Kansas City Star: Trump Withdraws National Guard Threat Amid Defiance

President Donald Trump has threatened to deploy the National Guard to Chicago amid Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s objections, pointing to Washington and Memphis as examples of federal intervention. Critics argue the move would mark an effort of federal overreach into state authority, while Republicans have argued it could help curb violent crime. Trump has withdrawn his plans to deploy the National Guard to Chicago, at least for the immediate future.

Trump said, “So I’m going to go to Chicago early against Pritzker. Pritzker is nothing. If Pritzker was smart, he’d say, ‘Please come in.’ … If they lose less than six or seven people a week with murder, they’re doing a great job in their opinion.”

Pritzker called Trump’s remarks inconsistent and not credible, warning that a deployment without state consent would face immediate legal challenges. Pritzker said, “That you can’t take anything that he says seriously from one day to the next.”

Pritzker added, “He’s attacking verbally, sometimes he attacks, sending his agents in, sometimes he forgets. I think he might be suffering from some dementia. The next day, he’ll wake up on the other side of the bed and stop talking about Chicago.”

Pritzker argued “Operation Midwest Blitz” could justify broader federal action and said the enforcement posture is likely to provoke confrontations. Legal limits may restrict deployment, as a federal judge in San Francisco ruled a June Los Angeles deployment violated the Posse Comitatus Act.

Trump said, “Chicago is a death trap and I’m going to make it just like I did with D.C., just like I’ll do with Memphis.”

Civil liberties groups criticized the Memphis operation as overreach and regressive policing. The White House has touted the move as a measure to reduce violent crime.

American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee said, “This latest step makes clear that the Trump administration is claiming a sweeping mandate to patrol, arrest and detain people in Memphis, and will bring back the same failed policing tactics that caused widespread constitutional violations for decades.”

Pritzker said, “The harder the ICE agents come in, the more people want to intervene and step in the way of them. And when that happens, and when there’s any kind of, well, touching or engagement with those ICE agents that involves actual potential battery, well, that’ll be the excuse.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-withdraws-national-guard-threat-amid-defiance/ss-AA1N5efl

Independent: Fruit vendor arrested by border patrol outside Gavin Newsom event speaks out after six weeks in ICE prison

Strawberry delivery driver released on bond after abrupt arrest as agents patrolled governor’s event

Angel Rodrigo Minguela Palacios was unloading boxes of strawberries during his final delivery in Los Angeles when a band of masked Border Patrol agents surrounded him and asked for his identification.

Minguela had unwittingly entered a political minefield on August 14 outside the Japanese American National Museum in Little Tokyo, where California Governor Gavin Newsom was addressing a crowd about his plans to fight back against a Republican-led gerrymandering campaign to maintain control of Congress.

Federal agents deployed by Donald Trump’s administration were patrolling the street directly in front of the building.

The timing of the spectacle drew immediate scrutiny and backlash, with the governor speaking out in the middle of his remarks to condemn what was happening just outside the event. “You think it’s coincidental?” he said.

Minguela, 48, was released from Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody last week after nearly two months inside a facility he described as a “prison” with lights on at all hours of the day, no beds and only a concrete floor to sleep on.

Detainees received little food, and the conditions were so bleak that some of the men inside volunteered to self-deport rather, he told CBS News.

“Those days were the hardest,” Minguela told The Los Angeles Times. “My first day there on the floor, I cried. It doesn’t matter that you’re men, it doesn’t matter your age. There, men cried.”

Minguela, who is undocumented, has lived in the United States for more than a decade after entering the country from Mexico on a tourist visa. He overstayed his visa after fleeing violence in the Mexican state of Coahuila, where he had been kidnapped twice and stabbed by people trying to steal money from ATMs he was servicing, according to The Times.

He does not have a criminal record.

Minguela was released on bond and is equipped with an ankle monitor as an immigration judge determines next steps in his case.

A spokesperson for Homeland Security said he “was arrested for breaking our country’s laws by overstaying his visa” but remains unclear why he was targeted for arrest.

Minguela had overstayed a tourist visa after fleeing the Mexican state of Coahuila in 2015 because of violence he faced there, his partner said. She said he had worked servicing ATMs there, was kidnapped twice and at one point was stabbed by people intent on stealing the money. After his employers cut staff, she said, he lost his job, helping drive his decision to leave.

On August 14, Minguela left his partner and three children — ages 15, 12 and six — while they were still asleep as he prepared for his daily delivery route at 2 a.m. He had worked for the same produce delivery company for eight years and never missed a day.

Minguela was unloading several boxes of strawberries and a box of apples when he noticed a group of masked Border Patrol agents roaming the area surrounding Newsom’s event.

