Trump's GDP

From the BEA:

Real gross domestic product (GDP) decreased at an annual rate of 0.3 percent in the first quarter of 2025 (January, February, and March), according to the advance estimate released by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.  [Bolding in original]

And:

The decrease in real GDP in the first quarter primarily reflected an increase in imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, and a decrease in government spending.  

 Then this happened:

Trump and his aides struggled to coalesce around a message about the GDP number, simultaneously saying it was bad because of Biden administration policies but also good because of Trump's efforts.

 

"You probably saw some numbers today, and I have to start off by saying that's Biden," Trump said to reporters, without elaborating as he referred to his Democratic predecessor.

Because of course he did. 

On the other hand:

The first-quarter decline was largely a result of quirks in the way economic activity is measured. More reliable data on consumer spending and business investment suggested that growth slowed in the first quarter but didn’t contract.

But while the negative number was misleading, it reflected something real about the way Mr. Trump has upended the economy in his first months in office. Consumers raced to buy cars and other goods before tariffs took effect. Businesses did the same with equipment, parts and raw materials, laying in stores for the trade war to come.

Moreover, the first-quarter figures were a glimpse at the past, before Mr. Trump announced even more sweeping tariffs in early April. That announcement, and the series of escalations and reversals that followed, caused chaos in financial markets and set off a full-blown trade war with China.

I can't wait until we see the next quarter's GDP!

 

Trump's "Due Process" And Such

From today's NYTimes: 

President Trump, whose administration has insisted it could not bring Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia back from El Salvador to the United States, said he does have the ability to help return the wrongly deported Maryland man, but is not willing to do so because he believes he is a gang member.

“You could get him back, there’s a phone on this desk,” said Terry Moran, an ABC News correspondent, noting a Supreme Court order to “facilitate” the release of Mr. Abrego Garcia.

“I could,” Mr. Trump replied.

Mr. Moran said Mr. Trump could call President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador and get Mr. Abrego Garcia back immediately.

“And if he were the gentleman that you say he is, I would do that,” Mr. Trump said. “But he is not.” Mr. Trump added that government lawyers do not want to help bring Mr. Abrego Garcia back to the United States.

Setting aside the administration's previous arguments that it could not do exactly what Trump just said he could (but wouldn't), let's take another look at something I posted a few days ago.

This is from the court order:

It is difficult in some cases to get to the very heart of the matter. But in this case, it is not hard at all. The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order. Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done.

This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear.

The government asserts that  Abrego Garcia is a terrorist and a member of MS-13.Perhaps, but perhaps not. Regardless, he is still entitled to due process.

And:

The Supreme Court’s decision does not, however, allow the government to do essentially nothing. It requires the government “to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.”

Now go take a look again at what Trump said in that interview.

Donald Trump is refusing to do what The Supreme Court ordered him to do.

Trump's definition of Due Process.

 

This is America Now.

From The New York Times:

The Trump administration has dismissed the hundreds of scientists and experts who had been compiling the federal government’s flagship report on how global warming is affecting the country.

The move puts the future of the report, which is required by Congress and is known as the National Climate Assessment, into serious jeopardy, experts said.

Since 2000, the federal government has published a comprehensive look every few years at how rising temperatures will affect human health, agriculture, fisheries, water supplies, transportation, energy production and other aspects of the U.S. economy. The last climate assessment came out in 2023 and is used by state and local governments as well as private companies to help prepare for the effects of heat waves, floods, droughts and other climate-related calamities.

Let's take a look at that last assessment:

The more the planet warms, the greater the impacts. Without rapid and deep reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions from human activities, the risks of accelerating sea level rise, intensifying extreme weather, and other harmful climate impacts will continue to grow. Each additional increment of warming is expected to lead to more damage and greater economic losses compared to previous increments of warming, while the risk of catastrophic or unforeseen consequences also increases.  

That (in part) is what this Administration doesn't want you to know.

And that requirement?  Goes back 35 years to this legislation signed into law by George H.W. Bush.  

