Tag Archives: news

Living with Uncertainty and Doubt in this Era of Increasing Autocracy

23 Sunday Nov 2025

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

To say we are living in a confusing, destabilizing, polarizing, and dangerous era is stating the obvious. In thinking back over the past thirty years, I offer an expanded list of events that I believe contributed to bringing us to this inflection moment in American history, mostly negative events (sorry to say), but many positive ones too (I have not included foreign happenings except for those that have affected directly the United States and the stability of our nation).  

The positive events:

  • The election of the first African American president of the United States;
  • The recovery from the 2008-9 economic crisis;
  • The normalization of LGBTQ rights;
  • The passage of the Affordable Care Act;
  • The Iran Nuclear deal;
  • The largest march in American history for women’s rights following the installation of Donald Trump as President on January 21, 2017;
  • The galvanizing of the Me-Too and Black Lives Matter movements;
  • The passage of climate change legislation and the international Paris Climate Accord;
  • The nomination of the first woman of a major political party for president of the United States and the installation of the first woman and person of color as vice-president in US history;
  • The multiple and successful law suits brought against unconstitutional and illegal actions taken by the Trump Administration;
  • The end of the Gaza War and the return of the Israeli hostages;
  • The November elections in New Jersey, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and California;
  • The “No Kings” march.

The negative events:

  • The 9/11/2001 terrorist attack;
  • The Afghan and Iraqi wars in which 7000 Americans, 200,000 Afghanis, and 600,000 Iraqis were killed during the United States’ longest wars against Al Qaida and extremist Muslim terrorists;
  • The 2008-9 US economic meltdown, mortgage crisis, and bank failures;
  • The rulings of the Roberts’ Supreme Court that have compromised American democracy including Citizens United, the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v Wade, the discarding of key elements of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, the gutting of affirmative action in college decisions, the expansion of gun rights, the granting of presidential immunity, and the MAGA assault on voting rights;
  • Multiple mass shootings in cities across the country;
  • Increasing income inequality, the accumulation of massive wealth of the top one percent, regressive tax policies, and the exploding federal debt;
  • The rise of social media (for better and worse) reflecting negative and positive human impulses;
  • The spread of opinion-laced “information” through media bubbles and the diminishing viability of   classic news sources (e.g. newspapers, network evening news broadcasts, etc.);
  • The rise of Donald Trump and the MAGA movement;
  • The multiple indictments and double-impeachment of a sitting American president;
  • The Covid plague and death of 1.2 million Americans;
  • The violent rebellion against the legitimate election of a president on January 6, 2021 led by the sitting president who refused to accept his electoral defeat;
  • Russia’s aggression and nearly four-year war against Ukraine;
  • The Hamas invasion of Israel and the murder of 1200 Israelis and foreign workers on October 7, 2023, the taking of 250 hostages, and the ensuing 2-year Israel-Hamas war resulting in the death of more than one thousand Israeli soldiers and tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians;
  • The dramatic rise in antisemitism, anti-Zionism, and anti-Israel hatred on the far political right and far political left;
  • The rise in racism, misogyny, homophobia, and Islamophobia;
  • Trump’s pardoning of all those tried and sentenced for violence and sedition against the United States on January 6, 2021;
  • The return of Trump 2.0 in the 2024 presidential election that has brought a systematic attack on American democracy and norms, the Constitution, media, the Justice and Defense departments, most federal agencies, American foreign aid, the State Department, EPA, HHS, the American military and intelligence services, the human rights of immigrants and peoples of color, the killing of people without due process in international waters based on the assertion that they are narco-terrorists, the threat of ICE and the use of the military in cities and states, Trump’s weaponizing of the Justice Department against his political critics and enemies, and Trump’s call for the execution of six members of Congress (all distinguished military veterans and intelligence officers) who cut a video telling service members not to follow illegal orders;
  • Trump’s cancellation of the Iran Deal, Biden’s Climate Change legislation, and the US withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord;
  • The attack from the far political right-wing on the Judeo-Christian ethic;
  • The normalization of white Christian nationalist supremacy in the US;
  • The massive grift and enrichment of the President, his family and wealthy friends in the amount of billions of dollars in an ongoing violation of the US Constitution’s Emolument clause.

Like so many of you, I have responded with disgust, anger, anxiety, exhaustion, and despair at the plethora of bad news, the cruelty, inhumanity, indecency, and ongoing assault against the US Constitution and American democratic norms that permeates our politics and culture in these days. I have asked myself why millions of Americans and their congressional representatives accept without protest the developing autocracy of Donald Trump who has in these first ten months of his second presidency done so much damage to American democracy and our democratic traditions.

I am reminded of the Irish poet William Butler Yeats’ (1865-1939) famous poem The Second Coming that he wrote in 1919 shortly after the First World War ended and as the Irish War of Independence began. The poem was inspired by that era’s turmoil, chaos and societal collapse (not unlike our own times):

“Things fall apart; the center cannot hold; / Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world. / The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, / And everywhere the ceremony of innocence is drowned; / The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

It seems to me that there are two primary motivating needs of tens of millions of Americans who have supported or acquiesced to Trump’s growing autocracy and immorality. In times of flux and chaos, people crave, on the one hand, certainty, and on the other a sense of security with like-minded culturally similar others.

My childhood Rabbi Leonard Beerman (1921-2014) offered a profound bit of wisdom, as he always did, long ago when he wrote:

“I live with uncertainty and doubt. But what I have learned is that doubt may be the most civilizing force we have available to us, for it is doubt that protects us from the arrogance of utter rightness, from the barbarism of blind loyalties, all of which threaten the human possibility.”

The writer Kathryn Schultz (b. 1954) explains in her book Being Wrong why certainty is so appealing to so many:

“The simplest truth about certainty is that it feels good. It gives us the comforting illusion that our environment is stable and knowable, and that therefore we are safe within it. Just as important, it makes us feel informed, intelligent, and powerful…Uncertainty leaves us stranded in a universe that is too big, too open, too ill-defined…Where certainty reassures us with answers, doubt confronts us with questions, not only about our future but also about our past: about the decisions we made, the beliefs we held, the people and groups to whom we offered our allegiance, the very way we lived our lives…the unconsulting fact [is] that …we can’t shield ourselves and our loved ones from error, accident, and disaster…our attraction to certainty is best understood as an aversion to uncertainty.” (p. 169)

That is where autocrats step in. They claim certainty about everything, contrary to what the French philosopher Charles Bernard Renouvier (1815-1903) poignantly said: “Properly speaking, there is no certainty; there are only people who are certain.”

