What Is It They Don't Understand About Democracy?

Since he arrived on the political scene the Democrats have called Donald Trump a "threat to democracy".

This is despite the fact he has won two Presidential elections (and possibly a third) proving that his agenda is supported by the American people.

It is also true that Trump is the most transparent President that we have had in my lifetime.

As I have written before in these pages, Trump has governed exactly like he ran. There was no bait and switch. That was true in his first term and it is no different in his second term

He did not run saying one thing and then do something else as President. He does what he says he is going to do.

This is very upsetting to Democrats.

They were on the streets several weeks ago with their "No Kings" protest asserting that Trump was acting as an authoritarian king.

The complaints of the protestors about Trump seem to center on the fact that as President he is following an agenda that is totally consistent with the platform he ran on---closing the border, mass deportations of illegals, tariffs, extension of the Trump tax cuts,  DOGE, etc---and won the election with a majority of the electoral and popular vote.

The Democrats have gone to the courts innumerable times to get liberal judges to issue nationwide injunctions against Trump's executive orders.

40 nationwide injunctions were issued against the Trump administration in the first four months of his second term. 

In fact, an astonishing 67% of all nationwide injunctions issued by the courts against any Presidential administration in the history of the United States have been directed at Trump according to Jay Sekulow with the American Center for Law and Justice.

Trump challenged the use of these nationwide injunctions earlier this year in a case that went to the U.S. Supreme Court involving birthright citizenship. 

Trump argued that allowing an unelected federal judge to enjoin the authority of the executive branch  exceed the constitutional and equitable authority of federal district courts. 

Allowing a single district judge to halt executive actions across the entire country would effectively allow the judicial branch to make policy decisions that belong to the executive branch.

In a 6-3 decision that was handed down on Friday, the Supreme Court ruled that federal courts do not have the authority to prohibit enforcement of federal laws of executive orders on a nationwide basis.

The authority of the court only extends to the person filing the action for injunctive relief.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the majority opinion which did not directly rule on the question of birthright citizenship.

The three liberal women justices---Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson dissented from the ruling.

Justice Barrett was particularly harsh in smacking down the dissent of Jackson to the majority ruling.

She observed that Jackson's argument was at odds with 200 years of precedent as well as the Constitution itself. Jackson also railed on about an imperial Presidency but seems to have no problem with an imperial Judiciary.

Credit: https://x.com/ArtemisConsort/status/1938664081830924331

It is also interesting to note that Justice Kagan, who voted to allow nationwide injunction of executive orders, had a completely different view of the issue thee years ago.

In 2022 Kagan said that it can't be right that one judge can stop nationwide policy.

Link: https://x.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1939042286454874123

What changed?

Biden was President in 2022. Trump is President in 2025.

Is this how the Constitution is supposed to be interpreted?

Politics comes before the letter of the law?

Another interesting side note is how much the three liberal female justices like to dominate the floor when oral arguments are being heard.

These stats are for 2024 (thru November 15) and compare the number of words each Justice spoke during oral arguments.

The three liberal women spoke more than the other six justices combined by a comfortable margin.

You have to wonder with all the talking they are not listening and thinking enough about the law.

Jackson, is by far, the very worst.

Credit: https://x.com/doc_gero/status/1938660287072424442

Of course, it has been most interesting seeing liberal Democrats melt down after the Supreme Court ruling was handed down.

I have again heard that Donald Trump is a "threat to democracy" and that the Supreme Court is endorsing "lawlessness".

Of course, the same liberals have told us repeatedly that a Supreme Court decision is the "law of the land" when it came to abortion rights or gay marriage.

I have heard that this ruling now puts the country in existential crisis because Congress is not willing to restrain Trump and lower courts now have no power to do so.

It does not seem that left wingers understand the definition of democracy.

Trump was elected to do the things he is doing.

In fact, a recent Pew Research poll shows that Trump would have still won even if all those who did not vote had turned out. In fact, Pew says the margin would have been even larger.