Section 106 reads:

On a periodic basis (not less frequently than every 4 years), the Council, through the Committee, shall prepare and submit to the President and the Congress an assessment which—  

(1) integrates, evaluates, and interprets the findings of the Program and discusses the scientific uncertainties associated with such findings;  

(2) analyzes the effects of global change on the natural environment, agriculture, energy production and use, land and water resources, transportation, human health and welfare, human social systems, and biological diversity; and  

(3) analyzes current trends in global change, both human- inducted and natural, and projects major trends for the subsequent 25 to 100 years.

Of course if you dismiss all the science folks writing the report you're not technically violating the law requiring it be submitted to the Executive and Legislative branches, are you?

You can just get Sean Hannity to write it for you instead!

Or maybe the next best thing.  The Times has this a few paragraphs down:

President Trump has frequently dismissed the risks of global warming. And Russell Vought, the current director of the Office of Management and Budget, wrote before the election that the next president should “reshape” the Global Change Research Program, because its scientific reports on climate change were often used as the basis for environmental lawsuits that constrained federal government actions.

And who is Russell Vought, current director of OMB? 

He was a major player in Project 2025. From The Times:

Mr. Vought and Mr. McEntee are involved in Project 2025, a $22 million presidential transition operation that is preparing policies, personnel lists and transition plans to recommend to any Republican who may win the 2024 election. The transition project, the scale of which is unprecedented in conservative politics, is led by the Heritage Foundation, a think tank that has shaped the personnel and policies of Republican administrations since the Reagan presidency.

And what does Project 2025 have to do with climate science?

From The Union of Concerned Scientists:

Effective climate governance, from policy to litigation, must be grounded in rigorous science. Project 2025, however, threatens this foundation by undermining scientists and the data they produce, a continuation of actions taken during Trump’s first term. The plan’s recommendations include policy changes that would stifle scientific research, sideline critical climate assessments, and discredit science as a guiding force for public policy.  

For instance, it proposes directing the President to “critically analyze” and potentially reject assessments from the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP)—the body responsible for the National Climate Assessment, a key scientific resource. The USGCRP was established under a 1990 Act of Congress and provides a crucial scientific underpinning to help the nation understand and respond to climate change. It is specifically not policy prescriptive in its work. Labeling these findings as “political” risks concealing climate realities from decision-makers who need accurate, independent science to make informed and accountable decisions. By casting doubt on established science, Project 2025’s agenda does more than distort policy; it feeds the disinformation machine. 

Good news, they don't need Sean Hannity after all!

This is America now.

 

 

McCormick Monday

Another in an ongoing series.

Dear Senator;

I am a resident of Pennsylvania and a constituent of yours and I'd like you to answer a question or two.

The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution reads, in part:

No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...

The Fourteenth Amendment also contains this:

...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. 

And the Supreme Court has asserted, in 1993, that:

It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings.

Those first two texts clearly state "persons" and not "citizens" and SCOTUS has established due process rights for aliens.

And yet, The New York Times recently reported that:

President Trump asserted on Tuesday that undocumented immigrants should not be entitled to trials, insisting that his administration should be able to deport them without appearing before a judge.

The remarks, which he made in the Oval Office in front of reporters, were Mr. Trump’s latest broadside against the judiciary, which he has said is inhibiting his deportation powers. Mr. Trump falsely claimed that countries like Congo and Venezuela had emptied their prisons into the United States and that he therefore needed to bypass the constitutional demands of due process to expel the immigrants quickly.

Finally, The Supreme Court ruled:

On March 15, 2025, the United States removed Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia from the United States to El Salvador, where he is currently detained in the Center for Terrorism Confinement (CECOT). The United States acknowledges that Abrego Garcia was subject to a withholding order forbidding his removal to El Salvador, and that the removal to El Salvador was therefore illegal.

Then there are the US Citizens (some of them only children) deported without meaningful due process.

I'd like to ask you, Senator, isn't it absolutely clear that all those deported - and, sadly, those yet to be deported - were absolutely entitled to due process? Why aren't you standing up to this administration's overstepping its constitutional authority? Don't you think that the Congress is an equal branch that was designed to serve as a check and balance over abuses of authority from the executive branch?

I'll await your answer, Senator.

As always, I will post your answer here at this blog.

Fetterman Responds!

No letter to Senator Fetterman this Friday.

Today, I am reporting on my latest letter from Fetterman, instead.

I hope that's OK.