Of course, there are always options, some are better and some are worse, but it’s upon us, an informed citizenry, to understand the advantages and disadvantages of each based upon the facts, science, reason, human rights, and the principles of equality, justice, compassion, empathy, and peace.  

As elections begin to appear on the political horizon, it’s important for us all to consider what constitutes great leadership. As concisely as I can characterize it, great leadership requires not just vision and high moral rectitude, but the love of truth and a sacred commitment to further the common good. There are times when all leaders must stand up against the crowd, take a political risk knowing that they can lose everything, power, position, and the respect of their followers. Great leaders, however, bear the responsibility to act on behalf of the best interests of the public and to set a high moral standard for themselves and their colleagues.

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, in his superb book that I highly recommend, Lessons in Leadership – A Weekly Reading of the Jewish Bible (Jerusalem: Koren Publishers, 2015) put it simply: “To lead is to serve. Greatness is humility.” (p. 190)

As the election season begins in the United States, and would-be leaders announce their candidacies, polls rejecting the Trump administration’s positions on virtually all the issues of concern to American voters, along with the millions who turned out to march on “No Kings Day,” and the important work of so many American lawyers and judges who have advocated for and ruled on behalf of American constitutional and state law and against autocratic over-reach, ought to give us a measure of hope and remind us how much agency we still have.

In electing candidates worthy of our support as servant-leaders, we can reverse the anti-democratic actions and trends that have plagued the United States in recent decades, and begin to restore American democracy despite the horrific damage that has been done.

Go to a No Kings Rally

17 Friday Oct 2025

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

I am 75 years old. The last time I attended a massive march was in 1987 in Washington, D.C. on behalf of the right of Soviet Jews to immigrate to Israel or to the United States. Before that I was a frequent public protester against American involvement against the Vietnam War and in civil rights demonstrations in the 1960s. Since then, after serving as a congregational rabbi for more than 40 years, my social justice activism has been expressed in the context of my community’s activism and in my writings. But, I will be at one of Los Angeles’ No Kings Rallies with my children and grandchildren this weekend because my outrage at what Trump is doing to innocent Americans and to our democracy needs outward expression.

The only actions that are now making a difference and protecting our democracy are the many court cases and judges who are rejecting in rulings Trump’s illegal executive orders. Also, we have to be grateful to the many Democratic state governors who are courageously resisting Trump in their states and the Democratic Congressional Representatives and Senators who are doing everything they can to resist the malignancies of Trump.

The only action we American citizens can take before the mid-term election that might begin to persuade Trump and his sycophantic Congress and the many voters who voted for Trump in the 2024 election but who are now appalled by his excesses and immorality is to participate in non-violent demonstrations throughout the country and support financially candidates for election in the mid-terms whose values align with our own.

I am at once excited and anxious to participate in a No Kings Rally this weekend. I’m not anxious for my own safety, but on account of my fear that Trump’s minions will be sent deliberately in plain clothes to violently disrupt peaceful demonstrations and give Trump the excuse he wants to send more federal soldiers into “blue cities and states” to quell what he characterizes as “anti-American traitors.”

I urge everyone to attend one of these rallies. If more than ten million Americans turn out, which I heard is one goal of the organizers, we will be furthering the movement to take back our democracy in the mid-terms and to break through the “ice” of the MAGA movement.

No matter what the provocations we might encounter, everyone who attends these rallies must remain absolutely non-violent.

“Zohran Mamdani Has Many Virtues. But He’s Also a Virulent, Relentless Hater of Israel” – by Rabbi Eric Yoffie    

04 Thursday Sep 2025

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

Introductory Note: I am not a New Yorker, but I have been waiting for someone to express the truth about NY’s Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani’s true positions about Israel and why his hostility to the State of Israel is so upsetting to me.

My friend and the former President of the Union for Reform Judaism, Rabbi Eric Yoffie, is as astute an observer and moral voice of American Jewish life and Israel as there is in the American Jewish community. He writes semi-frequently on pressing issues facing world Jewry in Israel’s newspaper Haaretz. The following piece appeared today, and I thank Eric for writing it. It ought to be read by every Jewish New Yorker before the election. If you have Jewish friends in New York, please share this with them.            

Sept. 4, 2025

Before and after the election, my plea to the Jewish citizens of New York City is: Use mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani’s Democratic Party primary victory to educate people about Israel.

Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for New York City mayor, is charming, attractive, bright and a natural politician. Energetic, enormously talented and only thirty-three years old, in the Democratic primary he ran a brilliant campaign.

Is Mamdani too good to be true? Unfortunately, he is.

Despite his many virtues, this attractive, articulate man, with the popular touch and Trumpian feel for politics, is a virulent, relentless anti-Zionist.

Like most New Yorkers, I was profoundly impressed by Mamdani and by his remarkable ability to reach voters of different age groups and ethnicities. I was impressed too by his message: He did not offer platitudes or complicated position papers, but hammered home the point that the cost of living is killing ordinary people. Former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and his other establishment rivals never had a chance; coming across as stodgy and out-of-touch, they lost to their dynamic younger rival by double digits.

But his beliefs about Israel are clear. Mamdani has expressed them repeatedly, and without equivocation. From his earliest days as a political activist as a student at Bowdoin College, he has declined to say that Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state. He held this view on the day of the deadly massacres of October 7, and held it just as strongly on October 8.

When he became a candidate for mayor of New York, a city with 1.5 million Jews, Mamdani was obligated to spell out specifically how he would deal with Israel issues. His refusal during the Democratic primary to condemn the use of the phrase “globalize the intifada” drew the most attention. He claimed that the term did no more than express solidarity with the Palestinians, but many Democrats and others, and certainly many Jews, rightly insisted that what it meant was “kill the Jews.”

Responding to the pressure, Mamdani said that he would discourage the use of the phrase but would not denounce it, a tweak that satisfied few of his critics. If the phrase was offensive, why not condemn it outright?

His hostility to Israel was expressed in many other ways as well. He indicated that as mayor, he would implement some form of boycott against Israel, and has advocated an academic boycott of Israel’s universities, consistent with his support of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. He promised not to visit Israel if elected mayor, breaking a longstanding precedent.

And how have the Jews of New York responded to Mamdani’s statements and threats?

To the surprise of many, most have not seemed overly concerned, or at least less concerned than one might expect. The reasons for this are not entirely clear.

One possibility is that most of New York’s 700,000 Jewish voters, like most other New Yorkers, think it is a foregone conclusion that Mamdani will win, and therefore a “wait-and-see” approach may make sense. After all, his major competitors are New York’s corrupt current mayor, a no-name Republican and a former Democratic governor of New York who has lots of baggage and barely seems to want the job. It would take a near miracle for any of them to beat Mamdani.

