A study in contrasts across two different U.S. wars in the Persian Gulf, and shadows of accountability emerge into view on today's BradCast. [Audio link to full show follows below this summary.]

FIRST UP... It has arguably taken far too long, but this week it became final. John Eastman, the sleazy attorney who helped conjure up much of Donald Trump's bonkers "legal" argument for stealing the 2020 electoral college vote in Congress on January 6, 2021, no longer has a license to practice law in his home state of California. He is officially disbarred after the state Supreme Court declined to hear his appeal this week. The disgraced former lawyer, a speaker at Trump's insurrectionist rally in front of the White House on January 6, now vows to challenge the California State Bar's final ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. Good luck with that, John.

Also today, hints of somewhat more timely accountability in Minnesota, as an ICE agent is charged with assault under state law for pointing a gun at motorists from his unmarked car during Trump's so-called Operation Metro Surge immigration offensive in Minneapolis. The case will be a test of whether state charges may be brought against federal agents by state officials. Prosecutors say they are still investigating at least 18 more related cases in the Twin Cities region following the ICE shooting deaths of U.S. citizens Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti earlier this year.

NEXT... We're joined today by former U.S. Army Captain, former lifelong Republican and attorney KEITH BARBER, who now writes frequently at the progressive Daily Kos website as "KeithDB".

More than 30 years ago, Barber penned a 39-page article for the Fall, 1994 volume of the Military Law Review (pp. 235-274), examining evidence behind allegations of war crimes then made by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark against the U.S. during the first Gulf War under President George HW Bush.

Barber, at the time, found that Clark's evidence of widespread war crimes failed to hold up to legal scrutiny. Last week, with few changes to International Law over the past three decades in regard to such crimes, he compared similar allegations regarding the lawfulness of Donald Trump's war in Iran.

His original article for the Military Law Review was titled "No Fire This Time: False Accusations of American War Crimes In The Persian Gulf." His follow-up last week: "The Real Fire This Time: American War Crimes In the Iran War".

The two headlines tell the tale, but we walk through --- as Barber does in his recent piece --- the central allegations of whether the two different offensives were considered lawful under International Law, and whether the conduct of each meets established legal principles of discrimination and proportionality. (Don't worry, we explain what all of that means.)

Also of note during our conversation, Barber's thoughts on whether the change in his personal political leanings may have colored his findings, either then or now, and about whether the Military Law Review would have published his findings had they come to a different conclusion 30 years ago. Tune in for some revealing answers in a sobering discussion today on those points and more.

FINALLY... Desi Doyen is in da house for our latest Green News Report as Big Oil continues to reap billions from Trump's war in Iran; Extreme weather slams U.S. slands in the western Pacific; and fossil-fuel loving candidates are ousted by voters from the nation's largest public utility board in Arizona, in favor of pro-renewable energy candidates, thanks, ironically enough, to the rightwing Turning Point outfit!...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

Donald Trump's disastrous War on Iran continues to wreak global havoc on today's BradCast, with no apparent end in sight. Though election news from Tuesday continues to offer at least a ray of hope. [Audio link to full story follows this summary.]

FIRST UP TODAY... the election news. Mississippi held its statewide midterm primary elections on Tuesday with no real surprises. The more interesting news comes out of two Special Elections in other states yesterday.

In Georgia's very MAGA 14th Congressional District, the Special Election primary to fill the seat left vacant by Marjorie Taylor Greene's January retirement following her split with Trump, offered some tantalizing results. It was a 14-person "jungle primary", with all candidates from all parties running for the top two slots. If nobody wins more than 50%, those two go on to the Special runoff on April 7.

On Tuesday night, Democratic candidate Shawn Harris, a cattle farmer and retired brigadier general, reportedly came out on top of the field with a bit more than 37% of the vote. Trump-endorsed Clayton Fuller came in with just under 35%, though he was largely battling fellow MAGA candidate Colton Moore, who took just over 11%. So the Republican front-runner had some actual competition from his own team, whereas Harris largely got a free ride, at least from Dems, to next month's runoff. Interestingly, however, Democrats in the contest received about 40% of the overall vote, cutting into Trump's 37-point victory in the District's 2024 Presidential race by some 17 points!

But the overperformance by the Democratic candidate in a Special Election for the New Hampshire state House on Tuesday --- in a Trump+9 District --- is being described today as "stunning" and a "major upset" for Democrats in NH's very very Republican 7th state House District. The 13-point overperformance for the Democrat became the tenth R-to-D flip in a Special Election for a state legislature since Trump's second term began, and the third one this year alone. The GOP has seen exactly zero such flips from D-to-R over that same period.

Also today, County Commissioners in Tarrant County (Fort Worth), Texas this week heard from poll workers with serious concerns about the County's 100% unverifiable computerized Ballot Marking Device systems made by Hart-Intercivic following apparent machine failures at the polls during the Lone Star state's March 3rd primary. Longtime pollworkers are hoping to see the computer systems replaced by a hand-marked paper ballot system before this November.

THEN... it's back to the nearly two-week old, but seemingly endless --- and clearly pointless --- War in Iran. This week, Iran has predictably shutdown all shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, where 20 to 30% of the world's oil and natural gas transits out of the Persian Gulf every day. In response, as oil prices spike along with gasoline prices, the White House is attempting to convince Americans that "short-term pain is necessary for long-term gain." The White House originally said it, and their friendly GOP propaganda outlets are now endlessly repeating the phrase, without ever actually explaining what that "long-term gain" might be or how we actually get there.

We're joined today by Roosevelt University political scientist DAVID FARIS, author of, among other things, several books on Middle Eastern politics, to discuss both the foreign and domestic implications of this disastrous move by the U.S. Administration.

"This has become an existential conflict for Iran," observes a gobsmacked Faris. "And because it's an existential conflict, they are doing everything that they can to keep shipping from getting through the Strait of Hormuz. It is unbelievable that people in the Trump Administration did not know or did not believe that this could happen. It's astonishing."

Faris says he has been having "terrible flashbacks to the early 2000s" amid all of this, remembering how the Bush Administration at the time simply ignored experts who warned "This is a bad idea. Don't do this!," before the Administration kicked off several disastrous wars of choice in the region anyway.

In Trump's case, argues Faris, "He's relying on a handful of sycophants in his administration, people without any expertise in the region. He's being led by the nose, I think, by people that have wanted to do this for a long time. And who very arrogantly thought that killing the Supreme Leader would set off a chain of events that would either lead to the regime collapsing or a transfer of authority within the regime to someone more friendly to the Trump Administration."

"The fact that they thought that in the first place is, in itself, evidence that they are not being advised by anyone with any kind of meaningful expertise about this region, or about Iran in particular. That is really scary to me, because we are all on this plane."

Beyond the "short-term disruption" of oil price spikes and potential global recession, he warns, if Trump didn't foresee those dangers, it's unlikely he saw the potentially nuclear ones that could come amid a full blown civil war in Iran or, worse, a "proliferation cascade" in which the lesson for countries in the region is simply to go nuclear.

"There's lesson after lesson after lesson that says to countries that are worried about their security or worried about the United States bombing or invading them or overthrowing their regime, that the only way to prevent that from happening for sure is to get a nuclear weapon," he observes, citing ironic potential fallout following a war that was, at least in theory, partially meant to prevent Iran from weaponizing it's own nuclear energy program.

As to the promise of the "long-term gain" Republicans now tout, with little if any detail when arguing that Americans must now be willing to "sacrifice"? Faris has no idea what that "gain" might be.