So far, I've sent PA's senior Senator 3 letters:

• April 5 - about Civil Rights
• April 11 - the administration's tariffs
• April 18 - the administration's attack on Harvard, Fetterman's alma mater.

Before yesterday, the first two had been "answered" in one form or another (you can see them here and here, respectively)

Yesterday, I received an email from the Senator (or, more likely, his office) responding to, what I am guessing should be, that third letter of mine.

I'm guessing. It's that unconnected.

This is what I asked in that letter:

And, according to the statement released by DHS Noem accused your alma mater of "bending the knee to antisemitism" and its "Harvard’s foreign visa-holding rioters and faculty have spewed antisemitic hate, targeting Jewish students."

Whatever one thinks of whatever the pro-Palestinian protesters have said about Israel after the attacks of October 7, 2023, those statements are protected by the First Amendment, aren't they? Have any actual laws been broken? Of course, those accused of breaking the law should be given due process and prosecuted. But is that enough to threaten the independence of an entire university?

And this is how Senator Fetterman answered:

Thank you for reaching out to my office. I appreciate hearing from you.
 
As Americans, we are committed to following our constitution and defending the freedom it guarantees all of us. Our civil rights protect our freedom to think for ourselves, to speak out, to be treated equally, to love who we love, to vote for the government of our choice, and so much more. These are values and protections that make America the great country it is. 
 
As your senator, protecting and advancing civil rights are key priorities for me. For too many Pennsylvanians, the promise of true equality has not been met, and I am committed to strengthening and expanding protections that allow all Pennsylvanians to live healthy and productive lives free from discrimination. Part of that is recognizing our country’s history of discrimination against minority communities, from the original sin of slavery through the brutality of Jim Crow and the bigotry of preventing LGBTQ+ Americans from marrying the person they love, and taking meaningful steps to make it right.  

And so on.

Does it look familiar?

Take a look at this response from Senator Fetterman's office from April 5. In that blog post, I quoted this: 

As your senator, protecting and advancing civil rights are key priorities for me. For too many Pennsylvanians, the promise of true equality has not been met, and I am committed to strengthening and expanding protections that allow all Pennsylvanians to live healthy and productive lives free from discrimination. Part of that is recognizing our country’s history of discrimination against minority communities, from the original sin of slavery through the brutality of Jim Crow and the bigotry of preventing LGBTQ+ Americans from marrying the person they love, and taking meaningful steps to make it right. 

It's the same letter. Two different letters sent to him with two different sets of questions and I got the same stock response to each from Senator Fetterman.

And, just like the "response' from April 5, this one utterly fails to address any of my concerns in any meaningful way.

Remember, I was asking about the administration's attacks on academic freedom at one of the nation's top universities.  If they could get away with that at Hah-Vahd, they can get away with it to any other college/university in the country. That's a big fucking deal.

Again, all I got back was another copy of the same bland recitation of Fetterman's past accomplishments in the Senate in response.

Disappointing doesn't begin to describe it. Insulting gets closer.

I am guessing that I am not the only one of Senator Fetterman's constituents to have received this letter for some question they've mailed in.  Or received a some other non-answer to whatever their question was. I can't be the only PA voter on the receiving end of such insultingly disappointing responses.

The only difference between their letters/responses and mine are that you can see and read mine at this blog.

Senator John Fetterman needs to be far far better at this. 

We are his voters. We deserve meaningful communication regarding the administration's numerous and serious threats to our collective and individual freedom.

If my letters here are any indication, we're not getting it.

 

This is America Now

From CBS News:

A 19-year-old U.S. citizen arrested by Customs and Border Protection agents earlier this month in Arizona and briefly prosecuted for illegal entry into the U.S. has intellectual disabilities, his family told CBS News.

Jose Hermosillo was arrested on April 8 by CBP in Tucson and detained for 10 days. His family provided documentation proving his American citizenship, days after being taken into custody, according to court records and Department of Homeland Security assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin.

On Monday, the Department of Homeland Security argued his arrest, which has attracted national attention, was a "direct result of his own actions and statements." A DHS spokesperson said Hermosillo approached a Border Patrol agent, said he had entered the U.S. illegally and identified himself as a Mexican citizen.