Another possibility is that the majority of Jewish New Yorkers – myself included – tend to be left-leaning in their politics, and therefore are sympathetic to Mamdani’s progressive views on domestic politics. It is these issues that have dominated the public discussion until now.

To be sure, attempts have been made to draw away Jewish support from Mamdani by painting him as a domestic radical, if not a raving socialist lunatic. Most Jews are not radicals, and would not support Mamdani if they saw him as the dangerous extremist that his opponents claim he is. Despite what Republicans say, New Yorkers are not clamoring for Lenin; in an economy made unstable by Trump’s tariffs, what they want is to get ahead and support their families, and Mamdani is promising to move them in that direction.

In short, Mamdani is an attractive candidate with an attractive platform. And while Jewish leaders have tried to raise the alarm about his Israel views, it has been difficult, in the quiet summer months to generate interest and concern among the broader Jewish community about this candidate’s relationship to Israel.

This issue is even more fraught in the current moment, as it appeals strongly to young Jews in particular, many of whom are justifiably furious at Israel’s actions in Gaza. These same young Jews often argue that as mayor Mamdani will have no foreign policy role. They therefore resent any effort to criticize their candidate for his Israel views. “Why are we even talking about this?” is a question that is often heard. “This race is about New York, not Israel.”

Are we to conclude from all of this that Mamdani will pay no price for his opposition to a Jewish state?

It is hard to say. There is no denying that Jewish support for Israel has declined as the war in Gaza drags on and the death toll of innocents grows. New York Jews are angry at Israel, furious about Gaza and sickened by the Kahanists who sit in Israel’s cabinet. And we should remember that despite his outspokenness on Israel, Mamdani won a decisive victory in the Democratic primary.

Nonetheless, I believe that in the two months that remain before the general election, as the election heats up and Mamdani’s views are subjected to far more intensive scrutiny, the dynamics of the race will change.

Support for Israel has declined, but it has hardly disappeared, and Jewish voters who have not been paying attention to the mayoral race – and that is the majority – will begin listening to what the candidates have to say. And I am betting that when they do, they will not like at all what they hear from Mamdani.

Mamdani, in my view, is playing an ugly little game with Jewish voters. In the Gaza era, presided over by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, it is not a problem to be a critic of Israel. Critics are everywhere, particularly in the Democratic Party, and even Israel’s most stalwart supporters are calling for more “balance” in America’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Some of Mamdani’s supporters, taking advantage of the growing debate, are slyly suggesting that he is simply another critic among many amid the ongoing war.

If this were true, of course, there would be little or no controversy. If Mamdani were promoting some form of a two-state solution, I would be voting for him myself.

But Mamdani is not a critic of Israel, he is a hater of Israel. Despite some very minor rhetorical adjustments, he remains what he has always been, an opponent of a Jewish state. His toxic disdain for Israel puts him so far out of the mainstream of the Jewish community that it will not be easy for Jews with even minimal attachment to Israel to support him. And while some will, given the alternatives, they will do so with reluctance and concern.

It is also true that Mamdani has said not a word about Islam’s miserable record in promoting both democracy and religious pluralism. Israel, where 20 percent of its citizens are non-Jews has a better than average record in that regard. Since Mamdani opposes the Jewish character of Israel, he should have the decency to speak up about Pakistan and other countries in the Muslim world that are neither democratic nor pluralistic.

What should Jews do in this election? I don’t tell people how to vote, and as I have indicated, I believe it is almost certain that Mamdani will be elected.

But both before and after the election, my plea to the Jewish citizens of New York City is: educate, educate, educate. Use Mr. Mamdani’s primary victory as an occasion to educate the people of New York about Israel.

This means making it clear that thoughtful criticism of Israel at this difficult moment is both welcome and necessary, and will be encouraged from all candidates. This means offering our own criticism, and calling for a resumption of diplomacy and an end to the war in Gaza. This means demanding that Mamdani stop the word games and be honest, finally, about what he really expects Israel to be and do.

And this means saying to the citizens of New York and the people of the world that there must be a Jewish state, and that saying there should not be a Jewish state is an act of hostility against the Jewish community and Jews everywhere.

Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker Tells it Like it Is

26 Tuesday Aug 2025

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

I am posting what the historian Heather Cox Richardson reported on August 26 in her Substack (worth subscribing) from a powerful speech delivered by Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker on August 25 in Chicago that everyone ought to read, assuming you had not heard or read it already:

Calling Chicago, Illinois, a “a disaster” and “a killing field,” Trump referred to Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker as “a slob.” Trump complained that Pritzker had said Trump was infringing on American freedom and called Trump a dictator. Trump went on: “A lot of people are saying maybe we like a dictator. I don’t like a dictator. I’m not a dictator. I’m a man with great common sense and a smart person. And when I see what’s happening to our cities, and then you send in troops instead of being praised, they’re saying you’re trying to take over the Republic. These people are sick.”

This afternoon, standing flanked by leaders from business, law enforcement, faith communities, education, local communities, and politics at the Chicago waterfront near the Trump Tower there, Governor Pritzker responded to the news that Trump is planning to send troops to Chicago.

He began by saying: “I want to speak plainly about the moment that we are in and the actual crisis, not the manufactured one, that we are facing in the city and as a state and as a country. If it sounds to you like I am alarmist, that is because I am ringing an alarm, one that I hope every person listening will heed, both here in Illinois and across the country.”

He acknowledged that “[o]ver the weekend, we learned from the media that Donald Trump has been planning for quite a while now to deploy armed military personnel to the streets of Chicago. This is exactly the type of overreach that our country’s founders warned against. And it’s the reason that they established a federal system with a separation of powers built on checks and balances. What President Trump is doing is unprecedented and unwarranted. It is illegal, it is unconstitutional. It is un-American.”

Pritzker noted that neither his office nor that of Chicago’s mayor had received any communications from the White House. “We found out what Donald Trump was planning the same way that all of you did. We read a story in the Washington Post. If this was really about fighting crime and making the streets safe, what possible justification could the White House have for planning such an exceptional action without any conversations or consultations with the governor, the mayor or the police?”

“Let me answer that question,” he said. “This is not about fighting crime. This is about Donald Trump searching for any justification to deploy the military in a blue city in a blue state to try and intimidate his political rivals. This is about the president of the United States and his complicit lackey Stephen Miller searching for ways to lay the groundwork to circumvent our democracy, militarize our cities, and end elections. There is no emergency in Chicago that calls for armed military intervention. There is no insurrection.”

