Tick tock Donald Trump regime

You see the Hemingway quote about bankruptcy happening gradually then suddenly all over lately. (Partly because Trumponomics is causing a lot of it). Anyway. It's in the air. And I think it's because what's happening gradually, then suddenly, is the fall from any real power of Donald Trump. He will remain president, unless he dies, until January 2029. But I think he will lose the ability to actually govern, because he is losing credibility even with his own party, including right wing judges. Tick tock. But suddenly an avalanche. Maybe I'm being Polyannaish, but I think so. 

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM TRANSFIGURAT 

ET SUMMUM GAUDIUM SALTAT

______________________________

Spectacular Corruption in the Justice System Exposed by Sen. Whitehouse

This is almost unbelievable. Yet it's true. The Trump Regime has broken the justice system and if it's not fixed soon it will be beyond repair. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsVDDzscbpQ&list=TLPQMjgwNTIwMja7xK2Bdw8T4A&index=1&pp=iAQBsAgC 

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM TRANSFIGURAT 

ET SUMMUM GAUDIUM SALTAT

______________________________

Trump to roll out NDAs? Hold on!

There are reports that the Trump Regime intends to "roll out" widespread use of NDAs (non-disclosure agreements) for regime lackeys, ... er, employees. Let me say it bluntly: governments exist solely for the purpose of serving the public interest. The regime itself has no legitimate interests other than the public interest. So NDAs must never be allowed. Period. Very limited secrecy for national security can be enforced by laws, but never by private contracts. Personally, I think we need a rigid test of consistency with public interest for all such agreements (at minimum), but there is simply no ethical construction for the idea that they are legitimate for governments. If the courts fail to see it this way, then there's yet another Costitutional Amendment we have to somehow pass. In the meantime, once Trump is booted out, we need to make them illegal by statute. 

  

Re: Democratic opportunity , let's not blow it

Yeah!

-

Sue Cohen

Past Membership Dir. in Public Radio from 1985, had a show, receptionist, boardop, Past ESL tchr  

"The worst people sometimes have something of value to say, the best people sometimes say stupid things."

The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the e-mail recipient and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please erase all copies of the message and its attachments. Please note that this e-mail has been created in the knowledge that Internet e-mail is not a 100% secure communications medium.

On Wed, May 27, 2026, 10:32 AM David Studhalter <oldionus@gmail.com> wrote:

I am pretty sick and tired of "establishment" Democrats nervously tittling about Graham Platner, the presumptive nominee in a Senate race we simply have to win. It reminds me of the way Centrist Democrats would always undermine Bernie Sanders with doom and gloom prognostications, when the actual numbers were quite different. And the hypocrisy of criticizing someone's hyberbolic youthful indiscretions when the alternative, people like Chuck Schumer who opposed the JCPOA (rememeber that?), has always deferred to AIPAC, and sold out to Trump on the first shutdown ... (I could go on and on)... are far less representative of what potential Democratic voters actually want and expect from government. 

We Democrats need to be a big tent, sure, but we need to stop shooting at our own best candidates, focus on what's important, which is winning control, and actually stand for what the American people want. Across the board, our so called leaders fall short, and it's people like Platner who speak plainly and will act accordingly. 

Look, folks. The very continued existence of our democracy is at stake, and we must pull together, pass the torch, nominate and elect new faces with new ideas, and be prepared to commence the gargantuan task of repairing all the damage that's been done, and in the process correct the myriad systematic problems underlying our current state of affairs. Oh, is that all? Yep, that's about it. We may only really get one shot at this, but this is our opportunity, and if we fail to take it quibbling with our own, we are fools. 

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM TRANSFIGURAT 

ET SUMMUM GAUDIUM SALTAT

______________________________

Cool Worlds: most stars cannot host life, and a comment on the implications

You may have already seen this. https://youtu.be/IrUia9AIaOk?list=TLPQMjcwNTIwMjYs1NE_YzXdfg 

Something like 74% of all stars are M dwarfs (aka red dwarfs). You don't see them even in a dark sky, because even from a few light years, they're too dim to see with the naked eye. But it actually is most of the stars that exist. The very closest star, Proxima Centauri, is an M dwarf. 

