried out, and whether the military leaders could be eligible for charges as serious as treason, the U.S. official and person with knowledge of the plan said.

It’s not clear to me how solid the sourcing is on this story. No one on Trump’s team will go on the record to confirm it. But it wouldn’t surprise me.

The transition team is looking at the possibility of recalling several commanders to active duty for possible charges, the U.S. official said. 

It’s not clear the Trump administration would pursue treason charges, and instead could focus on lesser charges that highlight the officer’s involvement. “They want to set an example,” said the person with knowledge of the plan….

… Speaking to NBC News days before the election, Howard Lutnick, one of the two advisers leading the transition, said Trump learned after his first administration that he had hired Democratic generals, and he would not make that mistake again. 

Former officials who worked in Trump’s first administration have said they advised Trump against policies they thought would weaken U.S. national security, such as withdrawing U.S. troops from Syria. And they advised against actions that they thought might violate the Constitution or inflame tensions domestically, such as deploying active-duty U.S. troops to quell protests after the 2020 police killing of George Floyd.

I take it “Democratic” generals balked at following Trump’s orders when they were stupid or unconstitutional. A “Republican” general is one who will just follow orders. Okay.

This is about Trump punishing genrals who didn’t defer to him with sufficient servility and obsequiousness. He wants generals who will jump when he says jump. Like the guys who were tried at Nuremberg who were just following orders.

Just the use of the word “treason” tells me the people pursuing this are extremists and fanatics who want to punish someone, not people who are serious about improving the military. There are very high bars for a treason charge. It’s my understanding that treason requires siding with an enemy in a declared war. That doesn’t describe anything that happened in the Afghanistan withdrawal. Note that the feds didn’t try to bring treason charges against Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, just espionage charges, because they didn’t think the legal definition of treason could be applied to their case (noting that Ethel probably was innocent).

I hate to think what Trump is going to do to the Defense Department.