Pritzker noted that every major American city deals with crime, but that the rate of violent crime is actually higher in Republican-dominated states and cities than in those run by Democrats. Illinois, he said, had “hired more police and given them more funding. We banned assault weapons, ghost guns, bump stops, and high-capacity magazines” and “invested historic amounts into community violence intervention programs.” Those actions have cut violent crime down dramatically. Pritzker pointed out that “thirteen of the top twenty cities in homicide rates have Republican governors. None of these cities is Chicago. Eight of the top ten states with the highest homicide rates are led by Republicans. None of those states is Illinois.”

If Trump were serious about combatting crime, Pritzker asked, why did he, along with congressional Republicans, cut more than $800 million in public safety and crime prevention grants? “Trump,” Pritzker said, “is defunding the police.”

Then Pritzker turned to the larger national story. “To the members of the press who are assembled here today and listening across the country,” he said, “I am asking for your courage to tell it like it is. This is not a time to pretend here that there are two sides to this story. This is not a time to fall back into the reflexive crouch that I so often see where the authoritarian creep by this administration is ignored in favor of some horse race piece on who will be helped politically by the president’s actions. Donald Trump wants to use the military to occupy a U.S. city, punish his dissidents, and score political points. If this were happening in any other country, we would have no trouble calling it what it is: a dangerous power grab.”

Pritzker continued: “Earlier today in the Oval Office, Donald Trump looked at the assembled cameras and asked for me personally to say, ‘Mr. President, can you do us the honor of protecting our city?’ Instead, I say, ‘Mr. President, do not come to Chicago. You are neither wanted here nor needed here. Your remarks about this effort over the last several weeks have betrayed a continuing slip in your mental faculties and are not fit for the auspicious office that you occupy.’”

The governor called out the president for his willingness to drag National Guard personnel from their homes and communities to be used as political props. They are not trained to serve as law enforcement, he said, and did not “sign up for the National Guard to fight crime.” “It is insulting to their integrity and to the extraordinary sacrifices that they make to serve in the guard, to use them as a political prop, where they could be put in situations where they will be at odds with their local communities, the ones that they seek to serve.”

Pritzker said he hoped that Trump would “reconsider this dangerous and misguided encroachment upon our state and our city’s sovereignty” and that “rational voices, if there are any left inside the White House or the Pentagon, will prevail in the coming days.”

But if not, he urged Chicagoans to protest peacefully and to remember that most members of the military and the National Guard stationed in Chicago would be there unwillingly. He asked protesters to “remember that they can be court martialed, and their lives ruined, if they resist deployment.” He suggested protesters should look to members of the faith community for guidance on how to mobilize.

Then Pritzker turned to a warning. “To my fellow governors across the nation who would consider pulling your national guards from their duties at home to come into my state against the wishes of its elected representatives and its people,” he said, “cooperation and coordination between our states is vital to the fabric of our nation, and it benefits us all. Any action undercutting that and violating the sacred sovereignty of our state to cater to the ego of a dictator will be responded to.”

He went on: “The state of Illinois is ready to stand against this military deployment with every peaceful tool we have. We will see the Trump administration in court. We will use every lever in our disposal to protect the people of Illinois and their rights.”

“Finally,” he said, “to the Trump administration officials who are complicit in this scheme, to the public servants who have forsaken their oath to the Constitution to serve the petty whims of an arrogant little man, to any federal official who would come to Chicago and try to incite my people into violence as a pretext for something darker and more dangerous, we are watching, and we are taking names. This country has survived darker periods than the one that we are going through right now. And eventually, the pendulum will swing back, maybe even next year. Donald Trump has already shown himself to have little regard for the many acolytes that he has encouraged to commit crimes on his behalf. You can delay justice for a time, but history shows you cannot prevent it from finding you eventually.

“If you hurt my people, nothing will stop me, not time or political circumstance, from making sure that you face justice under our constitutional rule of law. As Dr. King once said, the arc of the moral Universe is long, but it bends toward justice. Humbly, I would add, it doesn’t bend on its own. History tells us we often have to apply force needed to make sure that the arc gets where it needs to go. This is one of those times.”

The Abuse of Power in This Era

08 Tuesday Jul 2025

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

The Judeo-Christian tradition, upon which the United States was founded, promoted the notion of “covenantal politics” as a means to create an ideal society based upon human rights and dignity, equality and opportunity, justice and respect, accountability and responsibility, forgiveness and reconciliation, personal growth and freedom, all based in the principle articulated in the book Genesis that the human being is created b’tzelem Elohim, in the Image of God, thereby affirming infinite worth and dignity in every woman, man and child.

In this era of Donald Trump, the question before us is the same question that has always challenged Americans since our nation’s founding: What is political power for? Is it to sate the personal ambition of a politician, or is it to nurture a covenantal America in which politics is the means to further a more just and inclusive nation? If politics is only about ambition and power, then power renders as irrelevant morality and conscience, and it elevates amorality, illegality, sedition, insurrection, violence, and murder.

I know I’m not alone in my disgust and feeling of foreboding about what is happening to American democracy and the spirit of fair play and common decency under the aggressive disregard for human dignity under Donald Trump. Yes, there are still many good people and servant-leaders in every arena of our society committed to the well-being of others. We are watching now, for example, how many good people are doing everything possible to save victims of this horrendous flooding in Texas. And there are many among our political, business and educational leadership, religious and social justice activists, jurists, legal scholars and advocates, journalists and writers, entertainment and sports luminaries actively fighting for what I describe above as our nation’s “covenantal politics.” Certainly, not all is lost yet and mid-term elections will surely come and the vast majority of Americans who now disapprove of Trump’s aggressive disregard for human rights and the fundamental needs of most Americans will have an opportunity to vote against him and his minions.

I have been thinking a great deal about the use and abuse of power since Trump became President again, as he wields it like every common dictator does around the world, for his own purposes and interests. Note the column one story in this past Sunday’s New York Times (July 6, 2025) that describes in detail how Trump’s financial fortunes dramatically reversed since becoming the Republican candidate for President a second time and then winning the presidency again. He was on the verge of financial ruin (hardly a successful businessman he), but now has monetized the presidency to such an extent that he has turned his losses into massive wealth and power. His is a disgusting display of corruption the likes of which America has not seen in the presidency in our nearly 250 years of existence and that no one in his party even talks about much less does anything about.