But here's another aspect of all this to consider. It is clear that most of the star systems in the universe (or Galaxy, same argument) are never going to give rise to planets capable of hosting the origin and persistent existence of life on their surfaces. And of the ones where a planet so capable could exist in principle, only a small fraction will actually contain such a planet. Fine; there are a hell of a lot of planets, and even one in a million is many millions in a typical galaxy. We now know for a certain fact that nearly all stars, from M dwarfs up to B type blue giants (possibly excluding the very brightest ones), have planets. 

But what about the future of life, or what in other places may be in the past, but a major turning point. Intelligence, at least in our imagination, has conceived of spreading life out into the cosmos. Creating artificial habitats. Seeding life on planets of other stars where it did not get going on its own but could exist now. Terraforming worlds that aren't quite good enough. Etc. etc. Much of the universe, naturally dead, can come to life if intelligent beings like ourselves introduce life to those environments. Matter and useful energy are incredibly abundant in the universe. Distance is a huge problem, but patience is the answer. Set your automated ships asail in deep space and just wait; eventually they arrive at another star, where energy is free just like it is here. We are in no rush; if we settle down into a sustainable existence here in our neck of the woods, the future is long, and one consequence of the rarity of life is that we don't seem likely to run into competition any time soon. 

I think this is the likely actual future of our species, and is likely to have already happened countless times in other nooks and crannies of our incredibly vast universe. It's like a waiting stage of the evolution of the Biosphere. And not to get all teleological on you, but it's hard not to think of this as the purpose of the evolution of intelligence. 

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM TRANSFIGURAT 

ET SUMMUM GAUDIUM SALTAT

______________________________

Democratic opportunity , let's not blow it

I am pretty sick and tired of "establishment" Democrats nervously tittling about Graham Platner, the presumptive nominee in a Senate race we simply have to win. It reminds me of the way Centrist Democrats would always undermine Bernie Sanders with doom and gloom prognostications, when the actual numbers were quite different. And the hypocrisy of criticizing someone's hyberbolic youthful indiscretions when the alternative, people like Chuck Schumer who opposed the JCPOA (rememeber that?), has always deferred to AIPAC, and sold out to Trump on the first shutdown ... (I could go on and on)... are far less representative of what potential Democratic voters actually want and expect from government. 

We Democrats need to be a big tent, sure, but we need to stop shooting at our own best candidates, focus on what's important, which is winning control, and actually stand for what the American people want. Across the board, our so called leaders fall short, and it's people like Platner who speak plainly and will act accordingly. 

Look, folks. The very continued existence of our democracy is at stake, and we must pull together, pass the torch, nominate and elect new faces with new ideas, and be prepared to commence the gargantuan task of repairing all the damage that's been done, and in the process correct the myriad systematic problems underlying our current state of affairs. Oh, is that all? Yep, that's about it. We may only really get one shot at this, but this is our opportunity, and if we fail to take it quibbling with our own, we are fools. 

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM TRANSFIGURAT 

ET SUMMUM GAUDIUM SALTAT

______________________________

Trusting what AI tells you

If you talk to LLMs much this will seem familiar. 

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM TRANSFIGURAT 

ET SUMMUM GAUDIUM SALTAT

______________________________

MAD all over again?

I imagine most of my farflung correspondents' interest in military tactics is limited, but this video leads me to believe 1) Ukraine is winning decisively at this point; and 2) drone technology is approaching the level that it will be a new "MAD" (mutually assured destruction) phenomenon, whereby in the future nations will be very keen to avoid armed conflict because it will be impossible to resist drones, and there will be no winners in a drone vs. drone war. Which could be a good thing. 