Video from the scene shows the agents passing his van then doubling back and looking inside to find Minguela. He presented a red “know your rights” card from his wallet and handed it to an agent.

“This is of no use to me,” he said, according to The Times. Agents then asked him his name, nationality and immigration paperwork before leading him away in handcuffs.

“Immigration has already caught me,” Minguela wrote in text messages to his partner. “Don’t worry. God will help us a lot.”

U.S. Border Patrol El Centro Sector Chief Gregory Bovino was observing the arrest. He turned to the officers and shouted out “well done” moments before speaking with reporters who were filming the scene.

“We’re here making Los Angeles a safer place since we don’t have politicians that will do that,” Border Patrol El Centro Sector Chief Gregory Bovino told FOX 11. “We do that ourselves, so that’s why we’re here today.”

Asked whether he had a message for Newsom, who was speaking roughly 100 feet away, Bovino said he wasn’t aware where the governor was.

“I think it’s pretty sick and pathetic,” Newsom said of the arrest.

“They chose the time, manner, and place to send their district director outside right when we’re about to have this press conference,” he said. “That’s everything you know about Donald Trump’s America … about the authoritarian tendencies of the president.”

Minguela believes he was targeted for his appearance.

Immigration raids throughout the Los Angeles area in June sparked massive protests demanding the Trump administration withdraw ICE and federal agents from patrolling immigrant communities.

In response, Trump federalized National Guard troops and sent in hundreds of Marines despite objections from Democratic city and state officials.

A federal judge determined the administration had illegally deployed the Guard as part of an apparent nationwide effort to create “a national police force with the president as its chief.”

The Supreme Court also recently overturned an injunction that blocked federal agents from carrying out sweeps in southern California after a judge determined they were indiscriminately targeting people based on race and whether they spoke Spanish, among other factors.

The court’s opinion drew a forceful rebuke from liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the first Hispanic justice on the bench, who accused the conservative justices of ignoring the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unlawful searches and seizures

“We should not have to live in a country where the Government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low wage job,” she wrote in a dissenting opinion.

“The Fourth Amendment protects every individual’s constitutional right to be “free from arbitrary interference by law officers,’” she added. “After today, that may no longer be true for those who happen to look a certain way, speak a certain way, and appear to work a certain type of legitimate job that pays very little.”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/gavin-newsom-los-angeles-ice-arrest-border-patrol-b2831503.html

Fox Business: Newt Gingrich: This country is sliding into a pro-Chinese, communist dictatorship

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich defines the ‘real distinction’ in Erika Kirk’s remarks at Charlie’s memorial and warns which country is ‘sliding’ into a dictatorship on ‘Kudlow.’ 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/newt-gingrich-this-country-is-sliding-into-a-pro-chinese-communist-dictatorship/vi-AA1N6d24

Newsweek: Elena Kagan warns Supreme Court “overriding” Congress to give Trump a win

ustice Elena Kagan warned Monday that the Supreme Court is “overriding” Congress to hand President Donald Trump sweeping new powers over independent agencies.

Her dissent came after the court, in a 6-3 decision, allowed Trump to fire Federal Trade Commission member Rebecca Slaughter while the justices consider whether to overturn a 90-year-old precedent limiting presidential removals.

The conservative majority offered no explanation, as is typical on its emergency docket, but signaled a willingness to revisit the landmark 1935 Humphrey’s Executor ruling.

Kagan, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, said the court has repeatedly cleared firings that Congress explicitly prohibited, thereby shifting control of key regulatory agencies into the president’s hands.

“Congress, as everyone agrees, prohibited each of those presidential removals,” Kagan wrote. “Yet the majority, stay order by stay order, has handed full control of all those agencies to the President.”

Newsweek reached out to the White House for comment via email on Monday afternoon.

Why It Matters

The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly faced decisions regarding Trump’s use of his powers since his return to the White House in January. Cases have included attempts to fire large swaths of the federal government workforce, as well as changes to immigration policy and cuts to emergency relief funding, with arguments that it is Congress, not the president, that holds such powers.

What To Know

Monday’s decision is the latest high-profile firing the court has allowed in recent months, signaling the conservative majority is poised to overturn or narrow a 1935 Supreme Court decision that found commissioners can only be removed for misconduct or neglect of duty.

The justices are expected to hear arguments in December over whether to overturn a 90-year-old ruling known as Humphrey’s Executor.

In that case, the court sided with another FTC commissioner who had been fired by Franklin D. Roosevelt as the president worked to implement the New Deal. The justices unanimously found that commissioners can be removed only for misconduct or neglect of duty.

That 1935 decision ushered in an era of powerful independent federal agencies charged with regulating labor relations, employment discrimination and public airwaves. However, it has long rankled conservative legal theorists, who argue that such agencies should answer to the president.

The Justice Department argues that Trump can fire board members for any reason as he seeks to implement his agenda. However, Slaughter’s attorneys argue that regulatory decisions will be influenced more by politics than by the expertise of board members if the president can fire congressionally confirmed board members at will.

“If the President is to be given new powers Congress has expressly and repeatedly refused to give him, that decision should come from the people’s elected representatives,” they argued.

The court will hear arguments unusually early in the process, before the case has fully worked its way through lower courts.

The court rejected a push from two other board members of independent agencies who had asked the justices to also hear their cases if they took up the Slaughter case: Gwynne Wilcox, of the National Labor Relations Board, and Cathy Harris, of the Merit Systems Protection Board.

The FTC is a regulator enforcing consumer protection measures and antitrust legislation. The NLRB investigates unfair labor practices and oversees union elections, while the MSPB reviews disputes from federal workers.

What People Are Saying

Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote: “The President and the government suffer irreparable harm when courts transfer even some of that executive power to officers beyond the President’s control.”

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, in her dissent: “The majority may be raring to take that action, as its grant of certiorari before judgment suggests. But until the deed is done, Humphrey’s controls, and prevents the majority from giving the President the unlimited removal power Congress denied him.”

Representative Rosa DeLauro, a Connecticut Democrat, in an amicus brief filed in Trump v. Slaughter“Because the President’s limited authority to temporarily withhold funds proposed for rescission under the ICA does not permit the President to withhold those funds through their date of expiration without action from Congress, the district court’s injunction imposes no greater burden on the government than already exists under that law. The stakes for Congress and the public, however, are high. The fiscal year ends on September 30, less than three weeks from today.”

What Happens Next

The court has already allowed the president to fire all three board members for now. The court has suggested, however, that the president’s power to fire may have limits at the Federal Reserve, a prospect that is expected to be tested in the case of fired Fed Governor Lisa Cook.

https://www.newsweek.com/kagan-supreme-court-congress-trump-win-ftc-2133934

Buzz60: Walmart Raises Prices By 45% In 30 Days Due To ‘Magnitude Of The Tariffs’

Something unusual is happening at Walmart. This week, shoppers and workers are spotting big price hikes on toys, groceries, and everyday items.

Some prices are rising by nearly half in just 30 days. People are sharing photos of the new tags online. What’s driving these changes? The answer links back to tariffs announced in Washington, now showing up on America’s store shelves.

Across Walmart locations in the U.S., employees and customers are noticing sharp jumps. Fresh stickers are going up with higher numbers, and shoppers are posting side-by-side photos of old and new tags to show how quickly things have changed.

Much of the first buzz came from Reddit, where Walmart staff uploaded pictures of price changes. These posts quickly spread, giving the public a closer look at how steeply prices are moving in real time.

One of the clearest examples came from sporting goods. A left-handed fishing reel rose from $57.37 in April to $83.26 in May. That’s a 45 percent jump within weeks: proof of just how much tariffs can push prices.

The toy aisle tells a similar story. A Jurassic World T. rex climbed from $39.92 on April 27 to $55 by May 21. A Baby Born doll that cost under $35 in March was nearly $50 two months later. Parents are feeling the pinch.

Walmart makes about 60 percent of its U.S. sales from groceries. Even small increases here can affect millions of families. Cocoa powder, for example, jumped from $3.44 in 2024 to $6.18 in 2025, showing that food costs are not immune.

The main reason is tariffs. In April, President Donald Trump announced a 10 percent tax on imports. Vendors passed these costs on to Walmart, and Walmart says it can’t absorb them all without raising prices for shoppers.

Doug McMillon, Walmart’s CEO, put it simply: “We’ll keep prices as low as possible, but given the magnitude of the tariffs, we can’t take on all the pressure.” For a low-margin retailer, the math leaves little choice.

Walmart’s size means these changes affect huge numbers of people. As of July 31, 2025, Walmart runs 5,206 stores in the U.S., including 4,606 Walmart locations and 600 Sam’s Clubs. When Walmart prices shift, millions of households notice.

Walmart makes most of its money by selling lots of goods at low prices. Its thin profit margins mean that even small increases in supply costs show up quickly at checkout. Tariffs hit this model directly.

Tariffs were announced in April. By May, Walmart was already raising prices. That short gap shows how quickly higher import costs move from global trade decisions to store shelves.

Walmart isn’t alone. Many U.S. companies are also adjusting prices upward. The toy industry has warned that nearly every retailer relying on Chinese imports will feel the strain.

Most toys sold in the U.S. are made in China. That means nearly every part of the toy supply chain now costs more. With no way to absorb those costs, stores pass them to parents.

When asked about toy prices, Trump downplayed concerns: “Maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls.” His remark fueled debate about whether tariffs really protect U.S. jobs… or mainly just raise costs for families.

Online, shoppers are voicing anger. Many share receipts or photos showing items marked up by double digits in a matter of weeks. Some say they’re cutting back or shopping elsewhere, but most note Walmart has few low-cost rivals.

CFO John David Rainey told reporters that Walmart’s strategy remains strong, but protecting profits while prices rise is a challenge. For now, the company is focused on managing growth and costs at the same time.

Economists warn that if tariffs continue, more categories, from electronics to clothing—could rise in price. Long-term pressure may shift how families spend and how stores compete.

For the millions who shop Walmart weekly, a 30 to 40 percent increase on basics adds up fast. Families already stretched by inflation say they feel these hikes directly in their budgets.

With prices climbing, shoppers and experts are calling for more clear labeling about why costs are rising. Some want receipts or shelf tags to show when tariffs, not just supply shortages, are driving increases.

For now, Walmart is passing costs along as tariffs take hold. Whether things settle depends on trade policy in the months ahead.

What started as a government decision is now being felt in the everyday purchases of millions of Americans.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/walmart-raises-prices-by-45-in-30-days-due-to-magnitude-of-the-tariffs/ss-AA1N41OE

Axios: Trump promotes unproven vaccine theories, then praises shots

Just weeks after President Trump said “pure and simple,” vaccines work, he floated a slew of unproven theories linking vaccines to autism, before praising shots in a wide-ranging press conference on Monday.

Why it matters: Trump’s back and forth on vaccines amid consistent science finding them effective risks confusing the public and undermining trust in U.S. medical professionals.

Context: Trump made the remarks during a briefing on autism rates, where he and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. revived a contentious, unproven debate that links autism to acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Tylenol.

What he’s saying: “There are certain groups of people that don’t take vaccines and don’t take any pills, that have no autism,” Trump said during a Monday evening press conference at the White House.

  • He repeated the myth that Amish communities have “essentially no autism” and said neither does Cuba, citing “a rumor — and I don’t know if it’s so or not —” that the island nation doesn’t have Tylenol “because they don’t have the money” for the drug.
  • The president specifically noted that Americans should be wary of vaccines that include Thimerosal, a mercury-containing compound sometimes used as a preservative in vaccines.

Reality check: While research has found that some Amish people are likely under-vaccinated due to vaccine hesitancy, studies show that some Amish children do have autism.

  • report updated by the Food and Drug administration earlier this year found that a “robust body of peer-reviewed scientific studies” have concluded that Thimerosal is perfectly safe in vaccines.

Of note: At the end of the briefing, the president reversed course, saying that he’s a “big believer” in vaccines because he has “seen how great” and “incredible” they can be.

  • Trump said he supports giving kids vaccines to protect against the measles, mumps, rubella and varicella viruses, but added that he disproves of giving them the MMRV vaccine, the combined shot that treats them all.
  • Several studies have found no link between MMR vaccination and autism, per a National Institutes of Health post that notes: “Despite strong evidence of its safety, some parents are still hesitant to accept MMR vaccination of their children. Decreasing acceptance of MMR vaccination has led to outbreaks or resurgence of measles.”
  • Some doctors already provide separate vaccines for children, but also offer the combined vaccine for parents who wish to reduce the amount of shots their kids must take.

Zoom out: Kennedy’s handpicked vaccine recommendation board voted to limit the availability of the combined shots last week, drawing criticism from public health officials.

Health and Human Services referred Axios to the White House for comment, which did not immediately respond to a Monday evening email request.

https://www.axios.com/2025/09/23/trump-promotes-unproven-vaccine-theories-then-praises-shots

Reuters: Trump signs order targeting antifa as a ‘terrorist organization’

  • Trump designates antifa a ‘terrorist organization’
  • Critics warn of potential free speech attack
  • Legal experts question constitutionality of designation

U.S. President Donald Trumpsigned an executive order on Monday calling the antifa movement a “terrorist organization,” the White House said, after promising actions targeting left-wing groups following Charlie Kirk’s assassination.

Kirk, a prominent conservative activist with close ties to Trump, was assassinated on September 10 while speaking on a college campus in Utah. A 22-year-old technical college student has been charged with Kirk’s murder.

Investigators are still looking for a motive and have not said the suspect operated in concert with any groups. But the Trump administration has used the killing as a pretext to revive years-old plans to target left-wing groups they regard as being hostile to conservative views.

Antifa, short for anti-fascist, is a “decentralized, leaderless movement composed of loose collections of groups, networks and individuals,” according to the Anti-Defamation League, which tracks extremists.

“While some extreme actors who claim to be affiliated with antifa do engage in violence or vandalism at rallies and events, this is not the norm,” it says on its website.