As I have thought about power, here are a few quotations that offer additional insight and its character and purpose:

“Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” ―Lord Acton, English Catholic historian (1834-1902)

“It is not power that corrupts but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it, and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it.” ―Aung San Suu Kyi (Burmese Politician and diplomat, b. 1945)

“It is said that power corrupts, but actually it’s more true that power attracts the corruptible.” ―David Brin, American author (b. 1950)

“The true measure of a man is how he uses his power.” ―Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Nobel Peace Prize Winner (1929-1968)

“With great power comes great responsibility.” ―Voltaire, French Enlightenment author (1694-1778)

“The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don’t have any.” ―Alice Walker, American writer (b. 1944)

“The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no [person] living with power to endanger the public liberty.” ―President John Adams (1735-1826)

“We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.” ―George Orwell, British writer (1903-1950)

“Power is of two kinds. One is obtained by the fear of punishment and the other by acts of love. Power based on love is a thousand times more effective and permanent then the one derived from fear of punishment.” ―Mahatma Gandhi, Indian philosopher and non-violent champion (1869-1948)

The Case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia – An outrage if ever there is one!

04 Friday Jul 2025

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

I am not a lawyer, so I rely on the expertise of legal scholars who are able to communicate clearly to the public what is at stake in cases in which the United State’s government’s actions defy the US Constitution and the law.

I am posting here Joyce Vance’s “Civil Discourse” missive (worth subscribing) because the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, when understood, ought to outrage anyone who cares about American democracy, the rule of law, the separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary, the truth and common decency.

Joyce Vance is an American lawyer who served as the United States attorney for the Northern District of Alabama from 2009 to 2017. She was one of the first five U.S. attorneys, and the first female U.S. attorney, nominated by President Barack Obama.

Ms. Vance describes in detail the case against Mr. Garcia and the cruel treatment he has received deliberately by the Trump Administration and by Donald Trump himself.

Ms. Vance concludes:

“This case, which has brought issues of due process and the prospect of the executive branch of government ignoring orders issued by the judiciary to the forefront of Americans’ minds, will stand as one of the most important cases in American history.”  

I urge you to read the entire post below as it not only paints a terrible legal picture, but a horrendous moral one.

I have felt outrage, along with so many millions of Americans, about Mr. Garcia’s treatment since this case first became a national story months ago. Now that he has been returned to the United States and is being charged with federal crimes as a cover to whitewash what Trump and his minions have done to him and the rule of law, we know much more about what actually happened to Mr. Garcia in El Salvador and what the Trump Administration is capable of doing to any one of us.

Here is Ms. Vance’s report today – July 4, 2025

The Civil Case:

On March 24, 2025, Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s wife filed a civil lawsuit on his behalf in federal district court in Maryland. The defendants included Attorney General Pamela Bondi, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The Trump administration had just deported Venezuelans it claimed were gang members to El Salvador, although ultimately it came to light that significant numbers of them weren’t. The Trump administration violated a district court’s order that the men not be turned over to El Salvador, which was ultimately reversed by the Supreme Court.

It’s not unusual for plaintiffs in civil cases to amend their initial complaint as new information comes to light. On Wednesday, Jennifer Stefania Vasquez Sura, Abrego Garcia’s wife, asked the court for permission to do so.

She explained that “the Government filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint as moot, arguing that because it had returned Abrego Garcia to the United States, Plaintiffs have received all the relief they sought.” She wanted to amend her complaint to “clarify that the relief they seek remains live, notwithstanding Abrego Garcia’s return to the United States.” Three new items are included in the amended complaint:

  • “The proposed Amended Complaint details the Government’s defiance of court orders after this Court granted preliminary injunctive relief.”
  • “[E]vidence that emerged in a June 2025 whistleblower disclosure from former DOJ official Erez Reuveni, who was previously counsel for the Government in this case. The new allegations include government officials internally acknowledging that Abrego Garcia’s removal was an “administrative error” while simultaneously working to prevent his return and to make post-hoc justifications. These revelations provide evidence of deliberate misconduct that was unavailable when the original Complaint was filed.”
  • “Abrego Garcia’s first-hand account of torture and mistreatment at CECOT, as well as developments regarding his return to the United States and the Government’s stated plan to remove him again.”

The proposed amended complaint, which is attached to the motion for permission to file it, contains predictable but still shocking revelations about conditions at CECOT. The conditions, as alleged, are more like a concentration camp than a prison in the United States, and there is little doubt that if established, the allegations made about those conditions would run afoul of the Constitution’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. Although the government has maintained that once delivered to El Salvador, these men are no longer in U.S. custody, that argument is paper-thin, or at least it should be, since the U.S. government is paying El Salvador to house these men. The allegations made by Abrego Garcia will likely play prominently in litigation over this issue.

The new allegations in the amended complaint include the following:

“Upon arrival at CECOT, the detainees were greeted by a prison official who stated, ‘Welcome to CECOT. Whoever enters here doesn’t leave.’ Plaintiff Abrego Garcia was then forced to strip, issued prison clothing, and subjected to physical abuse including being kicked in the legs with boots and struck on his head and arms to make him change clothes faster. His head was shaved with a zero razor, and he was frog-marched to cell 15, being struck with wooden batons along the way. By the following day, Plaintiff Abrego Garcia had visible bruises and lumps all over his body.

In Cell 15, Plaintiff Abrego Garcia and 20 other Salvadorans were forced to kneel from approximately 9:00 PM to 6:00 AM, with guards striking anyone who fell from exhaustion. During this time, Plaintiff Abrego Garcia was denied bathroom access and soiled himself. The detainees were confined to metal bunks with no mattresses in an overcrowded cell with no windows, bright lights that remained on 24 hours a day, and minimal access to sanitation.”

And although the complaint alleges that El Salvadoran prison officials acknowledged that Abrego wasn’t a gang member, they threatened him with physical harm at the hands of gang members in the prison:

“As reflected by his segregation, the Salvadoran authorities recognized that Plaintiff Abrego Garcia was not affiliated with any gang and, at around this time, prison officials explicitly acknowledged that Plaintiff Abrego Garcia’s tattoos were not gang-related, telling him ‘your tattoos are fine.’

While at CECOT, prison officials repeatedly told Plaintiff Abrego Garcia that they would transfer him to the cells containing gang members who, they assured him, would ‘tear’ him apart.

Indeed, Plaintiff Abrego Garcia repeatedly observed prisoners in nearby cells who he understood to be gang members violently harm each other with no intervention from guards or personnel. Screams from nearby cells would similarly ring out throughout the night without any response from prison guards on personnel.

During his first two weeks at CECOT, Plaintiff Abrego Garcia suffered a significant deterioration in his physical condition and lost approximately 31 pounds (dropping from approximately 215 pounds to 184 pounds).”