Source: https://www.npr.org/2025/06/26/nx-s1-5447450/trump-2024-election-non-voters-coalition

Majorities in the Senate and House were also elected largely based on Trump's agenda.

That is democracy.

The people voted and made their choice clear.

Vice President Vance does a good job of trolling the left wingers over on BlueSky which is the Left's competition to Twitter/X.

What is it that they don't understand about democracy?

The Democrats lost.

Trump and the Republicans won.

It is 2025, not 2022.

It does seem that Democracy is winning.

Is NYC Destroying Itself?

I have previously advised those who would like to experience Europe to do it soon.

The ways things are going the Europe of tomorrow will be nothing like the Europe of the past due to mass migration, green policies, weak economies, wokeism and other things.

Europe is well on the way to not being Europe any more.

I may soon have to add that same advice to those who want to live in or visit New York City.

The future is not looking particularly bright for the Big Apple.

Years and years of liberal policies have taken their toll on the city.

Large numbers of immigrants (legal and illegal) from third world countries have further damaged the social fabric of the city.

In point of fact, 3.1 million people---almost 40% of New York City's population--- were not born in the United States. The most recent numbers are from 2022 which would not include the recent number of illegals coming to NYC during the Biden administration. 

The largest number of foreign born residents of New York City today have immigrated from third world countries.

There are over 400,000 from the Dominican Republic alone, almost 400,000 from China and almost 600,000 in combined numbers from Mexico, Jamaica, Guyana and Ecuador.

 

Source: https://www.nyc.gov/assets/immigrants/downloads/pdf/MOIA-Annual-Report-2023_Final.pdf

New York City has also been a magnet for immigrants into the United States.

However, that immigration used to be principally from European countries where shared values and cultures made assimilation easier. That is no longer the case.

The proximity that New York City has provided for business, finance, entertainment, media and other sectors of the economy has always been an asset to that metro area. However, in a world of the internet, zoom calls and the ability to work remotely the advantage of proximity has been substantially diminished.

We can now add to this list the fact the Democrats on Tuesday chose a Muslim Socialist to be their candidate for Mayor in the the November general election.

33 year-old Zohran Mamdani defeated former Governor Andrew Cuomo and several others for the Democrat nomination for Mayor of New York City.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/06/24/us/elections/results-new-york-city-mayor-primary.html

Mamdani focused most of his campaign on a promise to make New York City "more affordable".

He says he will open city-owned grocery stores.

He wants to make public transit free.

He wants to freeze rents.

He wants to provide free child care.

He wants to replace police officers with social workers in high crime areas.

In all, he wants to increase city spending by $10 billion which he says he will get by taxing wealthy corporations and the top 1% of individual taxpayers.

He believes capitalism is theft.

Here are a few more examples of issues that Mamdani has promoted in the past.

You can just imagine the paradise that New York City will be to live in or visit if all of these proposals were to put in place.

Mamdani has almost no real world business or executive experience. His college degree is in Africana Studies from Bowdoin College. H was born in Uganda but came to the United States when he was 7 years old when he father came to teach at Columbia University. He did not become a U.S. citizen until 7 years ago.

For good measure Mamdani says that New York City would arrest Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he visited the city.

https://x.com/ClayTravis/status/1937703801131299169

It should not surprise you that Mamdani has been accused of being an anti-Semite in the past.

However, he now says that he work vigorously to fight anti-semitism.

Should anyone believe him?

Who in their right minds believes any of this would improve life in New York City?

It appears that  a lot of his support in the Democrat primary came from white, higher income, college educated voters.

This breakdown of votes by income levels says a lot.

Those that would benefit most from the free stuff voted for the other guy.

Source: https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/1937834533065261467

Do those at the bottom of the income ladder better understand that there is "no free lunch"?

Black voters were also not taken in by Mamdani's campaign promises.

Mamdani was particularly popular with Asian voters but he also had majority support with Whites and Hispanics.

Source: https://x.com/tify330/status/1937939306930114834

In sum, Mamdani fared best with college graduates and those with high incomes.

Cuomo did best with Blacks and those with lower incomes.

 

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zohran_Mamdani

It is almost inexplicable but, after all, we are talking about a Democrat primary.

It does not have to make any sense.

However, in the real world there are consequences. 

A lot of those wealthy New Yorkers that Mamdani needs may not want to stay to pay the bills. 

As I stated above, New York City no longer has the advantage of proximity. 

What I also found interesting is how quickly some of the biggest names in the Democrat party are embracing Mamdani despite his radical far-left views.

Bill Clinton was at the top of the list.

Here is a sampling of other big name Democrats who did not waste any time on showing their support for Mamdani.

Source: https://x.com/Eric_Schmitt/status/1937985140380058013

Bear in mind that Mamdani just took down a member of Democrat royalty---former Governor Andrew Cuomo.

It was just five years ago that many were calling for Cuomo to be the Democrat candidate for President as his stature and profile were burnished by daily Covid-19 press conferences.

Source: https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2020-03-31/cuomo-2020-momentum-builds-amid-coronavirus-response

It just goes to show you how quickly things can change in politics.

And how easily your former "friends" can abandon you to protect their own rear ends.

It remains to be seen whether Mamdani can carry himself and his agenda to victory in November.

Current Mayor Eric Adams is running as an Independent.

The Republicans have nominated community activist Curtis Sliwa who also ran for Mayor in 1993 and 2021.

There is talk of getting Sliwa to drop out of the race and allow for Adams to take on Mamdani head to head because a three-way race would practically guarantee the Democrat would win the general election.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

There will be an effort by some clear thinking Democrats and others in New York to try to makes sure this guy never gets the power he wants.

We can be sure that much more will come out about Mamdani's views and background over the next four months.

However, there are a considerable number of people who say,  let New Yorkers destroy themselves.

Their view is that NYC has gone beyond a point of no return and the only way forward is for the people of New York City to own it which is the theme of this opinion piece in RedState.com.

Source: https://redstate.com/bonchie/2025/06/25/new-york-city-just-chose-to-destroy-itself-and-its-time-to-let-it-happen-n2190880

At this point, you might be asking how New York City ended up in this position. After all, who in their right mind would vote for someone like Mamdani? The answer is the same as it's been for a while when discussing the elevation of left-wing radicalism in America: Affluent, white, female liberals. 

They will not rest until they've destroyed what's left of Western civilization. 

With all that said, I'm not in much of a mood to further lament what is about to happen to New York City. It's about time the rest of America stopped feeling sympathy, as if this was the result of misguided naivete. No, they voted for an antisemitic Islamic communist with their eyes wide open. The destruction that is coming was a choice, and New Yorkers deserve to suffer the consequences of that. No federal bailouts and no interference to try to save them from themselves. Let it happen. 

I hate to see that happen considering how much New York City has meant to the nation over the years.

I hope that somehow and someway the people of the city realize where this is headed if Mamdani is the next Mayor.

In the meantime. if you have an interest in visiting New York City, I would suggest you hedge your bets and visit sooner rather than later. 

Show Me The Money

Jerry Buss spent $67.5 million in 1979 to purchase the Los Angeles Lakers. The transaction also included the Los Angeles Kings NHL team and the Forum, the building the teams played in at the time.

The Buss family has had majority ownership of the Lakers franchise since that time

Jerry Buss passed away in 2013 but ownership went into a trust controlled by his six children.

Daughter Jeanie Buss eventually was named by the family to be the controlling owner and the face of the franchise consistent with the wishes of the late Buss.

Jeanie Buss
Source: https://www.si.com/onsi/athlete-lifestyle/relationships/lakers-owner-jeanie-buss-has-crazy-sleeping-arrangement-husband-jay-mohr

Last week it was announced that the Buss family had sold a controlling ownership in the Lakers to Mark Walter (who also owns the LA Dodgers) that values that Los Angeles Lakers at $10 billion.