"It's unclear because they don't know," he says. "There's no way to communicate the stakes to the American people if you, yourself, don't have a strategic goal in mind, don't have a sense of what the fallout or the consequences might be. You're obviously not going to be able to prepare the American people to make sacrifices for that thing. The American people rightly perceived that there was no imminent threat to American national security from Iran. So this whole episode feels like it came out of nowhere."

Which, of course, it did. Unless you count the need to cover-up the damaging allegations against Trump from the Epstein Files as "somewhere". But, Faris also explains that all of this comes with an electoral price in November. If you don't like this war, "you know who to blame. Trump started this war [and] it's going to get worse the longer this goes on."

Tune in for much more on all of this, including the good Professor's explanation of why, if the U.S. is supposedly "energy independent" now, as Republicans like to claim, gas prices in the U.S. are skyrocketing anyway...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

Okay. It's not called "Operation Epstein Fury". It's called "Operation Epic Fury". But who's kidding who here? Here we ago again. Today on The BradCast, another unlawful foreign regime change war by the U.S. is now underway in the Middle East. In this case, launched by a President who ran for office, lying over and over again that he was against such wars. [Audio link to full show follows below.]

As usual, tune in for much much more. But, among the many points made and news shared today before we get to callers ringing in on Donald Trump's new war on Iran in the second half the show...

• Yes, J.D. Vance really wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal in 2023 headlined: "Trump's Best Foreign Policy? Not Starting Any Wars" with the sub-hed: "He has my support in 2024 because I know he won't recklessly send Americans to fight overseas."

• Yes, Stephen Miller actually tweeted just 4 days before the November 2024 President election: "To anyone still gullible enough to fall for scummy media hoaxes: Trump said warmongering neocons love sending your kids to die for wars they would never fight themselves. Liz Cheney is Kamala's top advisor. Liz wants to invade the whole Middle East. Kamala = WWIII. Trump = Peace."

• Yes, Donald Trump really did spend years decrying "stupid" U.S. Presidents who spent "$8 trillion" on wars in the Middle East instead of building roads and bridges and schools and hospitals in the U.S. He really did say, over and over, in 2011 that "in order to get elected @BarackObama will start a war with Iran". He really did say in 2012 that Obama would "attack Iran in order to get re-elected," and "Now that Obama's Poll numbers are in a tailspin, watch him start a war with Iran. He's desperate." That Obama would have to do so to "save face", and Trump really did declare in 2013: "Remember that I predicted a long time ago that President Obama will attack Iran because of his inability to negotiate properly --- not skilled!" [Emphasis added.]

• For the record, Barack Obama never did attack Iran. But he did negotiate a deal with Iran and other major countries to successfully prevent Iran from being able to obtain a nuclear weapon, an agreement that Trump unlawfully violated and ripped up after taking office. He's been begging Iran to strike a new deal ever since. But now his polls are in a tailspin. He is trying to save face, and, because of his inability to negotiate properly, he is (unlawfully and without Constitutional or Congressional authorization) choosing to spend billions on another foreign interventionist war instead of fixing roads and bridges and hospitals and schools in the U.S.

• In fact, Trump is apparently now bombing schools and hospitals in Iran, killing nearly two hundred school girls on the first weekend of his latest misadventure, as six U.S. service members have so far been announced killed and three of our F-15s have been shot out of the sky over Kuwait, with the crews, thankfully, ejecting safely.

• So far, 555 Iranians have reportedly been killed, according to the Iranian Red Crescent Society. At least 11 people have been killed in Israel.

• The Supreme Leader of Iran, 86-year old Ayatollah Ali Khamanei has been killed. But the attack on Khamanei was "so successful," according to Trump, that, apparently, so were the preferred choices of the U.S. to replace him. So, now what?

• Why does Trump say he bombed Iran? Well, he seems to be making up new reasons every few hours since ordering the first bombs on Saturday morning along with Israel. To prevent an imminent attack on the U.S. by Iran? Well, that can't be. Nobody believes they have the intercontinental missiles to do that. So, he's already in violation of both U.S. and international law. To prevent them from restarting the nuclear program he claimed to have "completely obliterated" when he previously attacked Iran just eight months ago? To stop terror attacks by Iran-funded militias in the Middle East? We discuss all of the above. But he certainly didn't bomb Iran to distract media attention from his dreadful and getting-dreadful-er approval ratings as the midterm primaries are now under way, right? Certainly not as a distraction from the fact that his DOJ has been caught red-handed unlawfully covering up the release of very serious allegations by a survivor of Jeffrey Epstein that she was also raped by Trump when she was just 13-years old, right?

• As you can tell, we've got a lot to discuss today. And a lot of callers in the second half of the show who want to join in on the conversation. I hope you'll tune in...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

On today's BradCast: Some of us saw it coming and warned about it long ago. Now that it's here, many STIL don't seem to see it. We get some help today, toward that end, from our guest, who published a startling report on all of it this week. [Audio link to full show follows this summary.]

FIRST UP, however, a few headlines...

The Trump Administration claimed today to be drawing down their deployment of under-trained, over-paid ICE and CBP goons from Minnesota. They say they are immediately withdrawing 700 of them. Donald Trump says a "softer touch" is needed. But that "softer touch" will still leave at least 2,000 thugs on the streets of Minneapolis --- the same number that had already been terrorizing residents in the Twin Cities region before they murdered Renee Good last month.

But staffing issues for the federal government is clearly a problem for them. More than a dozen of the top prosecutors have now resigned from the U.S. Attorney's office in Minnesota in recent weeks, since the start of Operation Metro Surge. And with hundreds of habeas petitions filed in court by detainees since then, federal judges are accusing ICE and government attorneys of ignoring scores of court orders to release them.

On Tuesday, one of those attorneys hit a breaking point. Julie Le, an ICE immigration court judge who volunteered at the beginning of January to help out the short-staffed U.S. Attorney's office, had been assigned more than 85 cases in that time. During a hearing yesterday, she made an emotional and dramatic plea to the judge. "I wish you would just hold me in contempt of court so I can get 24 hours of sleep," she said, adding "The system sucks, this job sucks, I am trying with every breath I have to get you what you need."

Today, it appears Le was pushed out of her job by DOJ, along with her supervisor.

THEN... We're joined today by Talking Points Memo's investigative reporter JOSH KOVENSKY, to discuss two different disturbing stories he's published in recent days. Both of them insane. One of them wacky. The other exceedingly troubling.

Following the FBI's raid of the Fulton County, Georgia elections warehouse last week outside of Atlanta --- part of Trump's latest scheme to obfuscate his humiliating election loss in 2020 --- the President of the United States took to social media to double down. He advanced a number of posts that revived the old "ItalyGate" conspiracy that posits (and forgive me if I get a detail wrong), that Barack Obama and China, with the help of money from Iran --- funneled somehow through Switzerland and/or Dubai --- took control of Italy's military spy satellites to hack computerized voting machines and/or ballot tabulators to steal the election for Joe Biden in 2020.

Sure, it may sound crazy, but that's only because it is. And while there may be no actual evidence to support any of it, that didn't prevent Trump's Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, from being on the ground to oversee last week's FBI raid of 2020 ballots in Fulton County. Why would the nation's top spy chief, whose job has nothing to do with domestic law enforcement, be there? We discuss that and other related idiocy today with Kovensky.

In far more troubling news, in a deep dive at TPM this week, Kovensky details how a series of White House memos issued after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, direct the Dept. of Justice to reinterpret a post 9/11 federal terrorism statute known as 2339A. The statute, as originally intended, allows prosecutors to hold associates of terrorists and terror groups to account for "material support to terrorists".

The Trump Administration's reinterpretation of the statute, however, demands, as Kovensky reports, that prosecutors use the provision to "target those who espouse 'anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity,' [and] direct federal law enforcement to use speech --- including "extremism on migration, race, and gender" --- as key criteria for who to investigate and against whom to bring the most aggressive charges possible."

Once again --- (as longtime BRAD BLOG readers may recall when they were turned against me and my family in 2013 in a different way) --- the federal government's post 9/11 tools for fighting terror, are being turned against non-terrorist Americans.

In this case, the government is now employing these measures to prosecute, as terror organizations, people and left-leaning advocacy groups regarded as political opponents of Donald Trump, including Black Lives Matter and "Antifa" --- along with anybody else the government wants to associate with them.

"These are 'material support for terrorism' statutes. It sounds dry, but it's important," argues Kovensky today, explaining how the provision has already been used to go after people at protests where someone else may have committed a crime, "if the protest was associated with a leftwing cause or something opposed to the administration. Then we are now starting to see the DOJ go after it as 'terrorism'."

"With 'material support for terrorism', if you're convicted on that," he adds, "prosecutors can then apply for a 'terrorism enhancement.' Even if you have no prior criminal history, and regardless of whether or not the underlying charge was non-violent --- it could be something as simple as spray-painting a government building --- you're now looking at a recommended minimum for the judge of 17.5 years behind bars. So it dramatically increases the severity of the possible sentence."

This is why you may have heard people like A.G. Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel, and others in the Administration in recent months, refer to protesters --- even those like Renee Good and Alex Pretti who were murdered by immigration officials --- as "domestic terrorists", along with vows to hunt down and break up their "networks".

"It gives the government greater powers to investigate," Kovensky tells me, "but it also raises unbelievably grave concerns about freedom of speech and freedom of association."

And, yes, this is what many civil libertarians argued more than two decades ago. "If you look at the commentary in the early 2000s after 9/11 and what a slippery slope this was with the PATRIOT Act, it's all very eerie," he says.

Told you this was a troubling one. Tune in for much more...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

On today's BradCast: It's been less than two weeks since he ordered the U.S. military invasion of a sovereign nation, killed about 80 people, kidnapped their leader and his wife to put them on trial for something or other here in the U.S., claimed he now "runs" their country and controls their natural resources, to exploit and sell as he pleases, the money from which will be held in offshore bank accounts controlled by him. Oh, and he's now declared himself "Acting President" there. And we almost don't discuss any of it anymore, because he's moved on to his next several imperial conquests, not to mention his deadly militarized assaults of thousands of people who live in U.S. cities, including American citizens. As Jon Stewart recently asked in exasperation, "What are we even doing here?!" Good question, Jon. [Audio link to full program follows this summary.]

Before we try to make some kind of sense --- any kind of sense --- of all of that, a few other news items of note today...

• And then they came for the journalists... Donald Trump's FBI raided the home of a Washington Post reporter on Wednesday, seizing her laptops, her phone and her smartwatch, as part of a supposed classified documents leak investigation requested by the Pentagon. The Post's Executive Editor described it as an "extraordinary, aggressive action [that] is deeply concerning and raises profound questions and concern around the constitutional protections for our work." The New York Times characterized the raid on a journalist's home as "a significant escalation in the Trump administration's tactics in seeking information from the news media." The journalist, Hannah Natanson, as AP explained, "has reported extensively on the federal workforce and recently published a piece describing how she gained hundreds of new sources --- leading one colleague to call her 'the federal government whisperer.'"

• Here we go again?... In Qatar today, some personnel at a major U.S. air base that houses thousands of troops are reportedly being advised to evacuate immediately, amid growing unrest in Iran, the killing of hundreds of anti-government protesters by the ruling regime in Tehran, and Trump's vows to those protesters that "help is on the way." The base, Al Udeid Air Base outside of Doha, was targeted in Iran's response to the U.S. attack on nuclear facilities last July.

Then, as Mad King Trump saber rattles with both Iran and, perhaps even more incredibly, our NATO ally of Greenland, there is still the matter of his recent invasion of Venezuela less than two short weeks ago, and the power vacuum left in its wake as he tries to convince reticent American oil companies to go plunder the nation's vast oil reserves.

None of it is lawful. And, of course, none of it makes any sense. But, also, none of it is over, even if he, we, the media have, for the moment, moved momentarily on to other Trump-induced nightmares.

"This isn't close to over," argues my guest today, NICHOLAS GROSSMAN, International Relations professor and political scientist at the University of Illinois. He is quick to compare Trump's rush to praise himself for the attack and abduction of Venezuela's President, Nicolas Maduro, to George W. Bush's infamous "Mission Accomplished" speech in 2003, just after the initial assault on Iraq, before the nation would quickly devolve into years-long, deadly chaos and violence.

"Tactically," Grossman concedes, the operation in Venezuela "was very impressive. But not strategically so." He describes reports in recent days of runs on banks, stores, and paramilitaries in the streets, arguing that the "competitions for power" are just beginning. "The situation is likely to devolve rather than stabilize. Or just have a spate of violence, and then at which point the regime re-stabilizes. It's unclear why that would be better than where it was with Maduro in charge."

Grossman, who teaches classes on terrorism insurgency, national security policy and 21st century technology and warfare, wrote about Trump's unlawful assault last week, detailing how it is likely to make things worse, not better, in Venezuela, the United States, and elsewhere in the region.

Moreover, he tells me today, despite Trump's rhetoric, all of this is unlikely to result in a rush of American oil companies to exploit the nation's resources. "This is where the lack of any sort of follow-on plan creates such a problem," says Grossman. "There is not a reliable security situation there, especially long term. There's not reliable rule of law." Add that to a glut of oil already on the market keeping prices (and profits) low; a particularly dirty and difficult-to-refine crude available there; and it seems unlikely that any of this will actually pay off for anybody.

So, why, in fact, was it done in the first place? On that, argues Grossman: "It doesn't really need to be only one reason. It's many things possibly at once. A lot of it, I do think, is demonstration of power. Because they can."

"Nothing Trump and his administration have done have seemed to conceive of national interest in the same standard way that Presidents, various leaders, voters of both parties, had in the United States for many years. There's 'because I can, because then people will be more afraid of me, because people will be more likely to pay me off.'"

He speculates on other explanations as well, and rings in on where Trump's militaristic tirade is likely to bring the U.S. next, even if things begin to further devolve in Venezuela at the same time.

"The biggest effect seems to be that it has emboldened him. And emboldened actors such as Pete Hegseth, where they don't think anybody can stop them. And they certainly don't care about violating norms, or the long term risks of upsetting the international order."

There is much more troubling stuff to chew over in my broad conversation with Grossman today. I hope you'll tune in...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

On today's BradCast: Things are now moving very quickly, it seems, in the story of our Defense Secretary reportedly ordering the murder of shipwrecked survivors in the Caribbean. Luckily, our guest today is able to help us make sense --- where sense is to be had --- of all of the different parts of this quickly spidering story. [Audio link to full show follows below this summary.]

The Trump Administration has been citing their supposed War on Drugs or War on Terror --- or, as what they describe as a war on "narco-terrorists" --- as legal justification for more than 20 U.S. military attacks against small boats in international waters near the coast of Venezuela. The attacks by the U.S. military have, so far, according to the Pentagon, resulted in more than 80 deaths of supposed drug-traffickers. No evidence, however, has been given by the Administration to support their claims that either drugs or "narco-terrorists" were on the defenseless boats in question when they were destroyed by U.S. rocket fire. In previous years, alleged drug boats would have been interdicted, evidence collected, and those on board either tried or interrogated to further bust up international drug cartels like the one found to have been facilitated for years by the former President of Honduras.

So, it has raised concerns from both Democrats and Republicans alike in Congress that Donald Trump, today, formally issued a pardon to the former President of Honduras who was tried and convicted by the Dept. of Justice last year to 45 years in prison for his role in trafficking some 400 tons of cocaine to the U.S.

All of that is contextual backstory to allegations, originally reported by Washington Post last week, that Trump's Defense Secretary, former Fox "News" weekend co-host Pete Hegseth, issued orders to "kill everyone" in the Pentagon's first attack on a supposed drug boat in early September. Two survivors of the attack, reportedly clinging to the remains of their boat, were subsequently murdered in a second kill shot, said to have been on the orders of Hegseth and carried out by Admiral Mitch Bradley. He currently leads the U.S. Special Operations Command. Before his October promotion, he served as commander of the Joint Special Operations Command that carried out the attack in question on September 2nd.

Killing victims of a boat strike is wildly unlawful under both U.S. and international law. It is even cited specifically in the Department of Defense's Law of War Manual, Section 18.3.2.1, describing "Clearly Illegal Orders to Commit Law of War Violations." The provision warns the "requirement to refuse to comply with orders to commit law of war violations applies to orders to perform conduct that is clearly illegal." It goes on to cite, specifically: "For example, orders to fire upon the shipwrecked would be clearly illegal."

After previously boasting about having watched the September 2nd attack live via drone video, Hegseth today claimed that the second strike on the survivors happened amid the "fog of war" and that he "didn't stick around" for the rest of the mission after the first strike. Though he claims Bradley "made the right call" in killing the survivors. "He had complete authority to do it," said the man who theoretically gave him that authority, while now appearing to throw Admiral Bradley somewhat under the bus.

And all of that, of course, comes on the heels of feigned outrage from both Hegseth and Trump just about a week ago, after a video was released by six Democratic members of Congress --- all veterans of the U.S. armed forces or intelligence services --- reminding members of the military that they are required to "refuse illegal orders". The video resulted in outrageous claims by Trump that the Democratic officials had committed "sedition" which, as he also noted, is punishable by death. In response, Hegseth announced a Pentagon investigation of one of the members, U.S. Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ), a former Navy Colonel and astronaut who could theoretically be called back into active duty by a politicized Pentagon in order to be court-martialed for, apparently, reminding troops that it is unlawful to carry out unlawful orders.

As noted, there is a whole lot going on in these quickly developing stories, but we've got just the guest today to help us make sense of them. We're joined by CARRIE A. LEE, PhD, an expert on civil-military relations and, until her resignation in July, associate professor at the US Army War College, where she served as the Chair of the Department of National Security and Strategy. She is now Senior Fellow at the Democracy and Security Network for Strategic Democracy Initiatives at the German Marshall Fund of the United States.

Lee explains today both what a civil-military relations expert is, and why she regretfully decided to leave her post at the War College earlier this year, after determining, as she explained in a social media thread, "that the United States faces threats today that cannot be effectively fought from inside the walls" of the US Army War College. She explained at the time that "in order to speak, I had to leave."

"I very much saw the writing on the wall after the election," she tells me today in describing her thought process for resigning in July, including "a lot of the threats that then President-elect Trump had made about what euphemistically I would call the 'creative uses' of the military that he had planned."

"It became very clear that if I had spoken out, that was going to bring an entirely unhealthy level of scrutiny to the institution I worked for, an institution that I really loved, and that I feel does outstanding work in educating future senior officers of the United States Army."

Lee explains that she ultimately left "to fight against the politicization of the military and abuses of power using the military domestically in ways that undermine democracy and Constitutional rights."

Today, Lee is speaking freely, as we discuss, among other things...

• The Pentagon's (empty and/or ridiculous?) threat to reactivate Sen. Kelly for a possible court martial.
• The "politicization death spiral" underway at DoD.
• The Trump Administration becoming "enthusiastic about punishing dissent and finding ways to weaponize and use their institutions of power to punish political opponents."
• How service members are able to determine whether an order is unlawful, and whether someone like Admiral Bradley would have the needed legal advice to know if striking shipwreck survivors was lawful or not. ("The manual explicitly says 'patently unlawful orders'. When the manual literally gives the example that we're talking about ['orders to fire upon the shipwrecked would be clearly illegal'] that's a pretty good indication that it is patently unlawful." She also notes: "The initial strike was probably unlawful, as well.")
• Whether "fog of war" serves as a justifiable defense for Hegseth.
• The difficult personal decisions that career military officials are now faced with in deciding whether to stay in their positions amid the Trump Administration's misuse of our armed forces. (See her paper published this week titled "The Soldier in the Illiberal State is a Professional Dead End")

"I think we are talking about two separate issues in the news cycle that is going on right now, as we eagerly await updates to figure out what new turn in the hall of mirrors we are about to take," Lee neatly summarizes our conversation. "There's the politicization of the military and the weaponization of the military justice system to try to punish political opponents. That's issue number one. Issue number two is what the heck is going on in the Caribbean, and are these orders lawful?; what is patently unlawful and therefore must be refused?; and what has the veneer of legal justification that would lead a military commander to go with it?"

As noted, lots to discuss on today's BradCast...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

It's our last BradCast today before our Thanksgiving break. And, frankly, it was a very different show than the one I went to bed last night pondering for today. Blame the pathetic, desperate, criminal coward in the White House. Again. [Audio link to full show follows this summary.]

Today, in several posts to his failing social media site, an increasingly unhinged Donald Trump, the President of the United States, called for six Democratic members of Congress --- four House members and two Senators, all distinguished veterans of the U.S. armed forces or intelligence services --- to be killed.

Their "crime"? Advising U.S. service members, in a 90-second video on Tuesday, that they may --- indeed, they must --- "refuse illegal orders."

It's not particularly controversial. But today, Trump, who is floundering in virtually every aspect of his job, pretended to be outraged, repeatedly describing the comments from those Democrats as "SEDITIOUS", describing them as "TRAITORS" and calling for them to be put to "DEATH!" (That, even though he pardoned actual seditionists that he incited to try and overthrow the U.S. Government on January 6, 2021.)

In addition to his own words, Trump also elevated another wingnut loon on his social media site who declared: "HANG THEM GEORGE WASHINGTON WOULD!"

Just two months ago, Republicans pretended to be furious about political violence and words that might lead to it following the murder of a far-right Republican activist. But, since Trump is now calling for the deaths of Democratic members of Congress, his lackeys and quislings at both the White House and in Congress are joining Dear Leader. Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson, pretending to be furious today, for example, falsely charged that those six elected officials and distinguished veterans "encourage[d] young troops to disobey orders". He forgot to mention that the orders in question are unlawful ones, as the Dems repeated over and again while reminding those "young troops" of their oath to defend and follow both the Constitution and rule of law, and encouraging them: "Don't give up the ship."

I had a word or two to say about all of this on today's program. So did a lot of other folks both in and out of Congress, some of which we share as well.

In not unrelated news on today's show...

• NBC News reports that the senior military attorney for the U.S. Southern Command, which has, so far, killed more than 80 people in boats off the Caribbean and Pacific coasts near Venezuela, determined that U.S. strikes on small boats said to be carrying supposed "narco-terrorists" (as the Administration describes them) were unlawful. His opinion, however, was overruled by Trump's political appointees in D.C. The service members who participated in those extrajudicial killings could, as the lawyer reportedly warned, eventually face accountability under U.S. and/or international law.

• TPM's Josh Kovensky reports that federal prosecutors in Chicago have dropped a whole bunch of supposed "domestic terrorism" cases against people who protested against Customs and ICE agents in Chicago in recent months. Among those who saw their charges dropped: A woman who was shot five times by a CBP officer who bragged to colleagues about it afterwards, and who falsely claimed the woman participated in a convoy of cars that "rammed" and "boxed" the federal agents in. And a 70-year old Air Force vet initially charged with felony assault, which was later downgraded to a misdemeanor and finally dropped all together by Trump prosecutors on Thursday.

• Last week, we told you about the Trump Administration's draft plan, reported by Washington Post, to open up off-shore oil drilling along the entire coast of California, off the West Coast of Florida (in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, not on the Atlantic side near Mar-a-Lago, of course), and off of Alaska in the pristine High Arctic region, where responding to a spill or a Deepwater Horizon-like disaster would be all but impossible. Today, the Administration officially unveiled the proposal and elected officials --- including both Democrats in California and Republicans in Florida --- vow to fight the effort.

• Finally, Desi Doyen joins us for our latest Green News Report, as this year's U.N. climate summit wraps up in Brazil; as Iran faces an historic drought in Tehran that could result in the evacuation of some 10 million people; and as the developing world is now turning to China for billions of dollars of investment and development in clean, cheap, renewable energy, since the Trump Administration has taken the U.S. out of that increasingly lucrative industry.

As noted, we'll be taking some much-needed downtime in the week ahead. But, while we're "gone", please have a happy and safe Thanksgiving --- and remember the advice from those six Dems in their video yesterday: Don't give up the ship!

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

Okay. Lots of crime and corruption by the President of the United States and his criminal henchman and women on today's BradCast. The good news, however, is that most of it falling apart on him, because he's not even good at criming. [Audio link to full show follows this summary.]

Most noteworthy among our coverage today...

• As Donald Trump threatens a distraction war of regime change against Venezuela, two human rights organizations released a damning report last week finding that more than 250 Venezuelan detainees that Trump shipped to the CECOT gulag in El Salvador earlier this year were subjected to "systematic and prolonged torture and abuse". That, despite the fact that just 3% of those disappeared to the known torture prison by the Administration had been convicted of any violent crime in the U.S.

• Trump's corrupt indictments of former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James are absolutely falling apart in court before several different judges and different pretrial motions. Attorney KEITH BARBER (who writes at Daily Kos as "Keith DB") is here to help us break down a remarkable 24-page ruling (PDF) issued today by a federal magistrate judge in the Comey case.

  After reviewing the grand jury transcript in chambers, Judge William Fitzpatrick determined that Lindsey Halligan, Trump's former insurance lawyer turned unlawfully-seated U.S. Attorney in Virginia, engaged in a "disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps" that appear to have violated Comey's rights in numerous ways.

  Among those rights violation, as Barber details, Halligan's apparent instructions to grand jurors that Comey's refusal to testify before them could be used to infer his guilt. That's a "clear violation of Comey's 5th Amendment rights," explained Barber in a posting at DailyKos today. Comey's rights were also violated, according to the judge, when the grand jury was instructed by Halligan that they didn't need to rely on the record presented to them. Rather, they could infer that the government had far better evidence to be presented later at trial.

  Not unlike the judge who wrote that those two instructions alone were "fundamental misstatements of law that could compromise the integrity of the grand jury process," Barber was flabbergasted.

  "It's unprecedented. That is one of those things that is like 'Prosecutor 101', which, of course, Halligan never took," he tells me. "I honestly can't believe she's that dumb, but she certainly acted that way. Normally the most faint whiff by a prosecutor before a jury --- including a grand jury --- that suggests that a defendant's unwillingness to testify imputes guilt is sufficient to result in a mistrial or dismissal of charges. That alone, by itself, should end the day for this."

  But there was much more from both the judge in this matter --- who has taken the extraordinary step of turning over the grand jury transcript to the defendants, as we discuss --- and from a separate federal judge who heard a separate pre-trial challenge last week, as combined from both Comey and James, regarding Halligan's apparently unlawful seating as U.S. Attorney.

  "This case will never get to trial," says Barber, regarding the Comey case. "If it doesn't get dismissed for this reason --- the misconduct before the grand jury --- then one of the others will kill it or the cumulative weight of all of these irregularities are going to cause the judge to toss it."

  "There's stupid, and there's corrupt," he quips. "And then there's stupidly corrupt. It's just ridiculous."

• Next... in a Sunday night social media posting, Trump appeared to flip-flop on his statement from just last week describing any Republican who would vote to release the Epstein Files as "stupid". In his Sunday post, however, Trump called on Congressional Republicans to vote in favor of pending legislation to release the Epstein Files. The legislation is likely to finally receive a vote in the House this week, that calls on the DOJ to release "all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in DOJ's possession that relate to the investigation and prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein."

  But, don't be fooled by Trump's seeming reversal, for at least two reasons. 1) Trump could order the release of those files today if he actually wanted them released. He doesn't need legislation to force him to do so. And 2) the legislation would allow the DOJ to withhold "materials that would jeopardize an active federal investigation." While corrupt Attorney General Pam Bondi announced several months ago that there were no more loose ends and nothing more to investigate in the Epstein matter following the jailhouse death of the child sex offender and longtime close friend of Trump, she announced last week that she was opening a new investigation last week into Democrats alleged to have been involved with Epstein. That announcement followed a public request from Trump for such a probe just one day earlier. So, yeah, vote to release the files if you like, but you can probably assume that anything that might incriminate Trump will be withheld so as not to "jeopardize an active federal investigation."

• Then, we open the phone lines to callers on what they think about the Trump/Epstein mess and whether they believe those files will ever see the light of day as long as Trump has the power to continue covering them up...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

Today on The BradCast: Analysis (and giddiness) continues amid the fallout from Election 2025, during which the bottom appeared to drop out for Team Trump --- at least for now --- pretty much everywhere that voters turned out in some 30 states holding off-year local or statewide elections. [Audio link to full show follows this summary.]

We're joined today by listener faves and fellow old-school bloggers HEATHER DIGBY PARTON of Salon and Digby's Hullabaloo and 'DRIFTGLASS' of the Professional Left Podcast in the wake of Tuesday's remarkable elections, in which Democrats and other anti-Trump voters made their opposition to the failed first year of the second Donald Trump presidency crystal clear --- even to Republicans who care to take notice.

Not only did Democratic candidates --- from the left to the center --- win, so did ballot initiatives supported by them. And, not only did they all win, they all won by huge margins in virtually every jurisdiction across the country holding elections on Tuesday, in both high and low profile contests and ballot initiatives from Maine to New York City to New Jersey to Virginia to Georgia to Mississippi to Pennsylvania to California and beyond.

"Trump and Trumpism, and this style of politics that he has brought into the Republican Party, the cult of personality that has been dominating our country over the last decade --- I think we can see a light at the end of the tunnel here," Digby argues. "Trump is now officially a lame duck. It's earlier than people thought it would be. It sent a shock-wave, I think, through the Republican Party that he's on his way out. And now, let the games begin. Because the fighting within the Republican Party is going to be a glorious thing to see."

"I was surprised how deep the coattails were, how deep the 'blue' ran in all these elections," observes Driftglass. "I am very confident now that a bunch of 'blue' states can redistrict with confidence." Rooting on Texas Republicans to please proceed with their gerrymandering, he continues: "Please, go ahead and do that. Because I think they did not understand that lots of large blocks of voters were not theirs permanently. We saw huge shifts in almost every demographic [on Tuesday]. 'Blue' won everywhere. And that should send a signal to Democrats everywhere it's okay to take risks, it's okay to be who you are, say what you believe and swing for the fences, because that is now being rewarded."

Among the many related and unrelated topics discussed today...

• The death and legacy of Dick Cheney.
• The announced retirement (next year) and legacy of Nancy Pelosi.
• The fallout from the surprising results of Election 2025.
• The media failures in the leadup to the election.
• The ridiculous, cowardly failure of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York (and other "leading" Dems) to endorse the young, charismatic Democratic sensation, now NYC Mayor-elect, Zohran Mamdani.
• Are those establishment Dems more afraid Mamdani will fail? Or that he will succeed?
• Who's more of a socialist, Mamdani or Trump?
• Does Trump even know what "socialism" means, much less "communism"? (Much less whatever fairly moderate and measured affordability measures Mamdani ran on in his NYC campaign?)
• The D.C. Sandwich Guy is found "not guilty" of misdemeanor assault with a deadly hero. ("That's a 'wrap'," quips Driftglass. "Another example of the Trump Administration not knowing how courts work.")
• After Gov. Gavin Newsom's Prop 50 redistricting measure's resounding success in California on Tuesday, will other Dem Governors follow suit?
• Will Trump-ordered mid-decade GOP gerrymanders come back to haunt them next year?
• Will Tuesday's results finally bring Republicans any closer to ending the federal government shutdown?

And more! Including Desi Doyen and our latest Green News Report on the critical climate races in Tuesday's elections and Brazil's successful climate fight against deforestation under its new President...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

Follow and stream @GreenNewsReport!...



(Or use "Click here to listen..." link below.)

IN TODAY'S RADIO REPORT: Democrats win in key climate races in the 2025 Elections; Climate change raised in Supreme Court oral arguments over Trump's 'emergency' tariffs; PLUS: Brazil's fight against deforestation is paying climate dividends... All that and more in today's Green News Report!

Click here to listen or download MP3 (6 mins)...

Link:
Embed:

Got comments, tips, love letters, hate mail? Drop us a line at GreenNews@BradBlog.com or right here at the comments link below. All GNRs are always archived at GreenNews.BradBlog.com.

IN 'GREEN NEWS EXTRA' (see links below): India's Ganga River drying at unprecedented levels; What the last gas boom (and bust) says about today's rush to build; Trailer: The White House Effect; Fishermen missing in Vietnam as Philippines mourns dead from Typhoon Kalmaegi; FAA reducing air traffic by 10% across 40 'high-volume' markets during government shutdown; Brazil launches plan to scale climate finance to $1.3 trillion a year... PLUS: Australia has so much solar that it's offering everyone free electricity... and much, MUCH more! ...

Today was Election Day for major contests in New York City, New Jersey, Virginia and California, not to mention about 30 other states which also held either statewide or local off-year contests. We'll have full reported results for you, of course, on tomorrow's BradCast. [Audio link to full show follows this summary.]

In the meantime, there was a whole lot going on today, while America votes...

• Several polling places were temporarily closed in more than half a dozen New Jersey counties on Tuesday following threats, reportedly via email, ultimately determined by officials to be "non-credible". One local official suggested the emails may have originated "abroad", bringing to mind the emailed bomb threats that resulted in temporary evacuations of a number of polling places in at least five different battlegrounds states on Election Day during the 2024 Presidential election. Those threats were reported, at the time, to have come from IP addresses in Russia.

• Former Vice President Dick Cheney died on Monday at the age of 84. His family announced the news today. We share some thoughts.

• The Trump Administration has fired yet another government watchdog whose job it was to root out waste, fraud and abuse at a federal agency. This time, according to a Reuters exclusive, it was the acting Inspector General at the Federal Housing and Finance Authority (FHFA), whose Trump-appointed activist Director, Bill Pulte, has been issuing bogus criminal referrals to the DoJ about "mortgage fraud" purportedly committed by Donald Trump's political foes, such as New York Attorney General Letitia James, Federal Reserve Board Governor Lisa Cook, and Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA). The IG in this case, a 40-year veteran DoJ prosecutor, was said to have been in the process of notifying Congress that FHFA leadership was violating the law by refusing to cooperate with the Office of the Inspector General. To date, the Administration has fired almost 20 IGs at almost every major (and not-so-major) federal agency or department.

• Trump's corrupt Attorney General Pam Bondi filed legal documents on Friday in hopes retroactively fixing some pretty huge problems with the weaponized political indictments of former FBI Director James Comey and NY A.G. Letitia James. The filings attempt to rewrite history regarding the corrupt and almost certainly unlawful appointment of Trump's former insurance lawyer, Lindsey Halligan, as Interim U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia. She was expressly appointed to the position after Trump's previous USA either resigned or was fired for refusing to file the politically motivated charges demanded by Trump, due to lack of evidence.

• Trump, almost certainly looking at an embarrassing loss tonight in California's Prop 50 initiative --- which would temporarily rewrite the state's Congressional map in response to a Trump-ordered U.S. House gerrymander in Texas over the summer --- was already falsely claiming this afternoon that the contest was somehow "rigged". CA's Sec. of State called out his evidence-free bullshit in a statement late today.

• Speaking of the Gerrymandering Wars kicked off by our desperate and incredibly unpopular President, Gov. Wes Moore, in the Democratically-controlled state of Maryland, announced a new Commission to consider jumping into the redistricting game before 2026. Maybe.

• Voting Rights advocates had a big victory on Friday, as one of two federal judges overseeing different lawsuits against Trump's bogus election-related Executive Order, issued a permanent ban on his attempt to mandate proof of citizenship documents by those registering to vote with the national voter registration form. The judge made clear --- as we did when Trump originally issued his dumb EO --- that Presidents have zero legal or Constitutional authority regarding elections.

• Finally, Desi Doyen joins us for our latest Green News Report, with a grim humanitarian crisis brewing in Jamaica and elsewhere in the Caribbean following last week's monster Hurricane Melissa; record rainfall in New York City; incredibly alarming glacial retreat in Antarctica; and the Trump Administration's Godfather-like thuggery used to block the world's first-ever emissions rules for international shipping...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

Today on The BradCast (my last until next week, see "NOTE" below), a full week after the awful murder of Republican activist Charlie Kirk, the political ramifications --- and opportunism --- is becoming quite clear. And it all has a very familiar echo to those of us, including my guests today, who were around and paying close attention 24 years ago this month. [Audio link to full show follows this summary.]

Back then, an unpopular President in the first eight months of his term saw his political fortunes reversed in the aftermath of the horrific terror attacks on September 11, 2001, as much of the nation "rallied around the flag" in support of that President, in response. His Administration, however, ran way too far with its presumed mandate in subsequent months and years. Innocent Americans themselves came under suspicion and paid a price (sometimes large, sometimes small) for their words and their political beliefs. The nation ended up committing itself to (at least) two, years-long, unwinnable foreign wars. And actions taken against Americans in the name, supposedly, of national security would bend norms, laws and Constitutional rights beyond recognition at times.

Charlie Kirk has yet to be buried. And yet, his most powerful ally, a very unpopular Donald Trump, his Administration and their supporters are already targeting their fellow Americans for retribution --- for a crime they had nothing to do with.

After years of describing Democrats as "fascists" and "the enemy within", Trump now claims that Kirk's death was the "tragic consequence of demonizing those with whom you disagree...in the most hateful and despicable way possible." In making his case, he cites "radical left" "scum" and unnamed "leftist organizations" as being responsible, vowing to target, prosecute and defund them for a crime that nobody other than the shooter seems to have carried out.

On Monday, Trump's Vice President, J.D. Vance, declared "left-wing extremism" was to blame and that "the data is clear" it is "not a both sides problem." It is "people on the Left" that are to blame for rising political violence. That, after the Trump Dept. of Justice removed a National Institute of Justice report from its website that finds white supremacist and far-right violence "continues to outpace all other types of terrorism and domestic violent extremism" in the United States. The study (now archived here) was there on the day that Kirk was killed. It was disappeared by the Trump Administration thereafter.

Speaking to Vance on the very same show on Monday, Trump's top White House political czar, Stephen Miller, furiously vowed "to uproot and dismantle these terrorist networks" and to "use every resource we have at the DOJ, Homeland Security and throughout this government to dismantle and destroy these networks."

Of course, there are no known "networks", at this time, tied to Kirk's murder in any way. But that's okay. Trump's Attorney General, Pam Bondi, promised on Monday to "absolutely target" anyone who uses "hate speech" that she doesn't like in the wake of Kirk's death. When asked about Bondi's remarks by an ABC News reporter on the White House lawn, Trump accused him of having "a lot of hate in your heart" and threatened: "Maybe I'll come after ABC."

(Shortly after we wrapped today's program, news broke that ABC was "indefinitely" pulling its popular late-night show, Jimmy Kimmel Live!. The announcement came after Trump's FCC chair threatened to "take action" against ABC and its owner Disney, and suggesting he might pull broadcast licenses from affiliate stations. The threats were apparently in response to Kimmel's charge on Monday that MAGA was "doing everything they can to score political points from" Kirk's death. Today, it seems, they scored another point. Though, to be fair, Trump said back in July, after taking credit for the recent cancellation of Stephen Colbert's top-rated late night show on CBS, "I hear Jimmy Kimmel is next." So, obviously all of this is just opportunism.)

Oh, and Rep. Clay Higgins, Chair of the Federal Law Enforcement subcommittee of the House Oversight Committee, sent a letter this week to the CEOs of six social media companies, (falsely) instructing them that they are required, by law, to remove comments regarding Kirk's assassination that Higgins and his compatriots might find offensive. He claimed the "restriction of public statements...is not an oppression of free speech [but] the protection of free speech." [Emphasis added for Orwell's sake.]

All of this sounds both familiar and chilling to those of us who lived through the aftermath of 9/11, including my guests today, HEATHER DIGBY PARTON of Salon and Digby's Hullabaloo and the notorious 'DRIFTGLASS' of the Professional Left Podcast.

"This isn't surprising," says Digby. "They've been telegraphing this since Donald Trump started running back in 2022, that they were going to go after 'the Left' and his enemies, 'the enemies of the state.' After the Kirk shooting there were MAGA people who were saying out loud, 'This is our Reichstag Fire,' looking for that moment they could use as an excuse to do what they were always going to do anyway."

"They have to start targeting people online who they said were insufficiently reverent toward Charlie Kirk, and getting them fired. So much more free speech. But that's the first step you take in this," she adds, citing similar threats from Republicans in the George W. Bush Administration back in 2001.

"I would like to thank the Reichstag Fire comparators for acknowledging they are Nazis," quips Driftglass, "because that's what the Reichstag Fire was. Way to go, guys!"

Citing similar blowback against those who disagreed with Bush and his wars after 9/11, Driftglass adds: "This didn't start with Donald Trump. They have been demonizing the Left as responsible for everything wrong with this country for at least the last 35 years. And the rhetoric has finally caught up with actual action being taken at the highest level of the White House."

"In Neuromancer by William Gibson," Driftglass observes, "he coined a phrase called the 'consensual hallucination.' That's what they [MAGA] are all engaged in. They have hallucinated into existence a vast leftwing conspiracy, sneaky liberal media, lots of awfulness that justifies everything they do. This has been set up for 40 years now, that the Left is always worse, always a threat, and always a justification for escalation against the 'enemy within.'"

There is, of course, much more on all of this on today's show, as both Digby and Driftglass join us for the full hour, including their insights on Trump's apparent attempt to start a war with Venezuela; his apparent attempt to start a war with Chicago; his laughable $15 billion defamation lawsuit against the New York Times and much more...

[NOTE: 'The BradCast' is off tomorrow due to an unavoidable medical appointment, though we hope to get a Green News Report out beforehand! Otherwise, see ya on Monday!]

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

I can't believe we're covering any of this. But, on today's BradCast, we're sounding twin alarms about the President of the United State's explicit threats of wars against both Venezuela and...yes...Chicago. There must really be some bad shit on him in those Epstein Files! [Audio link to full shows follows this summary.]

You would think that when Donald Trump posts on social media on Saturday morning that "Chicago [is] about to find out why it's called the Department of WAR" with a photo of him in battle fatigues in front of attack helicopters, a burning Chicago skyline and the phrase "Chipocalypse Now" in the style of 1979's Vietnam epic Apocalypse Now, that the nation's major newspapers might report on it in their print editions on Sunday. But, nope. Apparently a threat by the U.S. President to invade another major U.S. city no longer even merits a notice in either the New York Times or Washington Post the next day.

Moreover, you'd think ten U.S. warships ordered down to Central America within missile range of Venezuela --- just days after Trump violated all international (and U.S.) law by bombing a speed boat he claims to have been filled with "narco-terrorists" carrying "massive amounts of drugs" (there is no public evidence of either) that we'd see screaming ALL CAPS front page headlines about a pending U.S. war in Central America across all of the nation's papers. I guess blatant war crimes admitted to by a President of the United States and the threat of an impending U.S. attack on yet another sovereign nation just doesn't spark the outrage from the "liberal media" that it used.

So, here we are. The guy who those same papers described as an "anti-war" Presidential candidate is still playing them all like chumps as he threatens to unleash new wars both foreign and domestic.

Whatever is actually in those Epstein Files that he is refusing to release --- after promising to do so while running for President --- must be really really bad for him. And while everyone is looking for just two more Republicans with the courage to sign on to a Discharge Petition to force a vote in the U.S. House on the release of the criminal files on sex traffickers and Trump pedophile pals Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, perhaps they should look at the Democrats who are likely to win two upcoming Special Elections this month instead. Signatures from those two Democrats, once seated in the House (unless somehow blocked by Republicans from doing so), would be enough to trigger that vote. Could be a very interesting month.

We cover all of that and more on today's show, and open the phones to a bunch of listeners with their own thoughts on all of this madness.

Please tune in and let me know if you can make any more sense of this moment than I can. I welcome all the help and good sense you can offer. God knows ain't any Trump supporters calling in to defend him anymore. So make of that what you will...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

The war began decades ago, back when even Republicans favored a clean environment. But we are still nowhere near the final battle between climate champions and the fossil fuel industry profiteers who have now fully captured the GOP and the Trump Administration. We are joined on today's BradCast by a longtime warrior in this fight, who is surprisingly optimistic today, despite what would seem to be very grim news this week from the fossil fools in the Trump Administration. [Audio link to full show follows this summary.]

Before we get to the terrible, horrible, no good, very bad climate news, a few other quick items, including the worldwide tsunami fallout following last night's giant, 8.8 magnitude earthquake off Russia's east coast and Kamala Harris' announcement today that she does not intend to run for Governor in California next year.

Then, it's on to the huge announcement from the Trump Administration's corrupted, anti-environment Environmental Protection Agency this week that it is proposing to overturn the Obama EPA's 2009 "endangerment finding" which concluded that carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gasses are indeed planet warming pollutants that represent a danger to the health and welfare of the public. It is that finding --- essentially ordered by a U.S. Supreme Court ruling back in 2007 --- that provides authority to the EPA to use the Clean Air Act to regulate the production of climate warming gasses. The finding serves as the legal underpinning for most, if not all, of the climate change regulations that have been enacted ever since.

This week, however, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and former fracking CEO turned Trump Energy Secretary Chris Wright, announced that a new report from five cherry-picked climate science deniers, has given them legal authority to begin the process of overturning the 2009 "endangerment finding" and with it, kill all of the climate regulations --- to power plants, the auto industry, etc. --- that followed it.

It's obviously big and alarming news, even if it was promised in the Project 2025 manifesto that Trump pretended to disown during the campaign. But, as our guest details today, the EPA proposal is also alarmingly flawed in many ways that he believes makes it unlikely to stand up to legal scrutiny, even if this matter reaches this particularly corrupted Supreme Court.

We're honored to be joined on today's program DAVID DONIGER, Senior Attorney and Strategist for Climate & Energy at the non-profit Natural Resources Defense Council. Doniger first joined the NRDC in 1978; went on to have a hand in formulating the Montreal Protocol, which successfully stopped the depletion of the earth's ozone layer; served on President Clinton's White House Council on Environmental Quality; held key posts at the EPA, and is now back at the NRDC, still fighting the good and very long fight.

In AP's coverage of the EPA announcement this week, Doniger is cited as describing Zeldin's move as an attempted "kill shot" that, if successful, would then allow the Administration to invalidate all climate regulations. "They're trying to completely defang the Clean Air Act by saying, 'Well, this stuff [CO2, methane, etc.] is just not dangerous,'" Doniger told the Washington Post. "That claim is just mind-bogglingly contrary to the evidence."

Today, he explains the importance of the Obama endangerment finding to climate law and the Administration's legal justifications for UNfinding that finding. "Basically, they have thrown a lot of spaghetti at the wall, and they want to see if any of it sticks," he tells me. "Much of the spaghetti is all tangled up around itself. So it's going to take some work to show all the different ways in which this is just plainly wrong and illegal. But we will do that in the coming months, and take them to court if they persist."

We discuss the "mountain" of well-documented scientific evidence that counters the EPA's cherry-picked report from "five known, fringe climate deniers" and how Doniger believes "the record is going to be set straight, and these fringe people --- and how fringe their views are --- will be clear" as they do battle "in an echo chamber with themselves and try to construct an alternative reality."

Their goal, he argues, is that "if they can somehow turn reality upside-down and conclude that it's not dangerous, then they think they will knock the legs out from all of these regulations."

Doniger, who also discusses who is behind all of this and how much the transportation and power sectors in the U.S. are polluting the globe with climate warming emissions, doesn't believe the effort to "permanently damage the Clean Air Act as a law to deal with climate change," is going to work, "even in this Supreme Court."

He tells me that there have been a series of additional SCOTUS rulings since the 2007 opinion that required the EPA to act on climate change via the Clean Air Act following an endangerment finding. Moreover, he notes, the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act actually wrote into law that greenhouse gasses are pollutants that must be regulated. Doniger concedes that "you can never be sure with this Court", but cites those "four decisions that go right through 2022 where the present Court issued that last one."

"If they erase the endangerment finding, we will bring a lawsuit to challenge that. If they erase the vehicle standards, we will challenge that. Same thing with the power plant standards," he vows.

"There are four Supreme Court decisions, as recent as 2022, that follow the conclusion, the holding, of the [2007 Massachusetts v. EPA] case, that Congress gave EPA the authority and responsibility to address any form of dangerous air pollution including greenhouse gases."

"This administration is swinging for the fences," asserts Doniger, "but most of the time, when you swing for the fences, you strike out."

He's been in this fight far longer than I. Hopefully he's got this right and my worries are for naught. We will find out in the months and years ahead, as the long war for a livable planet continues...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

It all sounds a bit too familiar to those of us on The BradCast who covered the last time a Republican President forced the U.S. into a "Forever War" in the Middle East based on known lies regarding "Weapons of Mass Destruction" which they never had. Here we go again? [Audio link to full show follows this summary.]

Of course, part of the irony this time around is that Donald Trump ran for President on the false claim that he opposed the war in Iraq. And, despite his expansion of every inherited U.S. war, his unlawful targeted assassination of Iran's top military commander, and extreme expansion of the use of killer drones in all sorts of country during his first term in office, his supporters (and the corporate media) were dumb or duplicitous enough to characterize him as an "anti-war" President.

Trump's unconstitutional and unlawful attacks on three nuclear facilities in Iran over the weekend --- after Israel had cleared the field for him --- should put an end to the "anti-war" fairy tale once and for all. But we'll see.

Following Saturday's U.S. bombing run --- which, according to the Administration, has "obliterated" the three targeted nuclear production cites (something about which you should remain skeptical) --- Iran has responded with a fairly limp attack on a U.S. air base in Qatar and perhaps another in Iraq; the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS) has issued a terrorism advisory warning of potential Iran-sponsored cyberattacks and the possibility of new attacks in the U.S.; Trump's failing social media cite seems to have fallen victim to one of those cyberattacks over the weekend; and Russia suggests "a number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads."

Meanwhile, the Administration has been unable to proffer any actual evidence to suggest that Iran was anywhere near building a nuclear weapon --- the pretext for Saturday's attack --- much less posing a threat, imminent or otherwise, to the U.S.

According to sources in the U.S. intel community who spoke to our guest today, Rolling Stone's Senior Political Reporter, ANDREW PEREZ, "there is no intel" to suggest anything has changed regarding an Iranian nuclear program since Trump's own Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, testified to the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee in March that "the IC [U.S. Intelligence Community] continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon, and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003."

While the White House attacked Perez and his co-author, Asawin Suebsaeng for "false and lazy 'reporting' designed to undermine President Trump's highly successful operation to dismantle Iran's nuclear capabilities," subsequent statements from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Sec. of State Marco Rubio confirm that, in fact, "there is no intel" to suggest anything has changed in Iran's nuclear program between Gabbard's March 25th testimony in Congress and Trump's Saturday night B-2 stealth bomber assault on Iran.

Perez was not impressed by the White House attack on his reporting. "What we've been hearing from the Administration is that there has been no new intelligence to justify any sort of immediate actions against Iran," he says today. "What we're hearing is the White House is looking at the same intel it was looking at months ago."

To what does Perez attribute Trump's sudden decision to join Israel's war after spending months trying to negotiate a deal with Iran (like the one Obama struck in 2015)? "One of the major factors in the President's different posture, as it pertained to Iran, was watching Fox News coverage the last couple of weeks." On Fox, of course, they've been covering Israel's attack on Iran and calling for the U.S. to join in. Trump, according to Perez, thought "it looked very cool."

"What the President did this weekend definitely constitutes several acts of war," Perez argues. "It does look possible that this doesn't blow up into a broader conflict, but it still could."

None of this, it should be noted, should have even been necessary in the first place, but for Trump having unilaterally reneged on Obama's 2015 anti-nuclear deal with Iran. By all assessments (perhaps other than Israel's) the agreement worked, observably preventing Iran from enriching uranium above levels required for civilian use --- at least until Trump ripped it up upon taking office because HE wasn't the one to have made it.

Hilariously, that agreement was struck after Trump, in both 2011 and again in 2013 declared: "Remember that I predicted a long time ago that President Obama will attack Iran because of his inability to negotiate properly - not skilled!"

Then, with a few minutes left on today's program, we open up the phone to callers, including one who claims to have voted for Trump three times but now concedes he feels like he was completely duped. "I am so disappointed," he tells me. "I feel stabbed in the back." Tune in to find out why!...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)