Top Stories Daily Listen Now
RawStory
RawStory

All posts tagged "democracy"

This soulless 2028 hopeful just signed a deal with the devil

If there was ever any doubt that Secretary of State Marco Rubio is nothing more than Donald Trump’s glorified messenger boy, look no further than his smarmy interaction with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán in Budapest last Monday.

Rubio hailed a “golden age” of U.S. relations with Hungary, emphasizing Orbán’s strong personal relationship with Trump, and enthusiastically endorsed the autocrat’s bid for a fifth term in an April election.

To earn Rubio’s praise and endorsement, Orbán has systematically dismantled Hungary’s democracy over the 15 years he has wielded power. As far back as 2022, European Union lawmakers declared Hungary “a hybrid regime of electoral autocracy,” its undermining of EU’s democratic values taking Hungary out of the “community of democracies.”

Orbán has eroded Hungary’s pillars of democracy. He has limited the voice of opposition groups, passed anti-immigration laws, suppressed the freedom of the media and educational institutions, manipulated the election system, controlled the legislative branch through his Fidesz Party’s super-majority, and weakened judicial oversight by court packing and forced retirement of senior judges.

Orbán has provided Trump a blueprint for democratic demolition that Trump has followed with alacrity.

Rubio disgraced himself by wrapping America’s arms around the most autocratic leader in the European Union. A political chameleon, Rubio is a poster boy for why millions of Americans view politicians as the lowest of bottom feeders. He sold his soul for political gain and scrapped whatever values he may have had to serve Trump, hoping to position himself as a presidential contender in 2028.

As a Florida senator, Rubio criticized the erosion of democracy in Hungary under Orbán and signed a letter with colleagues that decried the “significantly eroded” state of democracy there. Today, Rubio hails that same Orbán as a great leader worthy of continuing to serve the Hungarian people.

As a senator, Rubio was known as a “Russia hawk” who labeled Vladimir Putin a “gangster,” “thug,” “tyrant,” and “war criminal.” Today, Rubio has refused to put any blame on Putin for invading Ukraine, made nice with Orbán, Putin’s one ally in the EU, and advanced Trump’s efforts to end the Russian-Ukrainian war quickly at great expense to Ukraine and benefit to Putin.

As a senator, Rubio was widely regarded as a staunch defender of democracy at home. Today, Rubio is helping Trump dismantle American democracy while lavishing praise on Hungary’s democratic destroyer who Trump seditiously emulates.

As Secretary of State, Rubio must carry out Trump’s agenda or be fired. However, Rubio had the choice of accepting the appointment, and he knew exactly what he was signing up for: serving at the pleasure of a narcissistic authoritarian bent on taking apart America’s democracy piece by piece and spreading Orbán’s brand of anti-democratic right-wing nationalism.

Of course, Rubio is just a slick extension of Trump, a more moderate-appearing face on Trump’s anti-democratic machinations. However, if it weren’t for Rubio and other unscrupulous lackeys like Kristi Noem, Lee Zeldin, Pam Bondi, Peter Hegseth, and Linda McMahon, Trump couldn’t carry out his multiple-front assault on democracy. If Hitler hadn’t had Goring, Himmler, Goebbels, and Hess, he too would have lacked the obedient functionaries to convert hateful rhetoric into nightmarish reality.

Rather than an anomaly, Rubio is representative of most bend-the-knee Republican politicians today. They are willing to forsake their values to keep their jobs or climb the political food chain like Rubio by prostrating themselves shamelessly before Trump.

By providing absolutely no pushback to Trump demolishing American democracy and promoting authoritarianism abroad, Republican politicians are complicit in supporting and enabling the most anti-democratic administration in US history. They have lost any right to represent the American people or our democratic republic and will be unceremoniously shown the door on Nov. 4.

  • Tom Tyner is a freelance editorialist, satirist, political analyst, blogger, author and retired English instructor.

Trump's banners advertise harsh truths about his regime's failure

Historically, fascist dictators have had large images of themselves plastered on government buildings to create a cult of personality among the worshipful populace, to symbolize the omnipotent power of the dictator, and to use as self-serving propaganda to promote the dictator’s indisputable greatness.

Add Donald Trump to that list.

Trump now has three large banners with his image hanging from federal buildings, with plans to hang a fourth.

On the façade of the Department of Justice building hangs a large banner with Trump’s image and the caption “Make America Safe Again.”

On the Department of Labor building hangs a Trump banner and the caption “American Workers First.”

On the Department of Agriculture building hangs a Trump banner and the caption “Growing America Since 1862.”

Contract documents indicate plans for a fourth Trump banner hanging from Department of Health and Human Services building with the caption, “Make America Healthy Again.”

The in-your-face propaganda purpose of the banners can’t be missed. “Make America Safe Again” and “Make America Healthy Again” are versions of Trump’s “Make America Great Again” theme. “American Workers First” is an obvious plug for Trump’s tariffs that supposedly protect American jobs, and “Growing America Since 1862” implies Trump’s great support for the American farmer.

The intent of the banners is for Americans to credit Trump-the-Peerless for all of the great things the country is experiencing. It serves the dictator’s purpose to take credit for all of the country’s successes, accomplished solely through his faultless leadership while earning the people’s undying gratitude.

The irony, of course, is that the captions represent the opposite of what is actually going on in the country, the banners a bigger-than-life reminder that Trump’s alternate reality is one big lie.

Regarding “American Workers’ First,” in 2025, the US economy added just 181,000 jobs, making it the weakest job growth since 2003. In addition, more jobs returned to the US in 2024 under President Biden than in 2025 under Trump, and unemployment rose higher in 2025 than in 2024. Trump also ended collective bargaining rights for over 1 million federal workers, terminating existing union contracts and derecognizing unions. So much for “American Workers’ First.”

Regarding “Make America Safe Again,” data shows that there has been a steady decline in violent crime in the US during the last five years since a spike during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, that decline has been the greatest in Democratic-controlled states, which have eight out of the ten lowest rates of violent crime in the country due in part to strong gun-control regulations. Seven out of the ten states with the highest rates of violent crime are Republican-controlled, Trump-supporting states. In addition, on Trump’s orders, the DOJ is wasting its time and taxpayers’ money on frivolous investigations and long-shot indictments of Trump’s enemies rather than fulfilling its primary mission: fighting violent crime.

Regarding “Make America Healthy Again,” the Department of Health and Human Services has reduced the number of recommended childhood vaccines from 17 to 11, a move heavily criticized by pediatricians. The US also has seen an alarming increase in the number of measles cases nationwide caused by declining vaccination rates.

HHS head Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has eliminated thousands of HHS jobs and frozen billions of dollars in scientific research, and only 37 percent of Americans trust him as a source of health information. Finally, Trump’s massive deregulation of polluting industries poses a serious risk to human health.

Regarding “Growing America Since 1862,” the US is currently importing record levels of agricultural products, transforming the US into a net agricultural importer for the first time in 50 years. As a result, net US farm income has dropped significantly and farm bankruptcies rose 46 percent in 2025 compared to 2024.

In addition, Trump’s tariffs have cost farmers billions of dollars due to shrinking export markets as countries have successfully sought less-expensive trading partners. Tariffs have also led to rising costs for farmers who import products such as fertilizer and machinery that tariffs have made much more expensive.

Thanks to Trump, the federal agencies where the self-aggrandizing banners hang have been turned against the American people. The DOL cut funds for programs that support workers, worker organizing, worker safety, and job training, the HHS is risking the health of every American child through its anti-vaccine messaging, the supposedly independent DOJ is busily carrying out Trump’s vendettas against multiple Americans, and the DOA has supported Trump’s tariffs that are hurting American farmers.

A strong case can be made that hanging presidential images on federal buildings is illegal or unconstitutional. However, given Congress’s role in pursuing legal challenges, nothing will be accomplished given the Republican majorities. The banners are probably here to stay unless defaced by a paintball-loaded drone, a crime for which Trump would certainly demand the death penalty.

Perhaps the banners’ haunting presence is a good thing, however. They are a grim daily reminder to all Americans that Trump has more in common with other banner-hanging dictators like Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong-un, and Xi Jinping than with past American presidents. Trump is the first and only American president in 250 years to adorn federal buildings with his image. If Americans cherish and protect our democracy, he will be the last.

  • Tom Tyner is a freelance editorialist, satirist, political analyst, blogger, author and retired English instructor.

This stark choice will guarantee Trump's downfall

Forget about “left or right,” there’s only one thing on the ballot this fall: democracy (Democrats), or oligarchy that leads to tyranny (Republicans).

Donald Trump, the GOP, the 13 billionaires in his Cabinet, and the ~150 billionaires who made him president again are all on the side of oligarchy. And we’re already most of the way there, thanks to five corrupt, on-the-take Republicans on the Supreme Court.

As President Jimmy Carter told me 11 years ago:

“It [Citizens United] violates the essence of what made America a great country in its political system. Now it’s just an oligarchy, with unlimited political bribery being the essence of getting the nominations for president or to elect the president. … So now we’ve just seen a complete subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors, who want and expect and sometimes get favors for themselves after the election’s over.” [emphasis added]

Democracy is when the will of the people is regularly converted into policy and law by their elected representatives. As Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence:

“…Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”

Oligarchy, on the other hand, is when the morbidly rich own the government and dictate policy, the “consent of the governed” be damned. We’ve been creeping in that direction since the Reagan Revolution in the 1980s, when rich people stopped paying taxes, corporate consolidations exploded, unions were attacked and wages stagnated, and it began to cost a fortune to get decent healthcare or a good education.

But the danger of oligarchy isn’t just that rich people get richer and the rest of us get poorer, which has been the steady trajectory of the Reagan Revolution for 44 years. As I point out in The Hidden History of American Oligarchy, oligarchy is almost always just a transitional system.

It doesn’t last, because working class people eventually get tired of being ripped off by the morbidly rich. Which is exactly what we’ve been seeing with our political system for the past two decades: whichever candidate — the best examples are Barack Obama and Trump — who promises “change” gets elected, because the people are angry about the morbidly rich oligarchs having taken over the government and turned it exclusively to their own benefit.

In some countries throughout history, that anger is translated into revolutions and civil wars. More often, however, it follows the course it is on right now in the United States: extreme polarization, seizure of the news and political system by the rich to hang onto their oligarchy, and millions of frustrated citizens showing up in the streets.

As Jack London put it in The Iron Heel, the oligarchs “own the Senate, Congress, the courts, and the state legislatures” leaving the middle class’s supposed power as “an empty shell.” The rich and powerful boast, “We are the Iron Heel, and none can withstand us,” and insist that morality itself largely flows from “the class interests” and “feelings of superiority” of those on top.

Eventually, however, it gets more and more difficult for an oligarchic government to hang onto power because people hate oligarchy.

The government toadies of the oligarchs then must either move back toward democracy by making real concessions to the people like FDR did — giving them better wages, taxing the rich, making healthcare and education free or cheap, breaking up the monopolies — or they have to clamp down and put an end to the protests.

We’re seeing that being played out right now in America, as protestors are beaten, gassed, arrested, and even murdered right in front of us, with the agents of the oligarchs — ICE in this case — suffering no consequences whatsoever.

Similarly, Trump just tried to get six members of Congress thrown into prison for saying that military people shouldn’t follow illegal orders, which actually is the law of the land. Don Lemon is being arraigned for daring to do his job as a reporter. In a spectacle resembling Russia or Belarus, the regime’s goons now gas, beat, and kill people with absolute impunity.

This is how every tyrant in modern history — from Germany in the 1930s to Russia in the early 2000s to America today — makes the transition from democracy to oligarchy and finally to absolute tyranny.

Germany called them Brownshirts. Russia called them Rosgvardiya or the KGB/FSB, and here in America we call them ICE. They’re the shock troops, loyal exclusively to Dear Leader, whose job is to crush public dissent on behalf of oligarchs who, like Fritz Thyssen in 1930s Germany, believe turning the country into a dictatorship will make them even richer and more powerful.

Elections still happen, flags still wave, politicians still give speeches about freedom. But the real power concentrates at the top and, when the people begin to seriously push back, the government becomes violent, using terror and imprisonment as its main weapons.

After the state murders of Renee Good and Alex Pretti (with no consequences) and the violent gassing, beating, and detention of thousands of protestors, the demonstrations in Minneapolis began to thin out. Fewer and fewer people are willing to be exposed to poisonous gas, get their bones broken, be thrown into brutal detention, or even be outright killed. And who could blame them?

Make no mistake: this is the direction Trump and today’s Republican Party are taking America as quickly as they can. Already we have more people in concentration camps than Hitler did by 1939, and the oligarchs have been looting our country and crushing the middle class ever since Reagan invited them to take over in 1981.

  • 45 years of massive tax cuts for the rich totaling over $35 trillion have been put on our nation’s credit card (our national debt) by Republicans, overwhelmingly benefiting corporations and making the ultra wealthy richer than any king or pharaoh in history.
  • On Thursday, Trump gutted the EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gasses because the fossil fuel industry crossed his palm with cash. He’s done the same with other environmental regulations, worker safety rules, and is handing billionaires control of our media left and right.
  • Corrupt, oligarch-friendly judges groomed by billionaire-funded legal networks populate the Supreme Court and about half of our appeals courts, consistently siding with concentrated wealth and state power instead of the rights of ordinary citizens.
  • To prevent the people from fighting back at the ballot box, Republican legislatures across the country have passed laws making it harder to vote, are purging voter rolls, restricted ballot access, and are redrawing districts to entrench GOP rule. There’s now Republican-sponsored legislation before Congress that would disenfranchise tens of millions of married women and low-income voters.
  • With Trump following Putin’s playbook, we first saw family separations and detention camps that human rights observers say are actually concentration camps. Children were taken from their parents as a matter of policy, and entire communities were demonized by Trump, Vance, et al with racist rhetoric about “invasions,” “infestations,” and lies like, “They’re eating the dogs and cats!”

That kind of language isn’t accidental. It prepares a country to see some people as “others” not deserving of human rights, accept government-sponsored cruelty, and view a police state as a “protective force” (Hitler’s Schutzstaffel or SS is “protection force” in English). It normalizes and speeds the transition from oligarchy to outright dictatorship.

And they know all about the psychological tools they’re using to bring about this transition here in America. Throughout history, racism and misogyny have been the oligarch’s favorite tools. Divide working people by race, religion, and gender so they’ll never unite to challenge the oligarchs.

Even our foreign policy has been transformed from one that advocates and supports democracies around the world to supporting and lionizing authoritarian leaders while attacking our democratic allies. Trump undermined NATO, cozies up to brutal strongmen like Putin and Middle Eastern dictators, and treats global alliances and tariffs like protection rackets to push other countries to subsidize his family building another hotel or golf course.

And through it all, we see a steady erosion of trust in elections themselves, what Thomas Paine called the beating heart of democracy. Trump’s lickspittles and his billionaire-owned media outlets promote claims of “widespread voter fraud” with quite literally no credible evidence. And now they’re using that same bulls--t to try to rig this fall’s election.

So, what do we do? This year, forget about third parties or skipping election day, and vote for every Democrat on the ticket.

We all get it that the Democratic Party isn’t perfect. There are corporate sellouts in the Party like the so-called “New Democrats” and “Problem Solvers.” Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries seem to lack backbones. There are compromises that frustrate Americans who want real action and a restoration of the middle class.

But at least the Democratic Party is still operating inside the democratic tradition. It supports expanding voting rights, not restricting them. It backs labor organizing instead of union busting. It pushes to reduce the influence of dark money instead of unleashing more of it. It fights for clean air and to stop climate change. It appoints judges who respect precedent and civil rights rather than dismantling them.

When Democrats win, there’s space to fight for more democracy. When Republicans aligned with Trump win, the fight becomes about whether democracy survives at all in America.

In a two party system like ours, refusing to vote because one candidate or party isn’t pure enough usually doesn’t create a better option; it simply strengthens the faction that’s openly comfortable with authoritarian tactics and oligarchic economics.

If we want a country where working people have a real voice, where votes are counted and respected, where diversity is seen as strength instead of threat, we have to defend the imperfect democratic coalition we have. And that means voting for Democrats this fall, and supporting them now, almost without exception.

Of course, we want to demand better values, universal healthcare, bold climate action, serious campaign finance reform, free college, and real taxes on the morbidly rich. We have to organize, protest, and push our representatives with regular phone calls and other actions. That’s how democracy grows stronger.

But we also have to understand the stakes when we talk with friends and neighbors, support candidates, and step into the voting booth.

A vote for MAGA Republicans, or a failure to vote, is a statement in favor of the normalization of racism, the rigging of our voting system, and the continued consolidation of ever more wealth and power in the hands of billionaires. A vote for Democratic candidates, even weak ones, is a vote to keep the democratic experiment alive long enough to improve it.

This isn’t just another election cycle, it’s a crossroads: we must pick democracy or continue to embrace oligarchy fueled by Citizens United.

That’s the choice. History will remember which side we chose, and our children and grandchildren must live with the consequences.

This story of dystopian hell makes for grim reading — but it's not fiction

Not that many years ago, the new Human Rights Watch (HRW) report on the rise of authoritarian governments around the world and the United States’ role would have read like dystopian fiction. Today, however, the report merely confirms the reality that Americans live in.

HRW is an independent, international non-governmental organization that investigates and reports on human rights around the world. Its 2026 report finds that a troubling 72 percent of countries are under authoritarian governments, the largest number since 1984. It also found a realignment of powerful nations advancing the authoritarian cause that now includes the U.S. alongside Russia and China.

HRW reports that in just 12 months, the Trump administration has carried out “a broad assault on key pillars of U.S. democracy and the global rules-based order, which the U.S., despite inconsistencies, was, with other states, instrumental in helping to establish.”

Evidence abounds that the HRW report’s assessment is accurate. In the old global order, the U.S. was the leading promoter of democracy and an example to follow. It united with other democratic countries in defending and spreading democracy, constraining authoritarian advancement, and exposing human rights violations in authoritarian countries.

In the new world order, the U.S. has shockingly switched sides. It now promotes authoritarianism rather than democracy both by example and its relationships with other countries.

At home, Trump has assaulted democracy by undermining Americans’ trust in the election system, violating the rule of law and the Constitution, emasculating the Republican-controlled legislative branch, attacking judicial independence, defying court orders, using government power to punish and intimidate political opponents, the media, and universities, and deploying the U.S. military to cities to impose “law and order” against the will of states.

Abroad, Trump has sharply criticized leaders of America’s traditional allies, slapped onerous tariffs on their countries, supported right-wing leaders and organizations that threaten their democracies, and made America an unreliable NATO member.

Trump saves his admiration for authoritarian leaders who have decimated their countries’ democracies including Vladimir Putin, Viktor Orbán, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and Ferdinand Marcos. In particular, Trump’s assault on America’s democracy parallels that of his close friend Orban in Hungary, the anti-democratic leader most greatly admired by the Republican Party.

Trump has also sided with Putin in Russia’s invasion of democratic Ukraine and limited U.S. military support for Kyiv. Trump draws no moral distinction between the invading totalitarian Russia and democratic Ukraine because in his mind, there isn’t any.

In Trump’s reprehensible world view, might makes right. Trump is not going to support a democracy under attack if the aggressor is more powerful, which would have been music to Hitler’s ears. A totalitarian country can invade a democracy with no moral indignation from Trump for a simple reason: Trump sides with the authoritarians.

How can a new world order with Trump’s America undermining democracy along with Russia and China be countered by freedom-loving nations? HRW recommends that a new global alliance be formed “to support international human rights within a rules-based order.” The obvious participants would be established democracies with significant economic and geopolitical clout along with smaller countries across the globe that have advanced human rights.

According to HRW, this global coalition of democracies could offer attractive trade deals to counteract Trump’s punitive trade policies. It could include rights' protections for workers and security agreements, all contingent on nations adhering to democratic governance and human rights' norms. That the U.K., E.U., Canada, and Australia are already forming closer economic ties to end reliance on the US could be a first step in creating a broader, more powerful worldwide coalition.

The very notion of the United States under Trump going to the dark side in the battle for universal dominance between democratic, freedom-loving countries and autocratic, freedom-repressing countries once seemed an unimaginable absurdity. It is terrifyingly real today, however, something that Americans ignore at our own peril.

Sinclar Lewis prophesized the future in his 1935 novel It Can’t Happen Here, where “Buzz” Windrip, a populist who wins the presidency by promising prosperity, systematically dismantles democratic institutions and becomes America’s dictator. Trump will be our “Buzz” Windrip if we allow it to happen.

While stopping the massive worldwide erosion of democracy may require an international coalition, Americans can do our share by limiting Trump’s ability to dismantle America’s democracy and support authoritarianism abroad. If we passively ignore Trump’s treasonous assault on democracy, he will succeed alongside Russia and China in helping authoritarianism continue to grow and choke out democracy in more countries, including the United States.

By electing Democratic majorities to the House and Senate in the November midterm elections and ending Congress’s subjugation to Trump, we can mitigate the damage he is doing to the country and the world in concert with Russia and China and ultimately return America to its historical place as the leader of the free world.

If we don’t act now, we may never have another chance, a nightmarish Orwellian future looming on the horizon.

  • Tom Tyner is a freelance editorialist, satirist, political analyst, blogger, author and retired English instructor.

This grotesque Republican trend has metastasized

One supposes that it’s not an especially unusual phenomenon for politicians who ascend to power to do everything they can to cling to it. Between the ability to shape public policy and the trappings that come with inhabiting high office, political power is almost always an addictive drug that’s hard to kick. That said, it’s also one of the hallmarks and great strengths of American democracy that, for most of the last 250 years, politicians of all parties have accepted — usually honorably — the will of voters.

Tragically, however, this great tradition of honor and discipline was egregiously abandoned by Donald Trump in the aftermath of the 2020 election — an action that led directly to the infamous January 6, 2021, insurrection. And now, five years later, it’s clear that this new practice of, when necessary, taking every conceivable step to evade the will of the citizenry in order to cling to power, has become the new modus operandi of Trump’s party in North Carolina.

We, of course, should have seen this coming. That the fear of voter decisions and the willingness to subvert them had become a new Republican tactic of choice was first made blatantly obvious in 2013 when the GOP-dominated General Assembly began enacting election law changes (like the infamous Monster Voting Law) that went to extreme lengths to both suppress the vote of disfavored groups — most notably voters of color — and rig electoral outcomes through the use of extreme partisan gerrymandering.

The practice continued in the weeks immediately following the 2016 election. That was the period during which the lame duck GOP-dominated General Assembly hastily convened to enact laws stripping the newly elected Democratic governor, Roy Cooper, of an array of basic powers long and logically attached to the office.

Never mind that voters chose Cooper with the eminently reasonable expectation that he would wield authority — like numerous important appointment powers — long and naturally associated with the role of a state’s chief executive. Ignoring the obvious will of voters, GOP legislators moved quickly to remove them, and in most instances, seize them for themselves.

And in recent years, sadly, this trend has only continued to metastasize and become even more ingrained.

See, for example, the ongoing effort to take gerrymandering to ever greater depths by, quite literally, rendering the results of almost all legislative elections foreordained and rigged to elect large Republican majorities. Late last year, the GOP took this practice to a new and truly preposterous level when, heeding the dictates of Dear Leader Trump, it further rigged the state’s congressional elections so that our deeply purple state will almost assuredly be represented by a U.S. House delegation of 11 Republicans and three Democrats.

And then of course, there was the almost laughably bizarre move to, in the aftermath of Democrat Josh Stein’s landslide victory in the 2024 election, seize even more gubernatorial power — like appointing the state Board of Elections — and hand it to, of all people, the state’s accountant (i.e. the auditor). It was a move so blatant and utterly contemptuous of the will of voters that it left many observers to conclude that Republicans would have gladly handed the seized power over to whatever GOP office holder happened to be handy — the Labor Commissioner? Agriculture Commissioner? — if the new GOP auditor, Dave Boliek, hadn’t been so cynically ready and willing to play along.

But wait, there’s more. As NC Newsline’s Brandon Kingdollar reported on Jan. 19, the governor’s office isn’t the only one from which Republicans have shown themselves more than willing to seize powers in contravention of the voters’ judgment. Newly elected Democratic Attorney General Jeff Jackson is also a target.

Despite ample evidence that Jackson has worked hard to approach the task in a nonpartisan manner guided by the letter of the law and the likelihood of demonstrable harm to our state, Republican legislators advanced legislation last year that would strip the AG’s office of one of its central and most important constitutional duties — to challenge unlawful presidential executive orders that harm the state.

One GOP lawmaker even promised he and his colleagues would wreak vengeance and render Jackson’s office “a feckless, empty shell of a position that has no authority to do anything,” if he dared to contest their action. Try to imagine that such a move could have occurred if Dan Bishop were AG and Kamala Harris in the White House.

All these moves come on top of many years of repeated legislative micro-aggressions toward Democrats elected to Council of State offices like the Superintendent of Public Instruction and Secretary of State via budget cuts and other power grabs.

Will this trend continue in the New Year? It’s hard to imagine that it won’t. While gerrymandering and political power jockeying has always been a feature of American politics, the modern, Trumpified Republican Party has taken both phenomena to new and extreme levels never seen before in American history. The only question that remains at this point is how much longer voters will stand for the fear and contempt directed their way by politicians supposedly sworn to serve them.

  • Senior contributor and award-winning journalist Rob Schofield authors regular commentaries and hosts the 'News & Views' weekly radio show/podcast. A part of NC Newsline since 2006, he served as editor from 2017 to 2025 and, prior to that, worked for many years as an attorney championing the rights of low-income people and civil liberties.

These powerful Americans yawned when Trump threatened to cancel midterms

The lack of market reaction to the news that Donald Trump ordered his Justice Department to investigate criminal charges against Fed Chair Jerome Powell surprises many people. After all, everyone knows that the claims about cost overruns being the basis for the investigation are nonsense. Trump wants to threaten Powell with criminal charges because he ignored Trump’s demand that he lower interest rates.

This ordinarily would be seen as a very big deal. Ever since Richard Nixon, presidents have been reluctant to be seen as pressuring the Fed. In fact, their concern about this issue often seemed absurd to my view. President Joe Biden didn’t want his Council of Economic Advisors to even comment on interest rate policy, as though giving a view based on the economic data would be undue pressure.

But there is a big difference between presenting an economic argument and threatening to imprison a Fed chair who disagrees. And we now see which side Trump comes down on.

But apparently, the markets are just fine with this new threat. The major stock indexes all rose on Monday, although bond prices fell slightly, pushing long-term rates higher. The dollar also fell modestly.

The non-reaction of the stock markets might seem surprising. After all, the independent Fed is considered a sacred feature of US prosperity. There is no shortage of economists who will insist that a Fed that is subordinate to the whims of a president is a quick route to double-digit or even triple-digit inflation. (I’m more agnostic on this one, but the markets generally don’t listen to me.)

Anyhow, Trump is now not just looking to fire an insubordinate Fed chair, he’s looking to throw him in prison. And the markets just yawned.

This reaction should cause us to start asking how the markets might react if Trump just cancels or outright steals the 2026 elections to keep his lackeys in control of Congress. Under any other modern president, the fear of a cancelled or stolen election would be silly. While they might have used dubious tactics leading up to an election, we could be comfortable that the votes would be counted, and the outcome would be binding. (Florida in 2000 is a major exception.) No one ever suggested that an election would be cancelled.

But Trump has made it clear that he considers both cancellation and ordering that some votes not be counted as serious options in his recent New York Times interview. No one can be safe in assuming that we will have a normal democratic election this year.

Given this reality, we might want to speculate on how the markets would react if Trump decides to end American democracy. We now know that most of the big money boys couldn’t care less about democracy. Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and Tim Cook have been happy to cozy up to Trump in Mar-a-Lago, even as he violates one democratic norm after another. Elon Musk has made it clear that he has contempt for democracy, insofar as it means allowing non-white people to vote.

This gang would obviously have no moral issues with a cancelled or stolen election. But what about the economics?

Trump has already made it clear that he will favor businesses whose leaders praise him and punish those who criticize him. His most recent effort in this direction was saying that he intended to ban ExxonMobil from access to Venezuelan oil because its CEO said what every oil analyst has said since Trump became president of that country: it will be difficult for companies to profitably invest there.

The economies of countries where the leader can reward or punish companies on a whim tend not to do very well. The courts have provided a limited check on Trump’s whims, as has even this pathetic Congress. However, if Trump is deciding who serves in Congress, the checks will be gone. We will have full-rule by our demented 79-year-old president.

Perhaps markets will be fine with that. With enough rear-end licking, some companies may still do fine, but it would seem that, on the straight economics, most people with money would probably prefer to invest in a serious country. Let’s hope we don’t have to find out.

  • Dean Baker is the co-founder and the senior economist of the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR). He is the author of several books, including "Getting Back to Full Employment: A Better bargain for Working People," "The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive," "The United States Since 1980," "Social Security: The Phony Crisis" (with Mark Weisbrot), and "The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer." He also has a blog, "Beat the Press," where he discusses the media's coverage of economic issues.

These familiar steps show how Trump is walking us into autocracy

By Konstantin Zhukov, Assistant Professor of Economics, Indiana University; Institute for Humane Studies.

The FBI search of a Washington Post reporter’s home on Jan. 14, 2026, was a rare and intimidating move by an administration focused on repressing criticism and dissent.

In his story about the search at Hannah Natanson’s home, at which FBI agents said they were searching for materials related to a federal government contractor, Post reporter Perry Stein wrote that “it is highly unusual and aggressive for law enforcement to conduct a search on a reporter’s home.”

And Jameel Jaffer, director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, told the New York Times the raid was “intensely concerning,” and could have a chilling effect “on legitimate journalistic activity.”

Free speech and independent media play a vital role in holding governments accountable by informing the public about government wrongdoing.

This is precisely why autocrats like Russia’s Vladimir Putin have worked to silence independent media, eliminating checks on their power and extending their rule. In Russia, for example, public ignorance about Putin’s responsibility for military failures in the war on Ukraine has allowed state propaganda to shift blame to senior military officials instead.

While the United States remains institutionally far removed from countries like Russia, the Trump administration has taken troubling early steps toward autocracy by threatening — and in some cases implementing — restrictions on free speech and independent media.

Public ignorance, free speech and independent media

Ignorance about what public officials do exists in every political system.

In democracies, citizens often remain uninformed because learning about politics takes time and effort, while one vote rarely changes an election. American economist Anthony Downs called this “rational ignorance,” and it is made worse by complex laws and bureaucracy that few people fully understand.

As a result, voters often lack the information needed to monitor politicians or hold them accountable, giving officials more room to act in their own interest.

Free speech and independent media are essential for breaking this cycle. They allow citizens, journalists and opposition leaders to expose corruption and criticize those in power.

Open debate helps people share grievances and organize collective action, from protests to campaigns.

Independent media also act as watchdogs, investigating wrongdoing and raising the political cost of abuse – making it harder for leaders to get away with corruption or incompetence.

Public ignorance in autocracies

Autocrats strengthen their grip on power by undermining the institutions meant to keep them in check.

When free speech and independent journalism disappear, citizens are less likely to learn about government corruption or failures. Ignorance becomes the regime’s ally — it keeps people isolated and uninformed. By censoring information, autocrats create an information vacuum that prevents citizens from making informed choices or organizing protests.

This lack of reliable information also allows autocrats to spread propaganda and shape public opinion on major political and social issues.

Most modern autocrats have worked to silence free speech and crush independent media. When Putin came to power, he gradually shut down independent TV networks and censored opposition outlets. Journalists who exposed government corruption or brutality were harassed, prosecuted or even killed. New laws restricted protests and public criticism, while “foreign agent” rules made it nearly impossible for the few remaining independent media to operate.

At the same time, the Kremlin built a vast propaganda machine to shape public opinion. This control over information helped protect the regime during crises. As I noted in a recent article, many Russians were unaware of Putin’s responsibility for military failures in 2022. State media used propaganda to shift blame to the military leadership — preserving Putin’s popularity even as the war faltered.

Threat to independent media in the US

While the United States remains far from an autocracy, the Trump administration has taken steps that echo the behavior of authoritarian regimes.

Consider the use of lawsuits to intimidate journalists. In Singapore, former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and his son, Lee Hsien Loong, routinely used civil defamation suits to silence reporters who exposed government repression or corruption. These tactics discouraged criticism and encouraged self-censorship.

President Donald Trump has taken a similar approach, seeking US$15 billion from the New York Times for publication of several allegedly “malicious” articles, and $10 billion from the Wall Street Journal. The latter suit concerns a story about a letter Trump reportedly signed in Jeffrey Epstein’s birthday book.

A court dismissed the lawsuit against the Times; that’s likely to happen with the Journal suit as well. But such lawsuits could deter reporting on government misconduct, reporting on the actions and statements of Trump’s political opponents, and the kind of criticism of an administration inherent in opinion journalism such as columns and editorials.

This problem is compounded by the fact that after ABC's Jimmy Kimmel was suspended following a threat from the Trump-aligned chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, the president suggested revoking the broadcast licenses of networks that air negative commentary about him.

Although Kimmel was later reinstated, the episode revealed how the administration could use the autocratic technique of bureaucratic pressure to suppress speech it disagreed with. Combined with efforts to prosecute the president’s perceived enemies through the Justice Department, such actions inevitably encourage media self-censorship and deepen public ignorance.

Threat to free speech

Autocrats often invoke “national security” to pass laws restricting free speech. Russia’s “foreign agents” law, passed in 2012, forced nongovernmental organizations with foreign funding to label themselves as such, becoming a tool for silencing dissenting advocacy groups. Its 2022 revision broadened the definition, letting the Kremlin target anyone who criticized the government.

Similar laws have appeared in Hungary, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan. Russia also uses vague “terrorist” and “extremist” designations to punish those who protest and dissent, all under the guise of “national security.”

After Charlie Kirk’s murder, the Trump administration took steps threatening free speech. It used the pretext of the “violence-inciting radical left” to call for a crackdown on what it designated as “hate speech,” threaten liberal groups, and designate antifa as a domestic terrorist organization.

The latter move is especially troubling, pushing the United States closer to the behavior characteristic of autocratic governments. The vagueness of the designation threatens to suppress free expression and opposition to the Trump administration.

Antifa is not an organization but a “decentralized collection of individual activists,” as scholar Stanislav Vysotsky describes it. The scope of those falling under the antifa label is widened by its identification with broad ideas, described in a national security memorandum issued by the Trump administration in the fall of 2025, like anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity. This gives the government leeway to prosecute an unprecedented number of individuals for their speech.

As scholar Melinda Haas writes, the memorandum “pushes the limits of presidential authority by targeting individuals and groups as potential domestic terrorists based on their beliefs rather than their actions.”

Pittsburgh just sent a chilling warning for American democracy

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette announced on Jan. 7, 2026, that it will cease all operations effective May 3. The daily newspaper, founded in 1786, has been the city’s paper of record for nearly a century and is one of the oldest newspapers in the country.

Block Communications, the company that owns the Post-Gazette, says the paper has lost “hundreds of millions of dollars” during the past two decades. The shuttering of the Post-Gazette comes after a three-year strike by newspaper employees who were asking management for better wages and working conditions. The strike ended in November 2025 after an appellate court ruled in favor of the union workers. The Post-Gazette was found to have violated federal labor law by cutting health care benefits and failing to bargain in good faith. Then, on Jan. 7, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the paper, stating that the Post-Gazette was required to adjust its health insurance coverage for union members. Hours later, Block Communications announced that the paper would shut down.

Victor Pickard, an expert on the U.S. media and its role in democracy, was born and raised just outside Pittsburgh. He talked to Cassandra Stone, The Conversation U.S. Pittsburgh editor, about what the closing means for local journalism and democracy.

CS: Newspapers have been in decline for decades. How significant is this closure?

VP: The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has long been a vital part of the local community throughout western Pennsylvania. This would be the first major metropolitan newspaper closing since the Tampa Tribune shut its doors in 2016, and it’s a devastating blow to residents in that entire area of the state. Block Communications also closed down the Pittsburgh City Paper, which is an alt-weekly newspaper in Pittsburgh, in January 2026. The loss of the Post-Gazette will likely create a major gap in local news coverage.

How much did the labor strike from 2022-25 affect the newspaper’s profitability?

I wouldn’t pin the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette’s loss of profitability on the strike — which was legitimate and did have a profound impact — as much as on the structural forces affecting nearly all local newspapers at this time.

Throughout the country, local journalism increasingly is no longer a profitable enterprise. The core business model of being reliant on advertising revenue has irreparably collapsed, and subscriptions rarely generate enough financial support.

Since the early 2000s, the U.S. has lost about 40 percent of its local newspapers and about 75 percent of the jobs in newspaper journalism, according to a 2025 report from the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University. A study published last year by Rebuild Local News and Muck Rack shows that in 2002, there were roughly 40 journalists per 100,000 people in the United States. Today, it’s down to about eight journalists.

This evisceration of local journalism leads to ever-expanding news deserts across the country, where tens of millions of Americans are living in areas with little or no local news media whatsoever.

How might this affect local civic engagement and democracy in Pittsburgh?

Democracy requires a free and functional press system. When a local newspaper closes, fewer people vote and get involved in local politics, and corruption and polarization increase.

Without local news outlets, people often turn to national news or even “pink slime” news sites. These sites masquerade as official local media institutions but in fact are often propagandistic outlets that amplify misinformation and disinformation.

With the retreat of newspapers, people are receiving less high-quality news and information. This means that people living in these areas are less knowledgeable about politics. They often don’t know who’s running for office in their communities, or what their political platforms are, and there’s just less civic engagement in general.

Most Americans have 24/7 access to unlimited news and information through their social media feeds, including local news influencers. Does this counteract the loss of local reporting?

I think an important distinction needs to be made between carefully reported and fact-checked articles and what seems like a glut of information at our fingertips at all times. Beyond the surface-level appearance of countless news sites, social media reports offer relatively few new facts that have been borne out of rigorous reporting.

You could say that Americans are living in a new golden age of political discourse, where we constantly see a churn of social media-based forms of expression. But that’s not necessarily journalism.

When we’re talking about the collapse of newspapers and fewer newspaper journalists working their beats, it would be an entirely different story if that journalism were being replaced by other institutions, by influencers, by podcasters. But many of those outlets are amplifying opinion-based commentary and punditry.

That’s not the same thing as reporting that adheres to journalistic norms and introduces new information into the world. Losing this kind of knowledge production hurts communities everywhere – from small towns and rural areas to major cities like Pittsburgh.

A vital struggle just exposed the breadth of this dark Trump threat

If Ukraine ends up capitulating to Russian demands to end the war, give the self-proclaimed peacemaker Donald Trump the lion’s share of the credit. Since he took office, Trump has done nothing but strengthen Russia’s hand while putting Ukraine in its weakest negotiating position.

Trump is far from an honest, impartial broker. He has been a great admirer of Russia’s murderous dictator, Vladimir Putin, for more than a decade, and in 2022 called Putin’s invasion of Ukraine “genius” and “savvy.” Trump has refused to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — thereby putting the U.S. in league with countries including China, North Korea, Cuba, Iran, and Nicaragua.

On the other hand, Trump has treated Ukraine’s courageous president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, as a minor-nation inferior, someone purely to bully. In 2019, Trump withheld military support from Ukraine for 55 days while trying to extract damaging information from Zelenskyy on political rival Joe Biden. In March this year, Trump berated and humiliated Zelenskyy at the White House.

He has called him a “dictator,” and criticized him for not showing sufficient gratitude for U.S. peace efforts.

Since Trump took office, the U.S. has reversed course on support for Ukraine. Under Biden, commitment to Kyiv was unwavering. Biden harshly condemned Putin, provided essential, reliable military aid, and was a unifying force in ensuring NATO support.

The Trump administration suspended military aid to Ukraine, saying it was “pausing and reviewing” the aid to “ensure that it is contributing to a solution.” Trump has splintered the NATO alliance by going it alone, presenting a pro-Putin peace proposal rejected strongly by European countries and Ukraine. He has put the burden of funding military aid to Ukraine on European allies.

When Trump and Putin met in Anchorage, Alaska, in August, they ostensibly agreed that Putin’s wish list for ending the war would be part of a U.S. peace proposal. This wish list included the industrial-heavy Donbas region of Ukraine becoming a part of Russia, the Ukrainian army reduced significantly, and Ukraine never being allowed to join NATO.

To Ukraine, these demands landed in a 28-point peace proposal like exploding drones.

Naturally, Ukraine rejected the proposal, European NATO nations huddled quickly to reject it, and Trump re-framed the proposal as a starting point for talks. A second, 20-point U.S. proposal was next offered — containing the same poison pills. It was another pro-Putin proposal, aimed at getting Ukraine to capitulate.

As Ukraine refused to meet Russian demands, Trump implied that Zelenskyy was the obstinate party that didn’t want peace and bore responsibility for the war dragging on, by not agreeing to Trump’s Russo-centric peace proposal.

“It takes two to tango,” said Trump — meaning that to end the war, Zelenskyy must dance the Russian polka.