Source: https://sports.yahoo.com/nba/article/how-the-los-angeles-lakers-10-billion-sale-compares-to-the-price-tags-of-other-north-american-sports-franchises-215447325.html

It is the highest price ever paid for a professional sports franchise.

The previous record was set when the Boston Celtics changed hands earlier this year at a valuation of $6.1 billion which narrowly eclipsed the sale of the Washington Commanders at $6.05 billion in 2023.

Source: https://x.com/YahooSports/status/1935451597116428333

I have to believe that if NBA franchises are going for the prices that the Lakers and Celtics did you can only imagine what an NFL franchise would bring ttoday?

A big reason for the continuing inflation in the prices of sports franchise is the limited supply.

Steve Ballmer, former CEO of Microsoft who owns the Los Angeles Clippers, recently commented on the business and investment case for being involved in sports assets.

“Unlike Microsoft, [the LA Clippers] cannot go to zero. The asset value...is far more secure than Microsoft. Why? They're not making more of them. As long as anybody in the world is [interested in sports], the value will hold.” 

Consider this chart that is from 2024 that shows the last time that every NFL franchise changed ownership, the price at that time and the estimated 2024 valuation (which likely is vastly understated based on the recent Lakers/Celtics sales).

Only 11 out of 32 NFL franchises have changed ownership in the last 25 years.

The Chicago Bears and New York Giants have not changed hands in 100 years.

The purchase price for those two franchises---$100 and $500, respectively

Source: https://x.com/WOLF_Sportz/status/1861863319587504484

Jerry Buss made a very smart investment in 1979 that has served his family well.

However, could he have done even better?

Many would be surprised to learn that $67.5 million invested in the stock of the S&P 500 in 1979 would now be worth almost $13 billion---30% more than the value of the Lakers.

Source: https://www.officialdata.org/us/stocks/s-p-500/1979?amount=67500000&endYear=2025

It just goes to show you that the stock market has been a pretty favorable place to invest for the last 46 years even if you did not have $67.5 million to start with.

However, it should be noted that the Buss family did sell the Kings NHL franchise for a reported $30 million in 1988 and The Forum for $22 million in 1999.

Another reason that the money in these examples grows like it does is the power of compounding.

46 years of compounding growth of anything starts to be a very, very big number.

The Buss family has done very well for itself due to the decision that Jerry Buss made to buy into professional sports almost a half century ago.

Someone else has done well for themselves by marrying into the Buss family.

In 2023, Jeanie Buss married actor/comedian Jay Mohr (most famous for his role as the rival sports agent Bob Sugar) in the movie Jerry McGuire.

Jay Mohr as sports agents Bob Sugar in Jerry McGuire

Jay Mohr with wife Jeanie Buss at LA Lakers game
Source: https://www.si.com/onsi/athlete-lifestyle/relationships/lakers-owner-jeanie-buss-has-crazy-sleeping-arrangement-husband-jay-mohr

The most famous line from the movie Jerry McGuire was "Show me the money".

The Buss family has been shown the money.

There have to be a lot of sports franchise owners that are also seeing dollars signs as well looking at these recent transactions.

Jay Mohr is apparently also getting a glimpse of it all along the way.

It just proves something my father used to tell me.

"It can take a lifetime to make a million dollars but you can marry it in a minute."

Of course, I did not listen.

However, considering I have 50 years and counting with the same woman, I must have done a few things right.

After all, money is not everything.

The Fog of War

Carl von Clausewitz was a Prussian general and military theorist of the early 19th century who is generally attributed as being first in describing the concept of "the fog of war" 

 

 

War is fraught with uncertainty.

Incomplete information, doubt and fear are inherent to war as are the risks involved in any engagement with an enemy.

There is little doubt that Hamas had no idea what their attack on Israel of October 7, 2023 would evolve into.

As I have written before, I arrived in Israel on the morning of October 7, to tour the country for three days. 

As we started the tour that morning our tour guide told us there were reports of a "disturbance" in the the south of Israel. She told us that there was nothing to be overly concerned about as this was a fairly common occurrence in her country.  

Several hours later the fog had lifted and it was clear to everyone that what had occurred was anything but common. 

When we left her that afternoon her son has already been called up by the IDF. We left Israel that night and nothing has been the same since.

The entire Hamas leadership from that time has been eliminated and Gaza has suffered untold damage.

Hezbollah in neighboring Lebanon has also paid an enormous price for their long standing attacks on Israel.

Finally, Iran, which supplied much of the funding for Hamas and Hezbollah is the focus in the Middle East conflict for their years of calling for "Death to Israel" and "Death to the United States".

I do not know if President Trump made the right call in targeting Iran's nuclear facilities over the weekend or not.

I do know it was an incredibly difficult decision for him.

There are just so many uncertainties involved in all of this.

Did the United States obliterate the uranium enrichment facilities or has Iran retained the ability to build a nuclear weapon?

Will the Iranian regime fall? If it does, could it be replaced with even those who are even more hard-line theocrats?

Will the Iranian people rise up against the regime or will the people rally around their country against the U.S and Israel even more firmly?

Will Iran target American interests and citizens in retribution for the attack?

At his core, Trump is decidedly a man who is anti-war.

Trump has a long record of being skeptical of war going back all the way to the Iraq war.

He is a negotiator and deal maker.

In fact, recent reports have just surfaced that Trump was willing to fly to Turkey this past week for a person to person meeting with Iran's Ayatollah to attempt to negotiate a peace deal brokered by Turkey's President Erdogan. 

The meeting could not be arranged because the Ayatollah was not willing to leave his bunker to even set up the meeting in fear of his life.

Source: https://www.axios.com/2025/06/21/trump-iran-turkey-negotiations-israel-war

Trump  is also someone who does not make decisions lightly.

There is always a lot of brashness and bluster from Trump. However, his decisions always seem to be well-formed and level headed.

He undoubtedly heard a lot of opinions on both sides of the question of whether to involve the United States in the attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.

I trust that he made the best decision that could be made based on the information and intelligence that he was given.

There were a lot of war hawks pushing him hard to act. 

However, there were also a lot of people close to him who wanted the United States to have Israel take care of Iran on their own.

I have attempted to follow what was going on in the Israel/Iran war since the conflict began but the flog of war has made it difficult to do so.

Part of the problem is an imbalance in the sources of information.

Israel is much more open and free and we can see the incoming Iranian missiles and the damages they are causing. At the same time, we are not seeing the full extent of the damages as Israel is censoring some of the coverage.

There is almost no reliable information coming out of Iran.

It does appear that Israel has decimated Iran's air defense capabilities such that there is almost nothing in the country that cannot be easily targeted by the Israelis.

Reports from the United States attack were that not one shot was fired at our bombers and support aircraft on the way in or out of Iran

This puts Iran is a very vulnerable position going forward. Every military installation, all its infrastructure and its political leadership is an open target for Israeli air strikes.

Iran is still able to fire missiles at Israel but how many missiles do they have left, and more importantly, how many missile launchers are still available?

With no air defense, Iran's ability to launch missiles is going to degrade over time as Israel focuses its attacks on the launchers.

At the same time, at what point is Israel going to run out of Iron Dome and other missile defense ordinance that has thwarted a high percentage of Iranian missiles from hitting their targets?

How long will Israel be able to sustain the air attacks considering the long distances that must be flown from Israel to Iran?

This looks to me like it is evolving into a war of attrition.

Who is going to run out of war material first?

We are already hearing a number of Democrats claiming that Trump should not have acted because Iran had done nothing to us.

I guess that is true if you ignore the consistent "Death to America" calls and all of these incidents over the years beginning with the hostages Iran took from the U.S. embassy in 1979.

We also are hearing that Trump did not have the constitutional authority to act and that he should be impeached.

However, these same people did not have a problem with Barack Obama authorizing thousands of targets in the Middle East of which many were not approved by Congress.

For example, in 2016 alone, 26,171 bombs were dropped by the United States on various targets in the Middle East that were authorized by Obama.

That works out to be an average of 72 bombs dropped each day of 2016. 

We now will  have to wait to see where we are when the fog of war lifts to give us a better idea of where this conflict goes.

One thing is for sure.

These are consequential times.

Trump was already likely going to go down as a very consequential presidents based on his "Make American Great Agenda".

Whether you like the direction he was taking on immigration, tariffs, dismantling wokeism and all the rest or not, there is no denying it was bold and represents a significant directional change for the country.

The decision regarding Iran makes it even clearer that Trump's presidency will be one of the most consequential in history.

It remains to be seen whether Trump will be consequential because he successfully guides us through these troubled times or lets the United States end up hopelessly divided at home and diminished in the global community.

One thing is for sure.

You cannot be great unless you are not afraid to be great.

That in itself is a rare commodity in a leader.

Trump has proven over and over that he is not afraid to be great

Look at the first three names on most lists of the greatest Presidents. One thing they share is that they were not afraid to be great.

George Washington was a man of privilege and prosperity. It would have been easy to forget about leading a revolutionary army against the British. He had it made. He had very little to gain personally by revolting against the British. He could have easily seen his life end on the end of a noose for treason and sedition at the hands of the British.

George Washington was not afraid to be great. He put it all on the line and he expected little in return.

You can say the same thing about Abraham Lincoln. He could have negotiated with the Confederacy after the southern states seceded from the union. He could have decided that it was too controversial to push for the 13th and 14th amendments. He was not afraid to take a stand. Many criticized his actions.

Abraham Lincoln was not afraid to be great. We now appreciate that courage and greatness.

Franklin Roosevelt took office as the U.S. economy was in ruins and as Nazi Germany and the Japanese Empire sought to expand their borders and enslave millions of people. Roosevelt responded aggressively to the needs of the American people with his New Deal. At times he went too far as with his attempt to stack the Supreme Court. However, he was not afraid to take action. 

He also did not hesitate to act when the war was brought to him. He also ignored the Washington precedent on serving two terms when he thought that the country needed continuity in those turbulent times.

Most Presidents never become great because they are typical politicians. They try to play both sides. They are afraid of offending anyone. They don't take strong stands. They are risk averse. They don't put themselves out there to succeed...or fail. In short, they are afraid to be great.

Of course, great Presidents usually come about by facing great challenges. In many respects, the times make the man. It was certainly true with Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt.

Greatness does not follow when taking the easy road. It only graces those who are not afraid of the challenge on the hard road.

Success is never assured. Trump may fail bigly. However, he is not afraid to be great. That in itself is a rare commodity. Keep that in mind as you listen to those who criticize Trump.

You cannot be great unless you are not afraid to be great.

Only when the fog of war lifts and the reality of the world around us is revealed in the wake of the U.S. intervention in Iran will we understand whether Trump has met the moment or not.

For the sake and the United States and the world, I pray that he has.

It Would Be Funny If It Were Not So Serious

The Federal Reserve met this week and decided to make no change in its interest rate policy.

It was the fourth straight meeting in which rates were left unchanged.

Chairman Jerome Powell stated that the reason was that the Fed needed more confidence that inflation is coming down. He cited uncertainty about the effect of tariffs on inflation as the primary reason that they did not have more confidence that inflation was controlled.

Link: https://x.com/RedWave_Press/status/1935430219105529861

Of note, the Fed cut interest rates four times amounting to a one percent total decrease between August and December, 2024 but have held rates steady since Donald Trump became President.

Source: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/interest-rate

By comparison, the European Central Bank has cut rates eight times in the last 12 months totaling two percentage points and Canada has cut seven times for a total of two and a quarter points.

The Fed policy has also been to hold tight on interest rates despite the fact that Core inflation was just .1% last month compared to expectations of .3%.

It was the lowest year over year inflation rate (2.8%) in four years.

Source: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/core-inflation-rate

In fact, the Fed was lowering interest rates in August through December of last year when inflation was running considerably higher than it has since Trump took office at the end of January.

Powell is still saying that he expects the Fed to lower rates at least two times before the end of the year. I wonder how he can stick to that forecast while also saying he is not confident enough in the inflation data?

My concern is that the Fed will be too late in lowering rates just as they were abysmally late in raising rates as they kept telling us that inflation was "transitory" during the Biden term.

I am no economist but I am seeing a number of "For Sale" signs on houses in my area that I have not seen in a long time, we are seeing increasing reports of layoffs and consumer spending last month was down.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/17/retail-sales-may-2025-.html

It raises a question as to whether Powell and the Fed are motivated more by politics right now than sound economic policy?

At the time Trump first announced his tariff policies it was condemned by an overwhelming number of economists. Most argued that it would make the inflation we saw the last few years much worse.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/1igx6u4/economists_agree_trump_is_wrong_on_tariffs/

Perhaps that will be proven true but the fact that we still have not seen evidence of it in the CPI numbers thus far is already befuddling to those same economists.

From The Economist.com earlier this month.

Source: https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/06/05/trumps-tariffs-have-so-far-caused-little-inflation

At the same time, the trade deficit has been been halved from $120 billion to $60 billion a month since Trump's tariff policy was first announced.

Source: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/balance-of-trade

And both personal income and personal savings is up since Trump took office.

Source: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RPI

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington, D.C. employs more than 400 Ph.D. economists.

I hope that they know what they are doing.

Of course, you may recall that it was the judgment of Jerome Powell and the Federal Reserve economists in 2021 that any inflation resulting from the Biden fiscal stimulus bill during Covid would be "transitory".

We know how that worked out.

Lest we think that economists opining on the American economy might have it wrong it is nothing compared to what we have seen in Argentina.

Economists were predicting doom in Argentina if conservative Javier Milei was elected and instituted his government budget cuts and free market reforms.

That was then. This is now.

Argentina is now projected to have the highest percentage GDP growth in the entire Western Hemisphere for 2025 and 2026.

Source: https://x.com/DrEliDavid/status/1932532980066460026

A the same time, monthly inflation has been reduced from over 25% per month to 2% per month.

I have nothing against economists.

However, I am not interested in predictions and forecasts.

Show me the data and facts if you want to persuade me.

Unfortunately, too often the the factual reality that unfolds does not match the forecasts of the economists.

Warren Buffett makes the point much better than I can.

All of this would be funny if it were not so serious.

The decisions the Fed makes affects every American in some way---their jobs, home values, stock prices, retirement savings, student loans and more.

Does the Fed really know what they are doing?

We can only hope.

Sharp Contrasts

It was hard to ignore the sharp contrasts that were in the news this weekend.

On the one hand you had the celebration and military parade in Washington, D.C. to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States Army.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/watch-crowd-sings-happy-birthday-trump-us-armys-250th-parade

That celebration was accompanied by a lot of flag waving, patriotism, pomp and circumstance to honor the Army that mustered together to fight the American Revolution and has defended freedom for the United States and around the world ever since.

On the other hand, we had liberals gathering in cities around the nation to protest against Donald Trump on what they called a "No Kings" day of defiance.

The contrast could not be sharper.

The "No Kings" protestors typically argue that Trump is a "threat to democracy", an "authoritarian" or wants to ignore the Constitution.

"No Kings" Protest in Akron, OH
Source: https://www.beaconjournal.com/picture-gallery/news/politics/2025/06/14/no-kings-day-protests-akron-ohio-photos-trump-military-parade/84175558007/

In fact, a recent study indicated that the average MSNBC/CNN viewer has heard that Trump is a fascist or dictator seven times per day since he announced his candidacy for the 2024 election.

Source: https://x.com/amuse/status/1934806362636141014

Repetitive messaging like this is very effective at shaping audience beliefs and behaviors in that it is the most basic principle of propaganda.

Let's go beyond the propaganda and put all of this in context with a a few facts.

First and foremost, people in countries ruled by authoritarian dictators or kings would not be able to gather and protest as we saw this weekend. Ask those who live in North Korea or Iran how that would work out.

You might also recall that Hillary Clinton's campaign manufactured and paid for the entire Russian collusion hoax in 2016 that was designed to prevent Trump from being elected in a free and fair election.

It was the Democrats who continued promoting the Russian collusion hoax for almost the entire first Trump term in order to hinder the democratically elected President from pursuing his agenda.

It was the Democrats who manipulated the 2020 Democrat primary process when it appeared that Bernie Sanders had the grassroots support and momentum to win the Democrat nomination and put all of the establishment support behind Joe Biden.

It were Democrats in almost every swing state during the Covid pandemic who ignored state laws and constitutional requirements and allowed liberalized mail in voting without legislative approval.

During Covid we also saw authoritarian school closures, mask and vaccine mandate and business closures that were largely promoted and supported by Democrats.

We saw Joe Biden totally ignore the law in contravention of his Constitutional oath and allow millions of illegal immigrants into the country in violation of federal law.

We also saw Democrats impeach Trump twice, raid his home and indict him four times in an attempt to prevent him from running for President again.

At the same time, Democrats were covering up Joe Biden's mental incapacities and rigging the primary process so that no Democrat could effectively challenge Biden as the party's nominee in 2024.

The Democrats mounted legal challenges in a number of states in an attempt to keep Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.  off of the ballots in the Democrat primaries and, later, to prevent him from running as an Independent before RFK ultimately dropped out of the race and endorsed Trump.

The Democrats also attempted to bar Trump from being on the ballot in several states.

When Biden's mental weakness became obvious to all after the debate with Trump, the Democrats anointed Kamala Harris as their candidate without receiving a single vote.

Where were all of these protestors when these authoritarian acts and threats to democracy were taking place?

A lot of the energy underlying the "No Kings" protests last weekend involved complaints about Trump's deportation efforts. 

"No Kings" protest in Grand Rapids, MI
Credit: https://www.fox17online.com/news/local-news/no-kings-rally-in-grand-rapids-draws-thousands-to-protest-trump-administration

"No Kings" protest in Salem, OR
Credit: https://www.statesmanjournal.com/picture-gallery/news/local/2025/06/14/photos-no-kings-protest-trump-oregon-state-capitol-salem/84191063007/

However, again, much of that is clearly driven by media narratives.

The fact is that Donald Trump is merely enforcing the federal law that is in place on the books regarding immigration.

Those protesting may not like it but it is the LAW.

Where were the complaints about the deportations that were undertaken by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama?

Source: https://x.com/firejack007/status/1932983381463126095

What about  the "due process" argument in the deportations that these Democrat Presidents undertook?

Where were the federal injunctions from the courts when previous Presidents were deporting illegal immigrants?

The protestors complaints with Trump seem to center on the fact that as President he is following an agenda that is totally consistent with the platform he ran on---closing the border, mass deportations of illegals, tariffs, extension of the Trump tax cuts,  DOGE, etc---and won the election with a majority of the electoral and popular vote.

It does not seem that they understand the definition of democracy.

There has been no bait and switch. The policies that Trump is pursuing are what the people of the United States voted for when they elected Donald Trump. 

I am also old enough to remember when we saw headlines like this on CNN when Barack Obama was President.

How did President Trump react to all of this vitriol and anger over the weekend?

Yes, the contrasts could not be any sharper.