The test for survival of sophonts (intelligent species, universally) is whether they can learn to cooperate instead of fight. Fighters die. All the way to extinction. Which are we?  

https://youtu.be/F2qHmuGzTgo?list=TLPQMjYwNTIwMjYH_LX3QM_XEQ________________________

​Why composers still study Bach.... Charles Rosen

Why composers still study Bach.... Charles Rosen

Worth watching

https://youtu.be/mjN9YVvpufc?list=TLPQMjUwNTIwMjb4Ocg7ycplqQ 

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM TRANSFIGURAT 

ET SUMMUM GAUDIUM SALTAT

______________________________

AI and learning a language

Language pedagogy companies like Babbel are facing a big challenge all of a sudden, and if they don't contract with Anthropic or OpenAI or Google pretty soon they may be doomed. Turns out one thing LLM AI is really good at is talking to you in a language you're trying to learn. It will actually respond to you and talk about whatever you want, and you can stop it and ask it to explain stuff you don't understand. It's quietly revolutionizing language learning. And they know a whole slew of languages, not just French, Spanish and German. You could learn Mandarin, Hindi, Ukrainian, or many others that are pretty useful to people contemplating careers right now. 

One thing... apparently this kind of live voice conversation is very resource thirsty so most accounts limit how much you can use it. And with the growing backlash at subsidizing the huge costs of AI farms, this kind of use may be considered a pricey commodity in the future. 

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM TRANSFIGURAT 

ET SUMMUM GAUDIUM SALTAT

______________________________

Rick Wilson interview about the history of the Ukraine war

This is worth watching. Especially when they're talking about how it was the Russian invasion that caused the nation of Ukraine to cohere and unite against what everyone now unequivocally sees as an agressive invasion by a hostile foreign power. That almost everyone in Ukraine was going to come to see it this way, and devote their loyalty entirely and only to their country, was not obvious or even highly probable at the outset of this conflict.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60ZOjvXgj_k

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM TRANSFIGURAT 

ET SUMMUM GAUDIUM SALTAT

______________________________

Ukraine is mopping up the Russian navy

There is a major and successful attack on the only remaining Russian Black Sea Fleet deepwater port. But, as this account actually mentions, you won't read much about it even in the British press, and certainly not the NY Times or other American media. But it actually is a big deal. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAkK625kbh0&list=TLPQMjIwNTIwMjZYKitEXxxWxQ&index=12

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM TRANSFIGURAT 

ET SUMMUM GAUDIUM SALTAT

______________________________

Is Trump actually deliberately wrecking everything?

Perhaps I'm overstating it a bit, but spending millions to defeat Republicans (Cassidy, Massie, Cornyn) while more and more MAGAts are relizing he's been lying to them all along, endorsing deeply unpopular policies, outright stealing from the government and wanting to build all kinds of useless crap all over hte capital, while driving up costs and especially gas costs, and engaging us in foreign wars when he promised he wouldn't... and to top it off, posting crazy shit like this (below) all the time now and displaying all sorts of evidence of dementia and declining physical health...

doesn't it start to look like Trump is actually trying to destroy the Republican party and to become the most hated president ever? Which itself is pretty damn scary. What incredible evil is he capable of when he cares nothing even about his own reputation? And we really do seem to be headed that way. 

 

 

This corruption has got to be challenged and stopped

Nearly everyone acknowledges that this "settlement" the Trump regime is attempting to foist off on us to basically give Trump a $2B slush fund at taxpayer expense, and, even worse, covenant not to prosecute him or his family for tax crimes that almost certainly are there to be prosecuted.... is corruption on an African dictator scale. Right here in the USA. Makes Teapot Dome look like an afternoon tea party. But we're not gonna fall for it. Come on, legal eagles! There has to be a way to get standing to challenge this in court and not allow this travesty of justice and process to go forward. There just has to be. 

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM TRANSFIGURAT 

ET SUMMUM GAUDIUM SALTAT

______________________________

Insider trading in the regime

OK, thanks to the AntiConstitutional Court, Trump can't be prosecuted for his hypersteroidal insider trading. But Eric and Junior and Ivanka and Jared can. And Nutlick. For their sake, I hope their lawyers have explained the statute of limitations to them. And that they realize that even if they have a "plan" to destroy democracy and keep their authoritarian cabal in power forever, they may not work out, and they just might find themselves on the inside of a state prison or even federal penitentiary in 2029. But actually, I hope they're as delusional as they appear to be, because they deserve it. All of them. 