The department also posted a copy of Hermosillo's sworn statement on X in which Hermosillo responded "yes" when asked if he had entered the U.S. illegally. The document shows a child-like signature that reads "Jose."

In a phone interview Tuesday, Hermosillo's parents told CBS News their son suffers from intellectual disabilities, cannot read or write and has trouble speaking. They said he could not have possibly known what he was signing when he was detained.   

"He's never been able to read and was always in special education classes in school," Guadalupe Hermosillo, Hermosillo's mother, said in Spanish. 

Then there's this completely unrelated story from the AP:

A U.S. citizen was arrested in Florida for allegedly being in the country illegally and held for pickup by immigration authorities even after his mother showed a judge her son’s birth certificate and the judge dismissed charges.

Juan Carlos Lopez Gomez, 20, was in a car that was stopped just past the Georgia state line by the Florida Highway Patrol on Wednesday, said Thomas Kennedy, a spokesperson at the Florida Immigrant Coalition.

Gomez and others in the car were arrested under a new Florida law, which is on hold, making it a crime for people who are in the country illegally to enter the state.

There's more about this story here:

The federal government is blaming a U.S. citizen for his arrest during a traffic stop in Leon County last week under a temporarily blocked state immigration law.

A senior official with the Department of Homeland Security said Monday that Juan Carlos Lopez-Gomez, a 20-year-old born in Georgia, was detained Wednesday after he told a Florida Highway Patrol trooper that he was in the country illegally.

“Immediately after learning the individual was a United States citizen, he was released,” a DHS senior official said in a statement Monday. “When individuals admit to committing a crime, like entering the country illegally, they will of course be detained while officers investigate.”

"Immediately" must mean something different to DHS. Back to the AP:

The charge of illegal entry into Florida was dropped Thursday after his mother showed the judge his state identification card, birth certificate and Social Security card, said Kennedy, who attended the hearing.

Court records show Judge Lashawn Riggans found no basis for the charge.

Lopez Gomez briefly remained in custody after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement requested he remain there for 48 hours, a common practice when the agency wants to take custody of someone. ICE did not respond to a request for comment.

And did you miss the part that the law he was held under was "temporarily blocked" from being enforced? From CNN:

Lopez-Gomez, who speaks an indigenous language and is not fluent in English or Spanish, was arrested with two men under a Florida law that took effect in February and was temporarily blocked April 4 by a federal judge, who barred its enforcement until Friday, court records show. It was not immediately clear why the suspended law was in play.  

This is America now.

 

 

 

 

Fetterman Responds!

I've written to PA Senator John Fetterman three times so far.

The first one, posted on April 5,  circled around questions of Homeland Security. The most recent, posted on April 18, was a question about Harvard, Fetterman's Alma Mater.

On April 11, I asked  him about Senator Elizabeth Warren's call for an official investigation into whether "Trump or anyone in his administration manipulated the market to benefit their donors."

The first one has already been "answered" and I can't imagine getting a response on Monday for something I posted the previous Friday. That leaves Warren's call for an investigation into possible market manipulation.

Yesterday, I received an email from his office that started with this:

Thank you so much for reaching out to my office about the economy. I appreciate hearing from you.

And continued with:

I’m working hard to deliver an economy that truly works for every Pennsylvanian. Pennsylvania families are currently being squeezed from all sides while companies rake in massive profits and the White House causes chaos with it's indiscriminate trade war. In the 119th Congress, I will continue to push for policies that bring down costs for Pennsylvanians and help local economies thrive. 

And so on.

No mention of Senator Warren, or the tariffs, or her call for an investigation into possible administration financial corruption based on the timing of those tariffs' "pauses."

No. Just a boilerplate recitation of Sen Fetterman's legislative accomplishments as they apply to the economy.

Why even bother with such a response, Senator?

We live in a time where the administration may well have signaled to its mega-rich friends on an up-coming tariff-pause. If true, it's hugely corrupt. If not, then the administration deserves an "all clear" on the issue.

This is the sort of oversight the US Congress should be doing. 

I ask you about it and you send me a list of your accomplishments that, more or less, has nothing to do with what I asked.

Disappointing isn't the word, Senator.

Feel free to take another shot at it. 

Please.

The letter from Fetterman: