Thank You, Katie, I have talked about this since September. This isn’t new, and it isn’t subtle. The playbook is right there, spelled out step by step, and it is way past time that people in the U.S. start taking this seriously.
I see what you’re tracking, and it lines up exactly with what I have been saying for months. It’s not just rhetoric—it’s a pattern of actions stripping away limits, shifting what’s acceptable until the unacceptable becomes policy. The words aren’t random, the timing isn’t random, and the pieces are being moved deliberately.
Look at how Congress is ceding power. Look at how control over money and emergencies is being consolidated. Look at the way sovereignty—whether of Canada, Greenland, or Panama—is being reframed as optional. This isn’t a hypothetical. It’s already happening.
I have been watching from Germany, and I see what this is. I see how people here react when I tell them. And I see how many Americans still think it’s just bluster.
Hi again Wild one: Here's some news off the wire via Dan Rather. While the 'clown' makes headlines, the gop monopoly in congress crafts away hoping to be invisible. Spread this far and wide if you will. See > https://steady.substack.com/p/its-not-just-trump-destroying-democracy
I’ve read about this from several sources, and one aspect deeply concerns me: it will disproportionately limit women’s right to vote, especially due to the documentation requirements tied to registration. The implications are serious and far-reaching
Absolutely. Therein is a huge point. And if it can happen to you or them today, tomorrow it could me or any others at whim !!! No ooo... The pushback must be swift, determined and relentless, and massive.
thank you—that made me smile. It’s always meaningful to be known, even just a little. Especially when the topic is this heavy. I’m glad our paths crossed here.
We need regime change immediately. This man is a wrecking ball for democracy. There is no one to STOP him but the Judiciary. I am so ashamed to be an American on this day - The Ides of March.
Democrats need to put forth a bill that if Canada enters the US, each province must be declared a separate state. We would possibly gain 20 senators and a boat load of congressional seats.
These are some comments on part of the text “Trump’s Imperial Vision, mainly up to the subtitle ‘Canada,’ but they should be sufficient to give an idea of the content.
An objective analysis of the text reveals a strong left-wing ideological bias, with elements typical of progressive and alarmist rhetoric regarding Donald Trump. The text employs discursive techniques that distort information, emphasize hypothetical scenarios without concrete factual basis, and use emotionally charged expressions to create a negative perception.
⸻
1. Rhetorical Construction and Ideological Bias
• The text uses expressions such as “Trump’s Imperial Vision,” “Trump often does what he says he is going to do,” and “Trump’s eliminationist speech,” indicating an effort to portray Trump as an authoritarian and expansionist figure, comparable to autocratic leaders.
• The reference to “Manifest Destiny” and its alleged connection to German fascism is a tendentious interpretation. The concept of “Manifest Destiny” was a historical principle of U.S. foreign policy in the 19th century, with no direct link to Nazi expansionism.
• The comparison with Putin and the invasion of Ukraine is another example of rhetorical construction without factual basis. There is no concrete evidence that Trump plans to invade or annex foreign territories.
⸻
2. Manipulation of Facts
• The author presents as an established fact the idea that Trump wants to annex Canada, Greenland, and the Panama Canal, despite Trump’s alleged statements being exaggerated interpretations or taken out of context.
• The mention of tariffs as a tool of “imperialism” ignores the logic of trade wars and economic disputes, which are common among governments of different ideological leanings.
• The narrative that “Canadians and Danes are taking Trump seriously” is presented without any concrete evidence of real concern from these countries.
⸻
3. Alarmism and Exaggeration
• The author suggests that Trump may be preparing a territorial annexation and that the U.S. Congress is irreversibly ceding power to the Executive. However, there is no legal or political foundation to support these assumptions.
• Expressions like “Trump cares little for laws, rules, and norms” reflect an interpretative bias that ignores the checks and balances of U.S. institutions.
• The tone of the article reinforces fear and urgency (e.g., “It is past time for Americans to take Trump seriously”), a common strategy in progressive media to mobilize political opponents.
⸻
4. Trump: A Buffoon with Power, but Not Absolute Power
You are absolutely right. Trump is a chaotic communicator who frequently makes exaggerated or provocative statements, but as president, he has significant power—though not unlimited authority. The U.S. legal and institutional system imposes clear checks and balances on presidential power. Even when Trump attempted controversial actions in the past, such as executive orders on immigration or unilateral changes to trade policy, he faced challenges from the courts, Congress, and the bureaucratic state itself.
The article fails to acknowledge these institutional constraints, instead suggesting that Trump could act as an unchecked autocrat. However, any attempt to annex foreign territory or completely disregard existing laws would face strong legal, political, and diplomatic resistance. Furthermore, Trump’s own presidential record shows that, despite his aggressive rhetoric, many of his actions were either blocked or moderated by other branches of government.
What the article does is take Trump’s flamboyant rhetoric and transform it into an imminent and concrete threat without providing substantial evidence. This kind of alarmism is typical of progressive media and the left-wing political sphere, which often uses fear as a mobilization tool. This does not mean that Trump lacks authoritarian impulses or that his ideas are always prudent, but suggesting that he would govern without limits ignores the fundamental workings of the U.S. constitutional system.
⸻
5. Analysis of the Birthright Citizenship Debate and the 14th Amendment
The author’s claim that Trump “issued an executive order declaring birthright citizenship illegal” and, in doing so, “signaled that laws passed by Congress and signed by a president and even the text of the Constitution itself would not prevent him from trying to act on his desires” reflects a partial and questionable reading of the legal debate surrounding the 14th Amendment. The issue of birthright citizenship is not as clear-cut and uncontested as the article suggests, as there are diverging interpretations within American constitutional doctrine.
Text of the 14th Amendment and the Legal Debate
Section 1 of the 14th Amendment states:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
The controversy centers around the phrase “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” which can be interpreted in different ways:
1. Traditional Interpretation (Status Quo):
• Supported by many legal scholars and traditionally accepted by the Supreme Court, this interpretation holds that anyone born on U.S. soil automatically acquires citizenship, regardless of their parents’ nationality or immigration status.
• This view traces back to United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), in which the Supreme Court ruled that a child born in the U.S. to legally residing foreign parents was an American citizen. The main argument was that the 14th Amendment incorporated the jus soli (right of the soil) principle from English common law.
2. Restrictive Interpretation (Advocated by Trump and Other Conservatives):
• Some legal scholars argue that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” excludes individuals whose parents are unlawfully present in the U.S. or owe allegiance to another country (such as diplomats).
• They contend that the Wong Kim Ark decision did not explicitly address the citizenship status of children of illegal immigrants and that Congress could define this issue legislatively.
• This interpretation argues that a president could restrict birthright citizenship through an executive order, imposing a narrower reading of the 14th Amendment and challenging the traditional interpretation in court.
Trump’s Executive Order and Its Legality
Trump attempted to issue an executive order restricting birthright citizenship, but such a measure would face immediate legal challenges because:
• The traditional interpretation of the 14th Amendment has been upheld for over a century.
• Supreme Court precedent favors a broad reading of the clause.
• Any change to citizenship policy would likely require a constitutional amendment or an explicit Supreme Court ruling overturning past decisions.
However, the Supreme Court has never directly ruled on whether the children of illegal immigrants have an automatic right to citizenship, leaving room for legal debate.
Flaw in the Author’s Argument
The article presents the traditional interpretation of the 14th Amendment as absolute and implies that Trump simply ignored the Constitution. However:
• The debate over “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is legitimate and remains unresolved.
• The Supreme Court may revisit this issue in the future.
• The article fails to acknowledge that many respected legal scholars question the broad interpretation of the 14th Amendment.
⸻
6. Conclusion
The issues raised in the article—Trump’s rhetoric, alleged expansionist ambitions, institutional limits, and birthright citizenship—are far more nuanced than the author presents. There are reasonable legal arguments on both sides, and the legality of Trump’s executive order would ultimately depend on how the courts interpret the 14th Amendment.
The article demonstrates bias by portraying this as a clear constitutional violation while failing to recognize that this remains an open legal question in American constitutional law. More broadly, the text selectively emphasizes Trump’s rhetoric without acknowledging the institutional checks and legal constraints that would prevent many of these supposed threats from materializing. Instead of a balanced analysis, it engages in alarmism, ideological framing, and manipulation of facts to push a specific political narrative.
So well done Nelson. That said, although tfg did 'not' get any mandate, elected as he was by ~49 percent of a low turnout election, not to even mention vote disqualifications and gerrymandering, it's sobering even by those low numbers, an apparent lack of ability to think objectively by so many, assuming some percentage unknown who are simply die-hards and 'all in' for the notion of running our country like it's a business, with a tfg or similar as a CEO of sorts. Ever since Reagan I've heard on the street, folks playing with the notion that government should be 'run like a bid'niss.' The murmurs, likely right wing instigated and perpetuated have not diminished. If nothing else they've melded into a philosophy by adoption, and more or less 'understood' and spoke of in a sort of right wing mutually understood code wording, at least as I've observed. *Right or wrong, I also feel that the low voter turnout was a clear sign of voter puzzlement; Not knowing with any degree of comfort - who to believe. Dems have to improve their messaging And come clean, with potentially injurious honesty. jmho
Calmly and patiently speak your truth; Share 'facts in evidence. Join demonstrations or do the recruiting. It's something, which is far better than nothing. Doing will help to calm you.
I've just now discovered your substack / topic. Count me as sincerely grateful to find you project. This is so very worthy. I've been complaining since tfg 1 that I couldn't find someone dedicated to keeping track and enumerating in categorical fashion, all the illegalities visited upon us. I'm not financially able to support your work, but vow to use facts in all things. I don't hide the light I find under a basket like a possession. ~D4N
This is how bullies talk . When Donnie often says if you "want to know the truth," He is lying all the time. None of it is for security. It's all about making $$ for his benefactors. Minerals in Greenland, Canada. Money in Panama Canal. The $$ would never be distributed to taxpayers. Thanks Katie for writing the truth. I restack to keep your informed messages moving.
Thank You for this!! Our mainstream media has been failing us since at least 2015/16, but of course FOX Propaganda w Rush Limbaugh gave us the rise of purely awful RW Nationalist Troll Podcasters. One former caddy Troll of Trump's is now the Assistant FBI Director. I'm surprised another Troll, T Carlson, is not yet in Trump's Administration. He may challenge Vance for POTUS, w Don Jr., whenever (if) Trump leaves Office. The Apostolic Dominionist White Nationalist fake christian Movement (w Flynn at the helm) is another DANGER, parried with Voight's Project 2025.
Trump has signaled his desire for Expansionism in controlling ALL of North America to Panama. Perhaps Colombia & Venezuela & Surinam. Greenland & Canada. There is a STRONG LINK & a possible agreement or desire, at least, to allow Putin to take ALL of Ukraine, The Baltics, & even Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece & Moldova. Orban will get slivers of southern Slovakia & western Romania (ethnic Hungarians live there) as his reward for blocking NATO & supporting Putin's goals.
Trump WANTS Greenland, Canada & Central America. Allow Xi to have Taiwan & control Asia. Xi would deal with N Korea.
But Japan, Australia & NZ do not wish this. None in Europe, save Orban, want this. Canada, Denmark & NATO do NOT.
This IS, indeed GRAVE.
We no longer have a balance-of-power checking Congress.
This is KEY - would enough Republican Senators refuse to support a takeover of Greenland & Panama?? I think Panama, yes. Greenland?? Perhaps, but the issue is what NATO on behalf of Denmark, would act. This could be a MESS. Could DESTABILIZE World Order completely.
BUT the catastrophic scenario would be a US power grab/invasion of Ottawa & Montreal. Trump already believes he has strong influence & friends in Alberta & British Columbia, Yukon & The NW Territories.
He thinks Greenlanders want to join the US as well as Western Canadian Provinces. He is sorely MISTAKEN.
Two MAIN ISSUES w addled Donald. 1) He couldn't even name all Canadian Provinces, much less know the actual History between our two Nations. He thinks the "imaginary" US/Canadian Border was just drawn w a straight ruler by low-level bureaucrats in 1978.
He said "decades ago."! We know Donold is NOT an educated man. He's clueless about so much. He hasn't even been to half the US States. He doesn't drive, has never shopped for groceries or worked a real middle class or working poor job. He's utterly FECKLESS understanding how 99% of the World lives. He's never run a home with children. He's clueless on how public schools work the work of great teachers in action. He's FECKLESS with pain & suffering, work ethic, & has never attended religious services, other than the few ceremonial ones, such as the Service at The Episcopalian National Cathedral. He is so CLUELESS, he thought Bishop Budde was going to hold a type of Episcopalian Trump Rally, praising him from The Pulpit. Donold doesn't even KNOW the Order of The ancient Christian Liturgy, the Readings, The Gospel, The Sermon. He took Bishop Budde's Sermon as a personal INSULT TO HIM, instead of how she linked her sermon to the Readings of the Calendar of the Liturgical Year. Instead, he expected a "quieter type of Trump Rally," & expected each Vicar & speaker to toll his Greatness. Then he viciously attacked Budde.
This example is Trump in a Nutshell. He's UTTERLY CLUELESS about HOW the World works. Because he's led a White Privileged, Spoiled existence & everything has always been done FOR HIM. He doesn't have the right Life Experiences for true Leadership. It’s why he LACKS EMPATHY for others. Over the years, he's developed into a severe Malignant Narcissist, & since the days in the 1970s to 2000, he was never accepted by wealthy Manhattan. That was the largest initial source of his desire for Revenge & Retribution which continues amped up today.
Lack of Education & how the World works outside of his Estates & Golf Clubs combined with a disordered personality. No Leadership qualities whatsoever.
Surrounded by broken people, many of whom exhibit similar traits &/or lust for their own personal ambitions. Few who would actually try to reign in his impulsive actions.
ALL of this leading to SEVERE INSTABILITY in most every Domestic & Global situation ahead. It will take a Generation or two to return to the Admiration & Stability of American Leadership... even IF it could return.
Dominion and subjugation. Those are Donald Trump's goals. He could not care less about the little people who vote, either for him or against him. He could not care less about his Secretary of State. Little Marco is as fungible a commodity as was General Mark Milley, John Bolton, or Rex Tillerson. Completely expendable. All of them. As are we, the voting populace. "If you elect me, you will never have to vote again". ""When you are the President, you have total power. It's absolute. The governors know that. It's like a king." "I'll only be a dictator for one day. Ha Ha." Trump's mental calculations and visions are that of a great powers totalitarian. The story goes like this. There are three great powers in the world today. Donald is one. Vladimir and Xi are the other two. Donald is the commander-in-chief of the most potent military that ever existed. He has purged the generals, the command interface with the soldiers and the support systems that makes the military a potent force. It is entirely under his control. He can do whatever he wants. It will weaken due to his meddling, but for the moment it is still the best in the world. Therefore, he must act quickly. Canada, Greenland and Panama are on Trump's menu of conquerable delicacies, but his appetite is even larger. Administration officials have floated the idea of sending US forces into Mexico to control the drug cartels and gangs. Indeed. Who would stop him? The Mexican government? Pffffttt. Who do they think they are? Besides, the drug trade would add a pretty penny to the Trump syndicate's coffers. Between Mexico and Panama is all of Central America. Might as well take that too. Trump imagines imperialism beyond any previously known. Donald takes Canada, Greenland, the Arctic and all the Western Hemisphere. Vlad and Xi can fight over the rest. Half the globe is Donald's Dominion. Will he desire even More? WW III. This is way bigger than which bathroom to use.
Thank You, Katie, I have talked about this since September. This isn’t new, and it isn’t subtle. The playbook is right there, spelled out step by step, and it is way past time that people in the U.S. start taking this seriously.
I see what you’re tracking, and it lines up exactly with what I have been saying for months. It’s not just rhetoric—it’s a pattern of actions stripping away limits, shifting what’s acceptable until the unacceptable becomes policy. The words aren’t random, the timing isn’t random, and the pieces are being moved deliberately.
Look at how Congress is ceding power. Look at how control over money and emergencies is being consolidated. Look at the way sovereignty—whether of Canada, Greenland, or Panama—is being reframed as optional. This isn’t a hypothetical. It’s already happening.
I have been watching from Germany, and I see what this is. I see how people here react when I tell them. And I see how many Americans still think it’s just bluster.
It’s not.
Hi again Wild one: Here's some news off the wire via Dan Rather. While the 'clown' makes headlines, the gop monopoly in congress crafts away hoping to be invisible. Spread this far and wide if you will. See > https://steady.substack.com/p/its-not-just-trump-destroying-democracy
I’ve read about this from several sources, and one aspect deeply concerns me: it will disproportionately limit women’s right to vote, especially due to the documentation requirements tied to registration. The implications are serious and far-reaching
Absolutely. Therein is a huge point. And if it can happen to you or them today, tomorrow it could me or any others at whim !!! No ooo... The pushback must be swift, determined and relentless, and massive.
Hi there Wild one; I know of you and that makes me happy !
Hi D4N,
thank you—that made me smile. It’s always meaningful to be known, even just a little. Especially when the topic is this heavy. I’m glad our paths crossed here.
Ditto Wild one. I've always enjoyed your commentary. And yes.... there is comfort. swak....
Amazing and concerning work! Thank you for sharing how dangerous and focused on mutually assured destruction course he wants to take.
We need regime change immediately. This man is a wrecking ball for democracy. There is no one to STOP him but the Judiciary. I am so ashamed to be an American on this day - The Ides of March.
WWIII in the making
Democrats need to put forth a bill that if Canada enters the US, each province must be declared a separate state. We would possibly gain 20 senators and a boat load of congressional seats.
Hi Steve !
These are some comments on part of the text “Trump’s Imperial Vision, mainly up to the subtitle ‘Canada,’ but they should be sufficient to give an idea of the content.
An objective analysis of the text reveals a strong left-wing ideological bias, with elements typical of progressive and alarmist rhetoric regarding Donald Trump. The text employs discursive techniques that distort information, emphasize hypothetical scenarios without concrete factual basis, and use emotionally charged expressions to create a negative perception.
⸻
1. Rhetorical Construction and Ideological Bias
• The text uses expressions such as “Trump’s Imperial Vision,” “Trump often does what he says he is going to do,” and “Trump’s eliminationist speech,” indicating an effort to portray Trump as an authoritarian and expansionist figure, comparable to autocratic leaders.
• The reference to “Manifest Destiny” and its alleged connection to German fascism is a tendentious interpretation. The concept of “Manifest Destiny” was a historical principle of U.S. foreign policy in the 19th century, with no direct link to Nazi expansionism.
• The comparison with Putin and the invasion of Ukraine is another example of rhetorical construction without factual basis. There is no concrete evidence that Trump plans to invade or annex foreign territories.
⸻
2. Manipulation of Facts
• The author presents as an established fact the idea that Trump wants to annex Canada, Greenland, and the Panama Canal, despite Trump’s alleged statements being exaggerated interpretations or taken out of context.
• The mention of tariffs as a tool of “imperialism” ignores the logic of trade wars and economic disputes, which are common among governments of different ideological leanings.
• The narrative that “Canadians and Danes are taking Trump seriously” is presented without any concrete evidence of real concern from these countries.
⸻
3. Alarmism and Exaggeration
• The author suggests that Trump may be preparing a territorial annexation and that the U.S. Congress is irreversibly ceding power to the Executive. However, there is no legal or political foundation to support these assumptions.
• Expressions like “Trump cares little for laws, rules, and norms” reflect an interpretative bias that ignores the checks and balances of U.S. institutions.
• The tone of the article reinforces fear and urgency (e.g., “It is past time for Americans to take Trump seriously”), a common strategy in progressive media to mobilize political opponents.
⸻
4. Trump: A Buffoon with Power, but Not Absolute Power
You are absolutely right. Trump is a chaotic communicator who frequently makes exaggerated or provocative statements, but as president, he has significant power—though not unlimited authority. The U.S. legal and institutional system imposes clear checks and balances on presidential power. Even when Trump attempted controversial actions in the past, such as executive orders on immigration or unilateral changes to trade policy, he faced challenges from the courts, Congress, and the bureaucratic state itself.
The article fails to acknowledge these institutional constraints, instead suggesting that Trump could act as an unchecked autocrat. However, any attempt to annex foreign territory or completely disregard existing laws would face strong legal, political, and diplomatic resistance. Furthermore, Trump’s own presidential record shows that, despite his aggressive rhetoric, many of his actions were either blocked or moderated by other branches of government.
What the article does is take Trump’s flamboyant rhetoric and transform it into an imminent and concrete threat without providing substantial evidence. This kind of alarmism is typical of progressive media and the left-wing political sphere, which often uses fear as a mobilization tool. This does not mean that Trump lacks authoritarian impulses or that his ideas are always prudent, but suggesting that he would govern without limits ignores the fundamental workings of the U.S. constitutional system.
⸻
5. Analysis of the Birthright Citizenship Debate and the 14th Amendment
The author’s claim that Trump “issued an executive order declaring birthright citizenship illegal” and, in doing so, “signaled that laws passed by Congress and signed by a president and even the text of the Constitution itself would not prevent him from trying to act on his desires” reflects a partial and questionable reading of the legal debate surrounding the 14th Amendment. The issue of birthright citizenship is not as clear-cut and uncontested as the article suggests, as there are diverging interpretations within American constitutional doctrine.
Text of the 14th Amendment and the Legal Debate
Section 1 of the 14th Amendment states:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
The controversy centers around the phrase “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” which can be interpreted in different ways:
1. Traditional Interpretation (Status Quo):
• Supported by many legal scholars and traditionally accepted by the Supreme Court, this interpretation holds that anyone born on U.S. soil automatically acquires citizenship, regardless of their parents’ nationality or immigration status.
• This view traces back to United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), in which the Supreme Court ruled that a child born in the U.S. to legally residing foreign parents was an American citizen. The main argument was that the 14th Amendment incorporated the jus soli (right of the soil) principle from English common law.
2. Restrictive Interpretation (Advocated by Trump and Other Conservatives):
• Some legal scholars argue that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” excludes individuals whose parents are unlawfully present in the U.S. or owe allegiance to another country (such as diplomats).
• They contend that the Wong Kim Ark decision did not explicitly address the citizenship status of children of illegal immigrants and that Congress could define this issue legislatively.
• This interpretation argues that a president could restrict birthright citizenship through an executive order, imposing a narrower reading of the 14th Amendment and challenging the traditional interpretation in court.
Trump’s Executive Order and Its Legality
Trump attempted to issue an executive order restricting birthright citizenship, but such a measure would face immediate legal challenges because:
• The traditional interpretation of the 14th Amendment has been upheld for over a century.
• Supreme Court precedent favors a broad reading of the clause.
• Any change to citizenship policy would likely require a constitutional amendment or an explicit Supreme Court ruling overturning past decisions.
However, the Supreme Court has never directly ruled on whether the children of illegal immigrants have an automatic right to citizenship, leaving room for legal debate.
Flaw in the Author’s Argument
The article presents the traditional interpretation of the 14th Amendment as absolute and implies that Trump simply ignored the Constitution. However:
• The debate over “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is legitimate and remains unresolved.
• The Supreme Court may revisit this issue in the future.
• The article fails to acknowledge that many respected legal scholars question the broad interpretation of the 14th Amendment.
⸻
6. Conclusion
The issues raised in the article—Trump’s rhetoric, alleged expansionist ambitions, institutional limits, and birthright citizenship—are far more nuanced than the author presents. There are reasonable legal arguments on both sides, and the legality of Trump’s executive order would ultimately depend on how the courts interpret the 14th Amendment.
The article demonstrates bias by portraying this as a clear constitutional violation while failing to recognize that this remains an open legal question in American constitutional law. More broadly, the text selectively emphasizes Trump’s rhetoric without acknowledging the institutional checks and legal constraints that would prevent many of these supposed threats from materializing. Instead of a balanced analysis, it engages in alarmism, ideological framing, and manipulation of facts to push a specific political narrative.
So well done Nelson. That said, although tfg did 'not' get any mandate, elected as he was by ~49 percent of a low turnout election, not to even mention vote disqualifications and gerrymandering, it's sobering even by those low numbers, an apparent lack of ability to think objectively by so many, assuming some percentage unknown who are simply die-hards and 'all in' for the notion of running our country like it's a business, with a tfg or similar as a CEO of sorts. Ever since Reagan I've heard on the street, folks playing with the notion that government should be 'run like a bid'niss.' The murmurs, likely right wing instigated and perpetuated have not diminished. If nothing else they've melded into a philosophy by adoption, and more or less 'understood' and spoke of in a sort of right wing mutually understood code wording, at least as I've observed. *Right or wrong, I also feel that the low voter turnout was a clear sign of voter puzzlement; Not knowing with any degree of comfort - who to believe. Dems have to improve their messaging And come clean, with potentially injurious honesty. jmho
I don’t know anymore how to get anyone to take Trump’s threats seriously. I feel like Cassandra.
Calmly and patiently speak your truth; Share 'facts in evidence. Join demonstrations or do the recruiting. It's something, which is far better than nothing. Doing will help to calm you.
I agree. Please see my Substack post 2 days ago - Doge is a Trojan Horse. Bill Schneider
I've just now discovered your substack / topic. Count me as sincerely grateful to find you project. This is so very worthy. I've been complaining since tfg 1 that I couldn't find someone dedicated to keeping track and enumerating in categorical fashion, all the illegalities visited upon us. I'm not financially able to support your work, but vow to use facts in all things. I don't hide the light I find under a basket like a possession. ~D4N
This is how bullies talk . When Donnie often says if you "want to know the truth," He is lying all the time. None of it is for security. It's all about making $$ for his benefactors. Minerals in Greenland, Canada. Money in Panama Canal. The $$ would never be distributed to taxpayers. Thanks Katie for writing the truth. I restack to keep your informed messages moving.
Thank You for this!! Our mainstream media has been failing us since at least 2015/16, but of course FOX Propaganda w Rush Limbaugh gave us the rise of purely awful RW Nationalist Troll Podcasters. One former caddy Troll of Trump's is now the Assistant FBI Director. I'm surprised another Troll, T Carlson, is not yet in Trump's Administration. He may challenge Vance for POTUS, w Don Jr., whenever (if) Trump leaves Office. The Apostolic Dominionist White Nationalist fake christian Movement (w Flynn at the helm) is another DANGER, parried with Voight's Project 2025.
Trump has signaled his desire for Expansionism in controlling ALL of North America to Panama. Perhaps Colombia & Venezuela & Surinam. Greenland & Canada. There is a STRONG LINK & a possible agreement or desire, at least, to allow Putin to take ALL of Ukraine, The Baltics, & even Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece & Moldova. Orban will get slivers of southern Slovakia & western Romania (ethnic Hungarians live there) as his reward for blocking NATO & supporting Putin's goals.
Trump WANTS Greenland, Canada & Central America. Allow Xi to have Taiwan & control Asia. Xi would deal with N Korea.
But Japan, Australia & NZ do not wish this. None in Europe, save Orban, want this. Canada, Denmark & NATO do NOT.
This IS, indeed GRAVE.
We no longer have a balance-of-power checking Congress.
This is KEY - would enough Republican Senators refuse to support a takeover of Greenland & Panama?? I think Panama, yes. Greenland?? Perhaps, but the issue is what NATO on behalf of Denmark, would act. This could be a MESS. Could DESTABILIZE World Order completely.
BUT the catastrophic scenario would be a US power grab/invasion of Ottawa & Montreal. Trump already believes he has strong influence & friends in Alberta & British Columbia, Yukon & The NW Territories.
He thinks Greenlanders want to join the US as well as Western Canadian Provinces. He is sorely MISTAKEN.
Two MAIN ISSUES w addled Donald. 1) He couldn't even name all Canadian Provinces, much less know the actual History between our two Nations. He thinks the "imaginary" US/Canadian Border was just drawn w a straight ruler by low-level bureaucrats in 1978.
He said "decades ago."! We know Donold is NOT an educated man. He's clueless about so much. He hasn't even been to half the US States. He doesn't drive, has never shopped for groceries or worked a real middle class or working poor job. He's utterly FECKLESS understanding how 99% of the World lives. He's never run a home with children. He's clueless on how public schools work the work of great teachers in action. He's FECKLESS with pain & suffering, work ethic, & has never attended religious services, other than the few ceremonial ones, such as the Service at The Episcopalian National Cathedral. He is so CLUELESS, he thought Bishop Budde was going to hold a type of Episcopalian Trump Rally, praising him from The Pulpit. Donold doesn't even KNOW the Order of The ancient Christian Liturgy, the Readings, The Gospel, The Sermon. He took Bishop Budde's Sermon as a personal INSULT TO HIM, instead of how she linked her sermon to the Readings of the Calendar of the Liturgical Year. Instead, he expected a "quieter type of Trump Rally," & expected each Vicar & speaker to toll his Greatness. Then he viciously attacked Budde.
This example is Trump in a Nutshell. He's UTTERLY CLUELESS about HOW the World works. Because he's led a White Privileged, Spoiled existence & everything has always been done FOR HIM. He doesn't have the right Life Experiences for true Leadership. It’s why he LACKS EMPATHY for others. Over the years, he's developed into a severe Malignant Narcissist, & since the days in the 1970s to 2000, he was never accepted by wealthy Manhattan. That was the largest initial source of his desire for Revenge & Retribution which continues amped up today.
Lack of Education & how the World works outside of his Estates & Golf Clubs combined with a disordered personality. No Leadership qualities whatsoever.
Surrounded by broken people, many of whom exhibit similar traits &/or lust for their own personal ambitions. Few who would actually try to reign in his impulsive actions.
ALL of this leading to SEVERE INSTABILITY in most every Domestic & Global situation ahead. It will take a Generation or two to return to the Admiration & Stability of American Leadership... even IF it could return.
Very Dangerous Times ahead...
Dominion and subjugation. Those are Donald Trump's goals. He could not care less about the little people who vote, either for him or against him. He could not care less about his Secretary of State. Little Marco is as fungible a commodity as was General Mark Milley, John Bolton, or Rex Tillerson. Completely expendable. All of them. As are we, the voting populace. "If you elect me, you will never have to vote again". ""When you are the President, you have total power. It's absolute. The governors know that. It's like a king." "I'll only be a dictator for one day. Ha Ha." Trump's mental calculations and visions are that of a great powers totalitarian. The story goes like this. There are three great powers in the world today. Donald is one. Vladimir and Xi are the other two. Donald is the commander-in-chief of the most potent military that ever existed. He has purged the generals, the command interface with the soldiers and the support systems that makes the military a potent force. It is entirely under his control. He can do whatever he wants. It will weaken due to his meddling, but for the moment it is still the best in the world. Therefore, he must act quickly. Canada, Greenland and Panama are on Trump's menu of conquerable delicacies, but his appetite is even larger. Administration officials have floated the idea of sending US forces into Mexico to control the drug cartels and gangs. Indeed. Who would stop him? The Mexican government? Pffffttt. Who do they think they are? Besides, the drug trade would add a pretty penny to the Trump syndicate's coffers. Between Mexico and Panama is all of Central America. Might as well take that too. Trump imagines imperialism beyond any previously known. Donald takes Canada, Greenland, the Arctic and all the Western Hemisphere. Vlad and Xi can fight over the rest. Half the globe is Donald's Dominion. Will he desire even More? WW III. This is way bigger than which bathroom to use.