Trump’s 370-word executive order directs “all relevant executive departments and agencies” to “investigate, disrupt, and dismantle any and all illegal operations” conducted by antifa or anyone who funds such actions, according to the White House.

“Individuals associated with and acting on behalf of Antifa further coordinate with other organizations and entities for the purpose of spreading, fomenting, and advancing political violence and suppressing lawful political speech.”

Federal law enforcement officials already investigate violent and organized crime associated with a variety of hate groups and ideological movements.

The U.S. government does not currently officially designate solely domestic groups as terrorist organizations in large part because of constitutional protections.

But a Justice Department official with knowledge of discussions on the issue said Trump’s order would unlock expansive investigative and surveillance authorities and powers.

The person, who declined to be named, said the designation would allow the U.S. government to more closely track the finances and movements of U.S. citizens and to investigate any foreign ties of the loose network of groups and nonprofits the Trump administration views as antifa.

FOCUS IS ON FOREIGN FUNDING

Critics of the administration have warned it may pursue an attack on free speech and opponents of the Republican president.

The FBI’s Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence Divisions will be used to track finances – both domestic and foreign sources of funding – and attempt to identify the central leadership of antifa, the official said. FBI surveillance and investigative operations are normally restricted in how they can target U.S. citizens.

“The big picture focus is on foreign money seeding U.S. politics and drawing connections to foreign bank accounts,” a White House source familiar with the plans told Reuters.

“The designation of antifa gives us the authority to subpoena banks, look at wire transfers, foreign and domestic sources of funding, that kind of thing,” the White House source said.

It was not clear which individuals would be the target of such a probe.

Political violence experts and U.S. law enforcement officials have previously identified far-right attacks as the leading source of domestic violent extremism. Trump administration officials have sought to portray left-wing groups as the main drivers of political violence in their remarks since Kirk’s death.

Legal experts have said the domestic terrorism designation may be legally and constitutionally dubious, hard to execute and raise free-speech concerns, given that subscription to an ideology is not generally considered criminal under U.S. law.

During the first Trump administration there were at least two failed efforts to designate antifa a terrorist organization, according to internal Department of Homeland Security communications viewed by Reuters.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-sign-order-designating-antifa-terrorist-organization-2025-09-22

Reason: What Does It Mean for Trump To Designate Antifa a ‘Terrorist Organization’?

America doesn’t have an official list of domestic terrorist organizations, but the declaration could mean heavier political surveillance and RICO prosecutions.

President Donald Trump announced in a social media post on Wednesday night that he is “designating ANTIFA, A SICK, DANGEROUS, RADICAL LEFT DISASTER, AS A MAJOR TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.” He made the same declaration in 2020 amid the Black Lives Matter protests against the police killing of George Floyd, with no real effect on the ground.

But Trump’s new declaration came with another, more specific order: “I will also be strongly recommending that those funding ANTIFA be thoroughly investigated in accordance with the highest legal standards and practices.” And that may be the real significance of his decision.

There is no such thing as a domestic terrorist organization list in the United States. When Congress debated the first counterterrorism legislation in the 1990s, the Clinton administration and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) pushed for sweeping domestic police powers. It was Republicans who opposed those measures at the time because they worried that counterterrorism would be weaponized against the right.

As a compromise, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 only allowed the government to designate and ban foreign terrorist organizations. The first Trump administration reportedly tried to paint Antifa as a foreign organization by pointing to Antifa activists who fought for Kurdish militias in Syria. The problem is that the same Kurdish militias were also allied with the U.S. military, which introduced a foreign policy complication.

The current administration could try to use the Palestinian solidarity movement to paint the left as foreign terrorists. Both Republican politicians and the ADL have tried to imply that student protesters are materially connected to Hamas. As with the Kurdish connection, however, the Palestinian connection to Antifa is fairly stretched.

During the 2020 unrest, then–Attorney General Bill Barr also reportedly told prosecutors to consider using the “seditious conspiracy” law against rioters. The law, passed during the Civil War to round up Confederate guerrillas, punishes any group of people that violently opposes the authority of the U.S. government. The government did not end up pursuing those charges.

The most obvious measure is one that Trump has already hinted at using: the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. After protesters disrupted Trump’s dinner last week, Trump told reporters that he asked the attorney general “to look into that in terms of RICO, bringing RICO cases against them. Criminal RICO. Because they should be put in jail, what they’re doing to this country is really subversive.”

Originally designed to go after the mafia, the RICO Act allows prosecutors to charge an entire organization for criminal behaviors. In September 2023, the state of Georgia tried to use its own state-level RICO law to prosecute members of Stop Cop City, a protest movement against a new police training center. A judge threw out the charges last week.

As many critics have pointed out, Antifa doesn’t exist—at least not as a centralized organization. Anti-fascist is a label that many different left-wing and anarchist activists around the country have adopted, along with similar tactics and aesthetics. But the vagueness of the label can help rather than hinder the Trump administration, if its goal is to crack down on political enemies.

The RICO Act allows prosecutors to define more or less anything they want as a mafia organization, and the charges are nearly impossible to defend against, partly because the government can seize the defendant’s assets before trial, making it impossible to pay a defense lawyer.

Trump’s reference to “those funding ANTIFA” is a hint that he wants to tie Antifa rioting to various progressive donors, as in earlier attempts to go after the Palestinian movement. In May 2024, the House Oversight Committee and House Education Committee demanded information from a wide range of philanthropists—George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, the Pritzker family’s Libra Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation—about their connection to campus protests.

At the time, Foundation for Middle East Peace President Lara Friedman told Reason that this investigation was meant “to demonize parts of the tax-exempt sector that a part of the Republican Party views as a key target in the war on woke….If you make this about supposedly fighting antisemitism, you bring parts of the Democratic Party with you.” 

Now that the Republicans are in power, they may calculate that the war on woke no longer needs Democratic support, and they can go after their targets much more directly. But it doesn’t take much imagination at all to see what the retaliation by a future Democratic administration might look like.

The Biden administration used seditious conspiracy charges to pin the January 2021 riot at the Capitol on the leaders of the right-wing Proud Boys, whom Trump later pardoned. Trump himself was charged under Georgia’s RICO law in 2023 for alleged election interference, a case that is currently on pause but could be resumed in the future.

Of course, Trump’s declaration about domestic terrorism was empty bluster in 2020. Given how much blood the Trump administration tastes from its successful attacks on critical media, and the fact that Democrats have broken the seal on other forms of domestic repression, this time might turn out to be more serious. The tools are there for a political crackdown—not a full descent into dictatorship, but for an escalation of the current surveillance state.

https://reason.com/2025/09/18/what-does-it-mean-for-trump-to-designate-antifa-a-terrorist-organization

Guardian: History teaches us that authoritarians use any excuse to seize power

Nazis used the 1933 Reichstag blaze to justify snuffing out civil liberties. In the US, the calls for a crackdown have already begun

On the night of 27 February 1933, six days before national elections, the German Reichstag was set on fire. Firefighters and police discovered a Dutch communist named Marinus van der Lubbe at the scene, who confessed to being the arsonist. The Nazi Reichstag president, Hermann Göring, soon arrived, followed by the future propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels and Adolf Hitler, who had been dining together.

Two competing, still unresolved, conspiracy theories would circulate about the real culprit: the Nazis, with van der Lubbe as front; or a communist cabal. But the three men had no doubts. Göring pronounced the crime a communist plot. Hitler called it “a God-given signal”, adding: “If this fire, as I believe, is the work of the communists, then we must crush out this murderous pest with an iron fist.”

On 10 September 2025, within minutes of the assassination of Charlie Kirk, before a suspect or a motive had been identified, a cacophony of voices – from neo-Nazi influencers to Republican members of Congress – were blaming the left for the murder of the hugely effective far-right political organizer.

Donald Trump amplified the indictments. “Radical left … rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now,” he said, in a televised address from the Oval Office that night, pointedly omitting examples of violence against progressives or Democrats.

Is Kirk’s assassination Trump’s Reichstag fire?

There are major differences between Germany in 1933 and the US in 2025. Germany’s democracy was but 14 years old at the time. Created amid the privation of the postwar depression and attended by popular ressentiment at the country’s defeat, the Weimar Republic was unstable from the start. And simultaneously, out of those same conditions, the Nazi movement was born and gained strength.

Hitler’s attempted coup d’etat of 1923 – the beer hall putsch – failed but brought him national attention. During what the Nazis called the “time of struggle” between 1925 and 1932, stormtroopers and assorted thugs committed nearly continual acts of terrorism and violence toward political foes. Jews, and other minorities. The conflagration of 27 February 1933 burst from tinder ready to combust.

By contrast, US democracy is nearly a quarter of a millennium old. It has weathered division, corruption, and violence – and, in many instances, stood stronger, better governed, and more just in their aftermath. Today – despite attacks on the press, boldly partisan gerrymandering, police brutality against peaceful protests, and the rightward lurch of the judiciary – Americans still have civil liberties, however frayed and endangered. That is more than Germans had after the Reichstag fire. But it is becoming clearer that, without widespread popular resistance, it will not stay that way.

Important differences notwithstanding, this moment in the US contains many parallels with what happened in Germany over 90 years ago. American history is full of injustice and repression – from the dispossession of Indigenous people’s lands to the permanently heightened surveillance of everyday life since the 9/11 terrorist attacks. But the scale and scope of Trump’s assaults on democracy are unprecedented. We need to learn from the past to recognize how dangerous a moment we are in, and where we might be going.

Within hours of the Reichstag fire, German president Paul von Hindenburg signed an emergency decree “for the protection of people and state” that snuffed out civil liberties, including the freedoms of speech, association, and the press and the rights of due process. A massive repression ensued, including thousands of arrests of communists and Social Democrats, trade unionists, and intellectuals on a list compiled by the paramilitary Sturmabteilung (stormtroopers or SA). The first night, 4,000 people were taken to SA barracks and tortured. The violence did not let up.

On 23 March 1933, with almost all opposition members prevented from taking their seats, the Reichstag passed the statutory partner of the 28 February decree, the Enabling Act, which permanently suspended civil liberties and assigned all legislative power to Hitler and his ministers. Just weeks later, the first concentration camp, Dachau, opened. Accelerated by the blaze in Berlin, German democracy was reduced to ashes.

Now the Trump administration is using Kirk’s assassination, as the Nazis used the fire in Berlin, to instigate its own massive repression. Trump has not blocked Democrats from taking their seats in Congress nor arrested opposition members en masse yet. But he is using the instruments of government to bring to heel anyone who speaks the mildest ill of him or his friends.

In just the last few days, the FCC chair threatened Disney, ABC and its affiliates with punitive action if they did not cancel Jimmy Kimmel Live after the host made a joke in which he implied that Kirk’s killer was one of the “Maga gang”. The companies caved and Kimmel’s show was indefinitely suspended. Autocrats are not known for gracefully taking a joke.

Assigning blame for Kirk’s murder on the entire American political left came not just from extreme-right podcasters, influencers and militia leaders. Republican representatives, administration officials, and White House advisers loudly, almost triumphantly, joined the fray.

“The Democrats own this,” congresswoman Nancy Mace, of South Carolina, told NBC News, calling Kirk’s then-unknown killer a “raging left lunatic”.

“EVERY DAMN ONE OF YOU WHO CALLED US FASCISTS DID THIS,” Florida congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna posted on X. “You were too busy doping up kids, cutting off their genitals, inciting racial violence by supporting orgs that exploit minorities, protecting criminals … Your words caused this. Your hate caused this.”

Laura Loomer, one of Trump’s closest allies, chimed in: “Prepare to have your whole future professional aspirations ruined if you are sick enough to celebrate his death,” she wrote. “I’m going to make you wish you never opened your mouth.”

Of course, the bully at the bully pulpit spoke loudest. “My administration will find each and every one of those who contributed to this atrocity & to other political violence,” Trump promised, “including the organizations who fund it and support it, as well as those who go after our judges, law enforcement officials, and everyone else who brings order to our country.”

Taking over as host on Kirk’s radio show Monday, JD Vance vowed to “go after the NGO network that foments, facilitates and engages in violence” – which he also called “left-wing lunatics”. Of these, he named the Ford Foundation and the Open Society Foundations, the latter run by George Soros, the progressive, pro-democracy philanthropist and Jewish Holocaust survivor, who has long been the subject of neo-Nazi vitriol. Vance also threatened to investigate the non-profit status of the venerable leftwing publication the Nation.

Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff , also on the show, added: “With God as my witness, we are going to use every resource we have at the Department of Justice, homeland security and throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy these [radical left] networks and make America safe again for the American people.”

On Tuesday, after Trump was confronted by protesters who chanted “Free DC! Free Palestine! Trump is the Hitler of our time!” in a Washington DC restaurant, deputy attorney general Todd Blanche said on CNN that he might investigate them as “part of an organized effort to inflict harm and terror and damage to the United States”.

The president more recently told reporters he conferred with US attorney general Pam Bondi about bringing federal racketeering charges against these “agitators” and would support designating “antifa” as terrorists.

In many senses, the crackdown on dissent has been under way for months. Trump began his second term implementing the Heritage Foundation’s Project Esther, punishing professors, students, whole college departments, and anyone accused of “antisemitism”– defined as criticism of Israel – with names supplied by Zionist informants. The witch-hunt is expanding.

All of this, along with Trump’s earlier moves, recall senator Joseph McCarthy’s crusade against communists and other alleged subversives in the 1950s. McCarthy instituted loyalty oaths for government workers, and many states followed suit. Failure to sign meant resignation or firing. In June, a plan to test potential federal employees for fidelity to Trump’s mission was dropped after criticism, but employees and higher officials have since then been regularly fired for failure to demonstrate it, or just for telling a truth inconvenient to the president. The FBI director, Kash Patel, published a list of traitorous “deep state” figures and has already punished a third of them. He denies it is an “enemies list”, referring to the list McCarthy claimed to have.

The president has toyed with invoking the Insurrection Act amid protests against immigrant roundups. He has declared a spectral “crime emergency” as a pretext to send troops into Washington DC and other cities, and ordered the formation of a federal “quick response force” for “quelling civil disturbances”. He has deputized Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) to terrorize and brutalize brown, Spanish-speaking people its agents assume to be undocumented immigrants, a policy of racial profiling and a violation of the fourth amendment against illegal search and seizure, which the US supreme court has allowed.

Before the National Socialists became Germany’s one, murderous ruling party, Nazism was a popular movement. But movements and parties are not separate entities, and governments need to mobilize consent – or squash opposition – to survive. Our lawless government supports and is supported by a lawless movement. “It is shocking how day after day, naked acts of violence, breaches of the law, barbaric opinions appeal quite undisguised as official decree,” the German Jewish philologist and diarist Victor Klemperer wrote on 17 March 1933. The same could describe the US under Trump.

The criminal president has criminals at his back. One of the provisions of the Enabling Act was a grant of amnesty to anyone who had committed a crime “for the good of the Reich during the Weimar Republic”.

“He who saves his country does not violate the law,” Trump posted, quoting Napoleon a few weeks after pardoning all the January 6 rioters, including those who had assaulted and killed police officers. “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by,” he said in a 2016 presidential debate. He is now hinting that it’s time for them to act.

The challenges are enormous. But in addition to the resilience and longevity of US democracy, there are reasons to hope that a resistance movement can survive and win this time around.

Repression is quickly metastasizing. But the same social media that polarize opinion, spread disinformation, and abet government surveillance enable political organizing, foil censorship and substantiate truth, and link global networks to elude repressive laws, such as the feminist cells distributing abortion pills into red states.

The country seems hopelessly divided. Yet the same federalism that gives the states the right to gerrymander and enact undemocratic legislation is useful to states that are intent on governing well, providing for their residents and sheltering them from the abuses of Washington.

The Democrats in Washington are clueless, but local progressive candidates are winning elections. Law firms and major media companies are surrendering to Trump’s extortion without a fight. But the ACLU still exists, as do independent news outlets.

And try as Trump may to erase America’s histories of oppression and of the liberation movements against it, they are not forgotten. We know what capitulation and passivity lead to and what the struggles for peace and justice can ultimately achieve. It is easy to feel defeated, but we cannot give up now.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/sep/20/authoritarians-seize-power-trump

New Republic: Trump’s Biggest Corruption Scandal Isn’t Getting Enough Attention

Donald Trump cashed in on a massively corrupt foreign crypto deal—and no one blinked.

New York Times exposé published Monday tells the tale of two back-to-back deals that enriched three powerful families: the Trumps, the Witkoffs (as in Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff), and the ruling family of the United Arab Emirates.

In one deal, announced in May, a firm of Emirati royal Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan invested $2 billion in World Liberty Financial, a cryptocurrency company owned by the Trump and Witkoff families—which consequently became among the most prominent crypto firms overnight.

In the other, negotiated “at the same time and by some of the same people,” the White House two weeks later agreed to sell the UAE hundreds of thousands of the world’s most valuable artificial intelligence chips, despite national security concerns.

The Times revealed that some officials in the Trump administration were wary about the chip deal due to UAE-China ties. But a key dissenter at the National Security Council, David Feith, was taken out of the equation when MAGA provocateur Laura Loomer questioned his (and five other NSC members’) loyalty, leading to their removal by the president. Silicon Valley investor David Sacks, Trump’s AI and crypto czar, then took a leading role in the negotiations—and received a White House ethics waiver in order to do so.

While the Times reports that there is no evidence that the two deals constituted an explicit quid pro quo—and the White House, and those involved, maintains they were not linked—they do “violate longstanding norms in the United States for political, diplomatic and private deal-making among senior officials and their children,” according to ethics lawyers cited in the report.

On Bluesky, economist Ryan Cummings, who served on President Joe Biden’s Council of Economic Advisers, wrote that the deals, if linked, would represent, by far, “the largest public corruption scandal in the history of the United States”—amounting to a $2 billion bribe, whereas the most comparable incident, the Harding administration’s Teapot Dome scandal, involved bribes amounting to about $10 million in today’s dollars, he said.

Dan Nexon, a political scientist at Georgetown University, observed that the report reveals how “U.S. foreign policy is much easier to understand once you accept that the main ‘grand strategy’ of the Trump administration is straight-up kleptocracy.”

“The Trump Administration is cashing in on foreign crypto deals—and weakening guardrails that protect our advanced technology,” wrote Senator Elizabeth Warren on X. “We should not pass any crypto legislation without shutting this down.”

https://newrepublic.com/post/200486/trump-corruption-scandal-crypto-uae-deal