Music to Putin’s ears, Trump has been telling Zelenskyy and the world that Ukraine can’t win, that Russia “has the cards,” and that for Kyiv, fighting on is a lost cause. Trump has put Ukraine in a weakened military and political position, empowering Putin to press the battle with renewed vigor. At some point, Zelenskyy may have no choice but to capitulate and cede a part of his country to Russia. If that occurs, a brutal aggressor will have been rewarded for invading a sovereign nation — with a huge assist from Trump.

Had Trump not been elected, the U.S. no doubt would have continued its commitment to helping defend Ukraine and working within the NATO coalition to put maximum military and economic pressure on Russia. Ukraine would be in a much better place today to sue for a just peace, one that doesn’t reward the invader and that addresses the horrendous atrocities committed against Ukraine and its people.

When Trump was elected in 2025, Putin was given the greatest gift he could ask for since his invasion of Ukraine: an ally in the White House. Putin knew Trump’s loyalty would lie with Russia given Trump’s friendship, his long-time business dealings with Russian banks, and Russian elites’ investments in Trump properties. He also knew that to Trump, Ukraine was a small, dispensable piece of the political puzzle.

Trump’s insatiable quest for a Nobel Prize drives him to seek peace at any cost to Ukraine. In addition, he has accomplished what Putin could never do by himself: splintering the NATO coalition, pitting Trump’s pro-Russian peace efforts against European nations’ pro-Ukrainian works. Thanks to Trump, Putin could now blame NATO for hindering U.S. peace efforts and claim European nations are “on the side of war.”

While Trump is selling out Ukraine, European allies are increasing military aid to help fill the gap left by U.S. disengagement. Unlike Trump, leaders in Germany, France, Britain, Sweden, and Demark, along with Canada and Australia, refuse to turn their backs on an ally in its time of greatest need.

Historically, though imperfect in its efforts, America has been a staunch defender of democratic countries against totalitarian aggression. Under Trump, the U.S. has aided totalitarian aggression against a sovereign democracy by cutting off support essential for an ally’s defense.

If a perfidious land-for-peace appeasement agreement is reached, who would rule out Putin rewarding Trump with a deal providing U.S. access to critical minerals in Russia’s new Donbas region? One filthy hand washes the other.

  • Tom Tyner is a freelance editorialist, satirist, political analyst, blogger, author and retired English instructor

This grassroots rebellion can decapitate Supreme Court's catastrophic mistake

Several of you have told me that the first step out of the mess we’re in is to get rid of the Supreme Court’s bonkers Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision of 2010, which held that corporations are people — entitled to the same First Amendment protection as the rest of us.

Corporate political spending was growing before Citizens United, but the decision opened the floodgates to the unlimited super PAC spending and undisclosed dark money we suffer from today.

Between 2008 and 2024, reported “independent” expenditures by outside groups exploded by more than 28-fold — from $144 million to $4.21 billion. Unreported money also skyrocketed, with dark money groups spending millions influencing the 2024 election.

Most people I talk with assume that the only way to stop corporate and dark money in American politics is either to wait for the Supreme Court to undo Citizens United (we could wait a very long time) or amend the U.S. Constitution (this is extraordinarily difficult).

But there’s another way! I want to tell you about it because there’s a good chance it will work.

It will be on the ballot next November in Montana. Maybe you can get it on the ballot in your state, too.

Here’s the thing: Individual states — either through their legislators or their citizens wielding ballot initiatives — have the authority to limit corporate political activity and dark money spending, because they determine what powers corporations have.

In American law, corporations are creatures of state laws. For more than two centuries, the power to define their form, limits, and privilege has belonged only to the states.

In fact, corporations have no powers at all until a state government grants them some. In the 1819 Supreme Court case Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, Chief Justice John Marshall established that:

“A corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of law. Being the mere creature of law, it possesses only those properties which the charter of its creation confers upon it, either expressly, or as incidental to its very existence … The objects for which a corporation is created are universally such as the government wishes to promote. They are deemed beneficial to the country; and this benefit constitutes the consideration, and, in most cases, the sole consideration of the grant.”

States don’t have to grant corporations the power to spend in politics. In fact, they could decide not to give corporations that power.

This isn’t about corporate rights, as the Supreme Court determined in Citizens United. It’s about corporate powers.

When a state exercises its authority to define corporations as entities without the power to spend in politics, it will no longer be relevant whether corporations have a right to spend in politics — because without the power to do so, the right to do so has no meaning.

Delaware’s corporation code already declines to grant private foundations the power to spend in elections.

Importantly, a state that no longer grants its corporations the power to spend in elections also denies that power to corporations chartered in the other 49 states, if they wish to do business in that state.

All a state would need to do is enact a law with a provision something like this:

“Every corporation operating under the laws of this state has all the corporate powers it held previously, except that nothing in this statute grants or recognizes any power to engage in election activity or ballot-issue activity.”

Sound far-fetched? Not at all.

In Montana, local organizers have drafted and submitted a constitutional initiative for voters to consider in 2026 — the first step in a movement built to spread nationwide. It would decline to grant to all corporations the power to spend in elections.

Called the Transparent Election Initiative, it wouldn’t overturn Citizens United — it would negate the consequences of Citizens United. (Click on the link and you’ll get the details.)

The argument is laid out in a paper that the Center for American Progress published several weeks ago. (Kudos to CAP and the paper’s author, Tom Moore, a senior fellow at CAP who previously served as counsel and chief of staff to a longtime member of the Federal Election Commission.)

Note to governors and state legislators: The Citizens United decision is enormously unpopular. Some 75 percent of Americans disapprove of it. But most of your governors and state legislators haven’t realized that you have the authority to make Citizens United irrelevant. My recommendation to you: Use that authority to rid the nation of Citizens United.

Hopefully, Montanans will lead the way.

  • Robert Reich is a professor of public policy at Berkeley and former secretary of labor. His writings can be found at https://robertreich.substack.com/.
  • Robert Reich's new memoir, Coming Up Short, can be found wherever you buy books. You can also support local bookstores nationally by ordering the book at bookshop.org.