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM TRANSFIGURAT 

ET SUMMUM GAUDIUM SALTAT

______________________________

The East Wing

Recent perhaps somewhat speculative reporting indicates that one of the real reasons Trump is so determined to build the Ballroom is as a cover for what's really going on... which is not only the bunker he hopes will help him keep power till he dies, but also the one-person hospital they're building since he's been told he is dying. Which is all so weird; people like him can't really believe anything negative about themselves, so he probably has some ridiculous idea that he can be kept alive forever by "the best healthcare" that he can force the executive support system to provide for him. Somehow none of this is going to end well, that much is clear. 

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM TRANSFIGURAT 

ET SUMMUM GAUDIUM SALTAT

______________________________

Fighting back in 2026, 2028

I have a superi simple motto, one of many, Dems need to use in the upcoming elections.  Gerrymandering is cheating. Americans don't like cheaters. 

We lost the contest to see who could cheat (where we were reacting to them), so now we have to stand for eliminating fundamental unfairness in our system (along with eliminating the corruption that is becoming increasingly blatant and unpopular). 

How about a picture of Trump moving a golf ball. With that line underneath it. 

 

______________________________

MUSICA SUMMUM DOLOREM CANIT ATQUE ITA COMMUTAT ~  

SUMMAM LAETITIAM SALTAT ATQUE ITA ANIMOS CAPIT

______________________________

Justin Wolfers

Justin Wolfers's comments on AI in this video are scary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piEpTx1-2f0&list=TLPQMTIwNTIwMjaVxYVfPe2c6g&index=6 

 

Musical therapy

I am of the firmly held belief that the only thing keeping me sane these days is working on playing (however crudely) the preludes and fugues of the Well Tempered Clavier. Fortunately, although apparently the finite work of but one human being, it is a nearly limitless well. 

 

  

.....

"The answer" to life, the universe & everything isn't 42 (Sorry, Douglas Adams), but 1/137, known as the fine structure constant, α (alpha), a pure, dimensionless number equal to the proportional strength of the electromagnetic interaction between elementary charged particles (which is essentially everything we actually see and feel):

α = ⁠e²4πε₀ħc ⁠≅ 1/137.0

Why it has this value, very close to the ratio of two integers, and not some other arbitrary value, is a cosmic mystery. 

We can do it... they're making it hard, but there are a lot more of us now

I say stuff like this all the time, but it bears repeating. The Fascists have been trying really hard to screw up the upcoming midterm elections, including with highly politicized court decisions, but we have a huge majority right now, so we have to just overcome their stolen advantages. And here's my approach to restoring democratic governance, assuming we are able to defeat Trumpism across the board in 2028, which is simply a "must-do."

Expanding the court to the same number as appellate circuits (13) has historical precedent, logic, and sound reasoning behind it. Term limits or age limits for justices are--at best-- questionably constitutional, but court expansion by STATUTE has precedent and is clearly constitutional. The court would risk losing all legitimacy if they tried to resist it. So my solution is: ADD 2 states (Puerto Rico and DC), increase the court to 13, pass a comprehensive new Voting Rights Act with anti-gerrymandering provisions, carefully written by Constitutional scholars, and include in it explicit statement that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to overrule it (for which there is also precedent, and Roberts himself wrote about it in the 80s).

Then get to work on a substantive justice and economic agenda to end corruption and give Americans a new NEW DEAL. And massive anti-corruption and anti-conflict of interest reforms for the executive, judiciary, and Congress (no stock trading, for example). Make it so everyone understands--once again-- that you don't go into government to get rich, because the regulations and ethics provisions just don't allow it. Period.

If Democrats did all these things, they could completely change course and set up a new era that the Republicans (or whatever replaces them) will be unable to upset for 20 years. We CAN DO IT, but we have to really work at it. It may even eventually be possible to fix the disproportion of the Senate and end the Electoral College with hugely popular Constitutional Amendments, but the current Constitution makes that extraordinarily difficult.

 

  

 

The Virginia redistricting decision

Although I am first to criticize the lack of common sense and inability to stick to facts of most LLMs ("AI"), this response to my question by ChatGPT is very telling. BTW, if I had asked the question with a bias towards the outcome, the answer would have been different. But I think this is nonetheless interesting and largely correct. 

My question: 

  I'm pretty shocked by the Virginia Supreme Court decision on the redistricting referendum. I thought courts were deferential to votes of legislative bodies, but EVEN MORE deferential to actual votes of the electorate. And given the recent green light to the most egregious gerrymandering by the US Supreme Court, I don't get how they could reach this decision with a straight face. Can you explain its rationale, and whether the consensus is that it's a primarily politically motivated decision?   

ChatGPT (Open AI)'s answer: 

Your reaction is not unusual. A great many legal commentators — including some who are not especially sympathetic to partisan Democratic redistricting — seem to think the Virginia Supreme Court majority reached for a highly technical procedural rationale in order to invalidate a result it politically disliked. The decision has already generated a lot of commentary precisely because it feels in tension with the modern judiciary’s generally extreme reluctance to overturn enacted maps or voter-approved measures. (Vox)

The core of the court’s reasoning was not, formally speaking, about whether the map itself was an impermissible gerrymander. In fact, after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Rucho v. Common Cause, federal courts largely treat partisan gerrymandering as a “political question” outside their competence. So the Virginia court instead focused on the amendment process itself.

Under the Virginia constitution, constitutional amendments proposed by the legislature must pass in two separate legislative sessions with an intervening general election between them, so voters can theoretically weigh the issue when electing legislators. The majority held that the first legislative approval happened after early voting had already begun for the relevant election. Therefore, they reasoned, the constitutionally required “intervening election” had already started, meaning the process was defective from the outset. (PBS)

That sounds technical because it is technical. The entire dispute turned on what counts as an “election.” Does “the election” mean Election Day itself, or does it mean the entire early-voting period? The majority adopted the latter interpretation. Since some Virginians had already cast ballots before the legislature acted, the court concluded those voters were deprived of the chance to evaluate legislators’ positions on the amendment before voting. (PBS)

The dissenters reportedly argued this interpretation was both overly formalistic and democratically perverse because the electorate ultimately did vote directly on the amendment itself. In other words, even if the procedural sequence was imperfect, the people ratified it anyway. That is very close to the intuition you expressed. (Vox)

And that gets to the heart of why so many observers see the ruling as politically motivated.

Courts are indeed often deferential to enacted legislation. But they are especially deferential to constitutional amendments approved by voters, because striking one down means overriding not merely legislators but the sovereign electorate itself. Traditionally, courts usually require a very clear constitutional violation before doing that.

Here, critics argue the court:

adopted the narrowest and most outcome-determinative reading possible of “election,”
treated early voting as constitutionally transformative in a way Virginia precedent had not clearly established,
and imposed an exceptionally rigid procedural standard despite the referendum’s actual ratification by millions of voters. (Vox)

The broader political context also matters enormously. This case arose amid an escalating national tit-for-tat redistricting war after Republican-controlled states such as Texas and Florida pursued aggressive mid-decade remaps. Virginia Democrats openly intended this amendment as a countermeasure that could shift as many as four House seats toward Democrats. (The Guardian)

That context makes the asymmetry feel striking to many people:

Federal courts, including the current U.S. Supreme Court, have largely tolerated highly aggressive partisan gerrymanders.
But the Virginia court then invalidated a voter-approved Democratic response on procedural grounds.

So even people who dislike the Democratic map itself often see an inconsistency in judicial attitude. The message can appear to be: substantive partisan gerrymandering is acceptable, but procedural imperfections in attempts to counter it are fatal.

There is not complete consensus that the ruling was “purely political.” Conservative defenders argue that constitutional amendment procedures exist precisely to constrain temporary partisan passions, and that courts have a duty to enforce those procedures strictly regardless of consequences. They would say that if early voting has become part of the election itself, then legislators cannot constitutionally wait until voting is already underway before acting. That is at least a legally intelligible argument.