During a conference call with District Judge Paula Xinis in Greenbelt, Maryland, the government acknowledged it intended to deport Abrego Garcia again, this time to a third country. That would not violate the withholding order that prevented them from sending him to Venezuela. The government’s lawyer represented that it didn’t have imminent plans for deportation, but Abrego Garcia’s lawyers told the court, “We have concerns that the government may try to remove Mr. Abrego Garcia quickly over the weekend, something like that.” They asked for an emergency order that would bring him to Maryland if he were released in Tennessee, where he is facing the criminal charges the government filed against him when they returned him from El Salvador.

Abrego Garcia remains in federal custody in Tennessee while the Magistrate Judge considers whether to release him—she previously ruled he was entitled to release, but she was concerned about the deportation issue.

Judge Xinis set a July 7 court hearing in Maryland to discuss the emergency request and other matters. Today, she rejected the government’s request to delay the hearing to a later date.

The same week Abrego Garcia’s wife filed her original complaint, Defendant Kristi Noem traveled to El Salvador to “visit” CECOT prison. She posed for this photo in front of a cell full of prisoners.

A report from the CATO Institute suggests that although the government claims all of the men it sent to Venezuela are “illegal aliens,” in 50 of the 90 cases where they were able to identify how the men entered the United States, the men said that they entered the U.S. legally, with government permission, at an official border crossing point.”

The Criminal Case

The government attempted to save face when it returned Abrego Garcia from El Salvador by filing criminal charges against him involving the transportation of people who were known to be present in the U.S. without legal immigration status. Comments made by government officials went far beyond the facts alleged in the indictment—a clear violation of DOJ policy—in describing his conduct and claiming he was a serious violent criminal who, among other things, had sexually assaulted women.

Last week, there were reports that the government’s key witness, Jose Ramon Hernandez Reyes, likely the owner of the car Abrego Garcia was driving during the incident he was charged with, was a three-time convicted felon. The deal the government cut with him allowed his early released early from federal prison to a halfway house in exchange for his cooperation in the case.

An official with Homeland Security Investigations, part of ICE, testified Hernandez Reyes would have been deported but for his cooperation with the government. The Washington Post reported that he said in court that the government “is also likely to give him a work permit.”

In the meantime, Abrego Garcia’s attorneys have asked District Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr. in Tennessee to enforce local rules that prohibit the Trump administration from making “extensive and inflammatory extrajudicial comments about Mr. Abrego that are likely to prejudice his right to a fair trial.” The motion continues, “These comments continued unabated—if anything they ramped up—since his indictment in this District, making clear the government’s intent to engage in a ‘trial by newspaper.’”

Abrego Garcia’s lawyers raise four points of concern in their pleading:

  • “[T]he government has relentlessly attacked Mr. Abrego’s character and reputation in dozens of public statements … Many of the government’s statements have been highly prejudicial and serve no justifiable law enforcement purpose—and reflect nothing more than the lengths the government will go to in its efforts to paint Mr. Abrego as a dangerous criminal to deflect from its mistake.”
  • “[T]he government has expressed opinions about Mr. Abrego’s guilt and the evidence in this case in ways that go far beyond the limited disclosures permitted” by local rules of court.
  • “[T]he government’s statements have been contaminated with irrelevant and false claims that the DOJ ‘knows or reasonably should know are likely to be inadmissible as evidence in a trial or that would, if disclosed, create a substantial risk of prejudicing an impartial trial.”” As an example, they offer that, “at a press conference announcing these charges, Attorney General Bondi recounted allegations from unreliable alleged coconspirators that Mr. Abrego ‘abused undocumented alien females,’ ‘trafficked firearms and narcotics,’ ‘solicited nude photographs and videos of a minor,’ and ‘played a role in the murder of a rival gang member’s mother.’” They also objected to what they call unsubstantiated claims that Abrego Garcia is Mr. Abrego is a “wife beater” and “domestic abuser.” They conclude that “These assertions are not only irrelevant and inflammatory, but also based entirely on inadmissible hearsay.”
  • “[S]ince the indictment was unsealed, the government has made nearly three dozen statements about the fact that it has charged Mr. Abrego with a crime, without reference to the presumption of innocence.”

In a normal administration, an Assistant United States Attorney who did any of these things would most likely be seriously sanctioned by internal DOJ disciplinary mechanisms. But here, the concern is about the Attorney General of the United States and other high-ranking officials. We are no longer surprised by much, but we should reclaim our ability to be shocked by the truly outrageous. Because that’s exactly what this is.

It is the job of defense lawyers to put the government on its back foot. But they’ve made the claims in this case knowing that they will be thoroughly tested. In their motion, Abrego Garcia’s lawyers ask the court for a very simple sanction: they want him to “issue an order directing the parties to comply with Local Criminal Rule 2.01,” the local rule that prohibits these out-of-court statements. This afternoon, Judge Crenshaw directed both sides to stop making public statements about the case. It’s not clear from his two-sentence ruling, “Motion (69) is GRANTED. All counsel are expected to comply with the Local Rules of this Court,” whether the order extends to DHS employees in addition to DOJ employees, which Abrego Garcia’s lawyers requested.

Despite this limited action, the motion was a strategic one that hints at the kind of arguments that will be used to argue a guilty verdict, if the government obtains one, should be reversed because the jury pool was tainted by the government’s own statements to the public. The motion also recites that, “The Vice President, a Yale Law School graduate, went so far as to flatly lie about Mr. Abrego, calling him a ‘convicted MS-13 gang member,’ notwithstanding that Mr. Abrego in fact has never been convicted of any crime at all.” Abrego Garcia’s lawyers are busy making a record.

This case, which has brought issues of due process and the prospect of the executive branch of government ignoring orders issued by the judiciary to the forefront of Americans’ minds, will stand as one of the most important cases in American history. We don’t yet know how it will end. It is a very dangerous moment for our democracy, one we should all pay close attention to. Thanks for being here with me at Civil Discourse. Your support, and your paid subscriptions help me devote the time and resources necessary to this work.

I Protest President Trump’s Call-up of the California National Guard

08 Sunday Jun 2025

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

President Trump has wanted to use the US military and states’ National Guard as a show of his concentrated federal power since his first term. He even wanted to shoot demonstrators in the legs who were protesting police brutality against the George Floyd murder by police in a demonstration outside the White House. Now, he is getting his long-held wish to hold a military parade on the streets of Washington, D.C. next week on his 79th birthday just as autocrats around the world love to do to intimidate and threaten civilian populations in their countries.

Yesterday and today, while circumventing the legitimate authority of California Governor Gavin Newsom to call up the California National Guard (if it would be needed –  Governor Newsom does not believe it is needed), Trump has himself called up 2000 National Guard troops and deployed them in Los Angeles citing a rarely used provision within Title 10 of the U.S. Code on Armed Services  ”10 U.S.C. 12406,”  that has been activated only when “there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.” That is NOT happening in Los Angeles County. Governor Newsom has stated that local police departments are acting responsibly, as opposed to the charges of the President.

The White House sent out this letter yesterday, insulting the Democratic leadership of the State of California, and falsely characterizing the situation in Los Angeles as out of control. The letter is transparent. It is part of Trump’s retributive justice against blue states generally and Democratic political leadership in California specifically. Of course, the great irony of this White House statement is that Trump pardoned hundreds of convicted criminals serving prison time for attacking the government of the United States, killing and injuring dozens of police officers who were guarding the nation’s Capitol on January 6, 2021:

“In recent days, violent mobs have attacked ICE Officers and Federal Law Enforcement Agents carrying out basic deportation operations in Los Angeles, California. These operations are essential to halting and reversing the invasion of illegal criminals into the United States. In the wake of this violence, California’s feckless Democrat leaders have completely abdicated their responsibility to protect their citizens. That is why President Trump has signed a Presidential Memorandum deploying 2,000 National Guardsmen to address the lawlessness that has been allowed to fester. The Trump Administration has a zero tolerance policy for criminal behavior and violence, especially when that violence is aimed at law enforcement officers trying to do their jobs. These criminals will be arrested and swiftly brought to justice. The Commander-in-Chief will ensure the laws of the United States are executed fully and completely.” -Karoline Leavitt, White House Press Secretary

Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the law school at the University of California, Berkeley was quoted this morning in the NY Times (link to the full article is below):

“For the federal government to take over the California National Guard, without the request of the governor, to put down protests is truly chilling. It is using the military domestically to stop dissent.”

I agree.

A friend rightly compared Trump’s action this weekend to the arson attack on the home of the German parliament in Berlin on Monday, February 27, 1933, four weeks after Adolf Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor of Germany. The fire, allegedly set by the Nazis themselves, was used to weaponize the NAZIs on their rapid march to destroy what was left of democracy in Germany.

Though I do not believe that we in America are experiencing 1930s Germany, the desired march towards autocracy by this President is obvious.

Now is the time for us to protest Trump’s over-reach. We best remember the warning of the German theologian and Lutheran Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892-1984) who aptly wrote about the consequences of passivity in the face of anti-democratic governance and brutality:

“First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and Id did not speak out – because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak for me.”

Read the NY Times piece on this action here: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/07/us/trump-national-guard-deploy-rare.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

REFORM MOVEMENT LEADERS SUPPORT IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES TO THE UNITED STATES

02 Sunday Feb 2025

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

 

January 20, 2025

For decades, the Reform Jewish movement has advocated for immigration policies that are compassionate and just, reflecting the United States’ status as a nation founded and strengthened by immigrants and as a nation of laws with borders that must be secure. We now speak strongly against the policies and Executive Orders issued by President Trump that demonize immigrants, seek to end birthright citizenship, target immigrants for mass deportation, make synagogues newly vulnerable to immigration enforcement actions, and cut off vital funding for essential refugee resettlement work – including that which helps fund HIAS, the nation’s oldest refugee resettlement agency, founded by the Jewish community and serving people of all faiths.  

Like most Americans, Jewish Americans are an immigrant community. Today, more than a century after the largest waves of Jewish immigration to the United States, we recall that anti-immigrant legislation passed in the 1920s discriminatorily limited legal immigration from Eastern and Southern Europe and prohibited most European Jews from finding refuge on American shores during the Nazi Holocaust. Hundreds of thousands of people who sought but could not find refuge here met their end in Hitler’s gas chambers and crematoria. This terrible history reinforces the lessons of the Torah, which commands us thirty-six times to be mindful of the plight of the stranger, for we were strangers in Egypt.  

Reform Jewish congregations, rabbis, cantors, and educators have long been engaged in the holy work of welcoming and resettling immigrants and refugees—Jews escaping antisemitism and limited opportunity in Eastern Europe, Vietnamese and Cuban people freeing oppressive regimes, refuseniks from the former Soviet Union, and many more. Today, our communities are diligently involved in resettlement of refugees whose lives are endangered by their having served with the United States Armed Forces in Afghanistan and others fleeing war-torn nations such as Syria and Ukraine. Reform communities along the southern border are deeply engaged in relief work with those who have recently arrived in the United States. Some Reform communities have declared themselves to be sanctuaries for those facing deportation and we are deeply opposed to the rescission of the policy that protected houses of worship from immigration enforcement actions. 

The demonization of immigrants as criminals must stop. Mass roundups of immigrants, or those perceived to be immigrants, and deportation without due process must halt. Funding to refugee resettlement agencies must be restored. Efforts to eliminate the Constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship must cease. Houses of worship must again be able to fulfill their prophetic mandate without fear of ICE raids. Asylum seekers must be allowed the right to plead their case. Migrants who were previously approved to enter the U.S. must have that approval reinstated. And it is time for Congress and the Trump administration to work together to achieve immigration reform that upholds our status as a nation of immigrants, meets the needs of businesses and employers, and ensures the nation’s security and future well-being.  

Reform communities and their leaders will continue this work, inspired by our Jewish history, biblical teachings, and the Constitution’s commitment to the free exercise of religion.  

Union for Reform Judaism 
Central Conference of American Rabbis 
American Conference of Cantors 
Early Childhood Educators of Reform Judaism
Men of Reform Judaism 
National Association for Temple Administration
Program and Engagement Professionals of Reform Judaism
Women of Reform Judaism 
Women’s Rabbinic Network

Rekindling Hope in the Trump Era

28 Tuesday Jan 2025

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

As Trump barrels forward dismembering and destroying long-held liberal American norms and democratic traditions and values that have been hard-fought for and legislated since the Civil War, it would be easy to become despondent and turn away from the political process. As a student of human nature, nothing that’s happening now really surprises me. Nor does anything Trump has done or will do mean that America is entering a long period of regression and the beginning of a generation of demagoguery. David French put it well last week on The Bulwark Podcast with Tim Miller that we still have agency to resist Trump’s demagoguery:

“The courage, compassion, and resistance against Trump combined with some of the natural consequences of Trump’s erratic and incompetent nature mean that there will be a real opportunity to turn the page from Trump. He will give us that opportunity. The question is will those who are opposed to Trump have our act together well enough to seize the opportunity… One of the things Trump has benefited from is sometimes a corrupt and incompetent opposition. … He’s at a high watermark now. Often there’s a period of extreme triumphalism after elections, but we’ve seen this flip-flop-flip-flop of power many times. The Trump folks are deluding themselves that they are on the ascendancy [that will last for decades].”

My sons often tell me that I’m a pie-in-the-sky idealist ignoring the corrupt reality into which America has been sliding. I understand their perspective and, in truth, agree that American society has massive problems. But, I believe that hope is very different from optimism. Hope is not an attitude that denies a very bad reality. I wrote about the difference between hope and optimism at some length in my Memoir (From the West to the East – A Memoir of a Liberal American Rabbi – publ. 2024). There I argued:

“Hope keeps us grounded in the here and now as a commandment of the heart in the face of uncertainty, a vision that enables a better future, based on trust and supportive of purpose, enabling us to live in an enhanced present of constructive waiting. Our keeping focus on the kind of world we want to inhabit, while doing everything possible to prepare ourselves for the fulfillment of that vision and dream, inspires not only hope but renewed energy, a sense of purpose and an optimistic attitude. Each of us has the capacity to inspire hope through our deeds despite obstacles in our way. There are so many examples of how one individual changed the course of history. All great social movements started with an individual whose will and hope thrust him/her forward to do great deeds.”

I offer here, as well, a few words published last week by Psychology Professor Dr. Kendra Thomas (“Hope Is Not the Same as Optimism, a Psychologist Explains” (January 25, 2025):

“Long-term hope is not about looking on the bright side. It is a mindset that helps people endure challenges, tackle them head-on and keep their eyes on the goal… What makes hope a virtue is not its ability to promote happiness and success but its commitment to a greater good beyond the self. …[Hope is] an unwavering focus on striving for a better future, often unglued from expectations of personal success… Hope is not a positive expectation but a moral commitment. … Hope doesn’t expect a quick improvement, yet it wards off paralysis… Hope plays the long game: … it manifests in hardship and is refined in adversity. Hope enables communities to march for justice and democracy even while tasting the danger of dictatorship, apartheid or oligarchy.”

The Trump Administration buttressed by a sycophantic majority in Congress and a majority of state houses presents formidable obstacles to human rights, democracy, justice and the virtues of compassion and humility. Some of his excesses in Executive Orders, however, are beginning to be challenged by the courts and even by corporations (see Dan Rather’s Substack piece today – January 28), by Democrats in Congress, states, cities and neighborhoods. Political pundits and members of the Democratic Party are starting to think out loud about what went wrong in the 2024 elections and what must be done going forward politically before elections this year and in 2026.

Edmund Burke reminds that “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing.” 

Trump’s Dangerous Call to Eliminate FEMA

26 Sunday Jan 2025

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

I was stunned by President Trump’s call on Friday to local Los Angeles leaders after the disastrous LA fires that FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) failed miserably in North Carolina after Hurricane Helene and ought to be eliminated altogether. Congressman Brad Sherman, my own congressional representative who also represents part of the Pacific Palisades community that was destroyed by the fires, challenged the President about the efficacy and importance of FEMA only to be interrupted and bullied by the President who kept claiming that FEMA is a disaster and utterly failed in North Carolina after Hurricane Helene.

Hurricane Helene was a disastrous storm that caused catastrophic damage with many deaths across the Southeast in late September 2024. It was the strongest hurricane on record and the deadliest hurricane since 2017 and the deadliest to strike the United States since Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

The Charlotte Observer, North Carolina’s newspaper, however, clarified how, in fact, FEMA dramatically assisted the people who suffered from Hurricane Helene. I quote from that article titled – “Trump disparaged FEMA in NC. Here’s what the agency did during Hurricane Helene” (by Joe Marusak and Ames Alexander – updated January 24, 2025) – https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article299107370.html

“Here’s what FEMA says it did before and after the storm: [FEMA] deployed at least 1,500 FEMA staff members in the Southeast before the hurricane made landfall, Deanne Criswell, FEMA’s top administrator at the time, told The Charlotte Observer in a Dec. 4 interview. “Just because you don’t see somebody in a FEMA shirt walking on the streets the day after a disaster doesn’t mean FEMA is not there,” Criswell said. “We have people on the ground.” … Before the storm’s arrival, FEMA placed millions of liters of water and many meals in staging areas where they could be quickly distributed in North Carolina, Criswell said. “We were working side by side with the state before Helene even came into North Carolina, and we’re still there today,” she said. [FEMA] had hospital assessment teams out within 24 hours of the storm’s arrival to make sure no patients needed to be evacuated, according to Criswell. [FEMA] provided hotel stays for almost 13,000 displaced Western North Carolina households. About 2,700 of those households are still checked into hotels. [FEMA] provided more than $316 million in cash grants, including more than $6.2 million in rental assistance, to Western North Carolina survivors. [FEMA] planned one-day agriculture recovery centers to help North Carolina farmers recover from Helene damage. Trump’s latest comments come at a time of increased concern over climate change and more frequent severe weather events. Trump has already begun rolling back some regulations aimed at preventing climate shocks.”

Trump’s ignorance about FEMA or his cynical misstatement of the truth about what FEMA does is dangerous to the well-being of potentially millions of Americans around the country in blue and red states who will be victimized by natural disasters, many of which are made worse by climate change that the President insists isn’t real (on his first day in office last week, Trump with drew again from the Paris Climate Accord).

Congressman Sherman insisted on asking, over Trump’s incessant interruptions, what small states are expected to do in order to address natural disasters should FEMA be eliminated. He didn’t say (as I believe he should have done) that California contributes to the federal government in far greater dollars to the federal budget than virtually every other state (being the largest state with 40 million citizens) as well as being a major exporter of agricultural and technological products to the nation as a whole.

Trump’s advance team to this visit excluded from the list of officials to meet with the President, California’s Governor Gavin Newsom. It’s no secret that the two leaders represent vastly different views on virtually every issue from climate change to human rights and immigration. Since Trump, because so often he doesn’t have the facts and makes stuff up, constantly resorts to name-calling (e.g. Newscum). However, our Governor understood the significance of the President’s visit and met him at the airport.

Apparently, Governor Newsom informed and charmed the President enough to exact a promise from him that he would do everything he could to help LA recover from these horrendous fires. Trump also promised in the meeting with the local officials, including LA’s Mayor Karen Bass, that he would respond to every request she made of the federal government. But, he continued to bad-mouth FEMA unnecessarily and contrary to the truth of what this agency does.

What Trump will ultimately do regarding FEMA is unclear, but his threats to eliminate this federal agency that does so much to help Americans who suffer from natural disasters is a disaster itself in the making. One can only hope that Trump’s supporters, especially in small red states that will suffer from future disasters will prevail upon him quietly to back away from his outrageous threats.