But the dominant reaction in mainstream legal commentary so far seems to be that the majority chose an unusually aggressive remedy and an unusually rigid interpretation in a context where courts normally bend heavily toward validating voter-approved measures. (Vox)

 

  

.....

"The answer" to life, the universe & everything isn't 42 (Sorry, Douglas Adams), but 1/137, known as the fine structure constant, α (alpha), a pure, dimensionless number equal to the proportional strength of the electromagnetic interaction between elementary charged particles (which is essentially everything we actually see and feel):

α = ⁠e²4πε₀ħc ⁠≅ 1/137.0

Why it has this value, very close to the ratio of two integers, and not some other arbitrary value, is a cosmic mystery. 

Coffee

Some would regard it as sacrilege, but even though I pay like $20/lb. for high quality whole bean coffee, I still add a nice drop of real vanilla extract to each pot. Coffee has a delicate flavor, but like many flavors, it is improved by the tiniest hint of vanilla.

Dirty little secret about coffee ... it only really tastes good for about 3 min. after being brewed. It's that fragile. 

There, something to think about other than the collapse of civilization going on around us. 

 

  

.....

"The answer" to life, the universe & everything isn't 42 (Sorry, Douglas Adams), but 1/137, known as the fine structure constant, α (alpha), a pure, dimensionless number equal to the proportional strength of the electromagnetic interaction between elementary charged particles (which is essentially everything we actually see and feel):

α = ⁠e²4πε₀ħc ⁠≅ 1/137.0

Why it has this value, very close to the ratio of two integers, and not some other arbitrary value, is a cosmic mystery. 

A dark day

So, according to the Virginia State Supreme Court, it's ok for Republican fascists to screw with fair districting, but not Democrats. This decision makes me more worried than I had been in quite a while that the march to real fascism in this country may indeed be unstoppable. When even judges consistently put political allegiance ahead of even the most contorted concept of basic fairness, we are in trouble. 

 

   

Restoring Democracy, if we get the chance, will take years and years

I think of Jamie Raskin as one of our time's more important thought leaders, at least in the political realm. 

https://www.dcreport.org/2026/05/06/trump-institutions-restoration-generation-repair/ 

 

  

.....

"The answer" to life, the universe & everything isn't 42 (Sorry, Douglas Adams), but 1/137, known as the fine structure constant, α (alpha), a pure, dimensionless number equal to the proportional strength of the electromagnetic interaction between elementary charged particles (which is essentially everything we actually see and feel):

α = ⁠e²4πε₀ħc ⁠≅ 1/137.0

Why it has this value, very close to the ratio of two integers, and not some other arbitrary value, is a cosmic mystery. 

NYT: Important article abot the dangers of centrism in the UK... and here

This guest op-ed in the NYT about the collapse of support in the UK for Centrist OM Starmer makes what I consider a very important point. The voters don't want cautious moderation from their leaders in the UK, nor do they from Democrats in our country. They was a program of REFORM, to correct the serious constitutional and rule-of-law problems that have arisen from our disastrous fling with real Fascism. But they also want a PROGRAM to actually address our problems. Cost of living, medical care, education, infrastructure, money spent on the people's needs not imperial grandeurm a tax code that favors working people and demands more from corporate profits and the very rich. We need Democratic leaders willing to step out in front and promise real change, both structural and in policy, to get our country back on track. It's a huge job and it requires dramatic, decisive leadership, not caution and centrism. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/05/opinion/keir-starmer-britain-democrats.html?unlocked_article_code=1.gVA.QJGt.f1EEnh65-exq&smid=url-share 

 

  

.....

"The answer" to life, the universe & everything isn't 42 (Sorry, Douglas Adams), but 1/137, known as the fine structure constant, α (alpha), a pure, dimensionless number equal to the proportional strength of the electromagnetic interaction between elementary charged particles (which is essentially everything we actually see and feel):

α = ⁠e²4πε₀ħc ⁠≅ 1/137.0

Why it has this value, very close to the ratio of two integers, and not some other arbitrary value, is a cosmic mystery.