Democrats, MIA

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) arrive at a press briefing at the US Capitol on February 12. Francis Chung/AP Images

On Thursday afternoon, before I began to write this newsletter, I searched Hakeem Jeffries in Google News. I found but a handful of recent entries for the House Democratic leader from New York. On Sunday, he had appeared on ABC News’ This Week and slapped President Donald Trump and the Republicans for having done nothing to lower the cost of living for Americans and for preparing to push more tax cuts for the wealthy. Three days later, Axios reported that Jeffries, during a call with House Democrats, advised his colleagues to bring guests to Trump’s address to Congress next month who have been negatively affected by the administration.

This search also turned up reports that Jeffries earlier in the month had criticized Trump’s comments on DEI and the DOGE attack on the federal workforce and had compared the Democrats to New York Yankee Aaron Judge, noting they ought to be patient: “He waits for the right one—and then he swings. We’re not going to swing at every pitch. We’re going to swing at the ones that matter for the American people.” Another story noted that Jeffries said at a press briefing, “I'm trying to figure out what leverage we actually have. What leverage do we have? Republicans have repeatedly lectured America—they control the House, the Senate and the presidency. It's their government.” And on Wednesday he was in the news for cooking up a nickname for Trump—“Captain Chaos”—which to some ears might sound somewhat appealing.

That’s about it. Do these intermittent bursts of criticism strike you as the exertions of a leader who’s fighting a war of survival?

Jeffries and Chuck Schumer, the top Democrat in the Senate, are the two leaders of their party now. And they appear to be mainly watching as Trump and Musk mount an all-out blitzkrieg on the federal government, the rule of law, and democracy. Each day, El-Don launches a fusillade against agencies that provide critical services—USAID, IRS, EPA, FAA, NIH, CDC, USDA, EEOC, CFPB, USPS, NOAA, NASA, the Labor Department, Veterans Affairs, the National Science Foundation, the US Forest Service, the National Park Service, the Social Security Administration, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, and more—and it’s all part of a grand scheme: to demolish the one entity than can counter the forces of oligarchy and autocracy.

This is not your father’s GOP push for lower taxes for the plutocrats and less regulation for corporate pirates and polluters. Musk is seeking to dismantle government to make way for the libertarian dystopia he seeks in which the disruptors and robber-barons of today are free to do whatever they like, as an authoritarian (who’s their pal) rules without restraint. The goal is not government efficiency but government emasculation—and the obliteration of the political party that has called for utilizing government to address such crucial matters as economic inequity, inadequate health care, high prescription drug prices, environmental despoilation, education disparities, crappy infrastructure, housing shortages, and climate change.

The targets so far have generally been government agencies and departments that are perceived as liberal outposts (as if preventing malaria in Africa is a left-wing project). Check out this chart posted by Adam Bonica, a professor of political science at Stanford:

Yet in the face of this onslaught—amid this existential battle—Jeffries and Schumer display little sense of urgency. The same goes for many other elected Democratic officials. I previously wrote that Democrats are bringing a teaspoon to a gunfight. But it’s unclear if most Ds even recognize they’re in a gunfight.

Trump and Musk are initiating assaults on multiple fronts every day (including weekends!). They are using their platforms and bullhorns to proclaim nonstop that they are vanquishing waste, fraud, abuse, and inefficiency. This is their narrative, and as good propagandists they repeat this line incessantly to justify their slash-a-thon that is defenestrating tens of thousands of government workers and ending or hindering programs and departments that bring food, clean water, and medical care to the needy; that address climate change; that safeguard workers in their workplaces; that protect consumers from vulturous financial firms; that collect revenue for the government; that prevent the pollution of our air and water; that research diseases; that control air traffic; that serve our veterans; that guard nuclear weapons; that inspect our food; and that do much more.

Where’s the counterpunch? Where’s the Democrats’ narrative? Are they in the ring 24/7 explaining to the public that DOGE is a dodge? Just a front for a top-down revolution of elites who want to be unfettered by rules, regulations, or laws? If they are not matching Trump and Musk syllable for syllable, they are losing. A crusade to slim down bloated government sounds good to many Americans. By not loudly calling BS on this, the Democrats lose any chance they might have of winning. Waiting for Trump and Musk to overreach, looking for strategic openings—ah, they really screwed the pooch by killing that veterans program!—is not going to do the trick in the face of this hostile takeover of the federal government by a power-mad autocrat and the world’s No. 1 oligarch. This is a recipe for being crushed. Rope-a-dope is not going to work. Neither will waiting for Trump and Musk to slip in the polls, which appears to be happening.

The destruction being wreaked upon the government will not be easily undone or repaired, should the tables ever be turned. Many of the fired—people with expertise—won’t come back. Necessary programs will not be revived. Young people will not apply for jobs in a workforce that can be dismantled on a whim. This is the time for a robust response. The barbarians are not at the gate; they’re inside, burning and pillaging. Worrying about guests for a presidential speech two weeks from now is like fretting about your ride home from the dock when your ship is sinking mid-journey.

Then there’s this: Your people are demanding action. There’s polling data and plenty of anecdotal evidence that Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters across the land are yearning for leadership. They look to Washington and to the folks at the top of the party and scream in exasperation, “Where are you? What are you doing? What is the plan?” After the election, there was the usual post-loss chattering about what the party should do. Go left? Go right? Reach out to pissed-off white working-class guys? Focus on message delivery mechanisms? Downplay the social issues (say, trans rights) and zero in on bread-and-butter matters?

Those are all good questions for cogitation, and folks thought they had some time before the next election to reflect on all this. Yet now a crisis is at hand—for the nation and the party. A much different conversation is required—as is an action plan. And there’s a craving for it. On Thursday night, Jeffries was in Chicago for an event promoting his illustrated book, The ABCs of Democracy. Outside protesters chanted, “We don’t need a book tour” and called on Jeffries to “stand up right now” to the Trump-Musk assault. I don’t know if this is a sign of a burgeoning populist uprising of progressives against the Democratic Party. But, as much as I’m in favor of authors promoting their work, this is no time for a book tour.

There are institutional obstacles for the Democrats. Out-of-power parties in America tend not to have paramount leaders with national standing who can go toe-to-toe with a president or a run-amok billionaire. The job descriptions for Schumer and Jeffries do not cover this. They were elected to serve their constituents, not the nation, and, as congressional leaders, their jobs are to manage and wrangle their caucuses, each of which contain members with different needs, different perspectives, and different amounts of political courage. And there are no 2028 Democratic contenders who presently can command as much attention as the liar who stands behind the presidential podium. Some governors are trying—see Gov. JB Pritzker of Illinois—while California Gov. Gavin Newsom, once a mighty Trump foe, has been pinned down by the tragic wildfires in Los Angeles.

Certainly, some Democrats understand this is a five-alarm, break-glass moment. When Musk and his minions were shutting down USAID, several House members and senators, including Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), showed up at its headquarters to protest. And in recent days, a few Democratic legislators have demonstrated fierceness. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York is one. She got the story right at a recent rally: “[Musk] is trying to gut everything good in America for his own private profit. This is the culmination of what oligarchy is all about...the fusion and the capture of the billionaire class of our democracy."

Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut also understands this is a battle for the narrative: “The question is can you work with Republicans in the middle of a constitutional crisis when democracy is on the line? And right now, I think that this crisis is serious and deepening in its seriousness, that our job No.1, No. 2, and No. 3 is to save our democracy."

But the absence of a top-dog Democrat swinging hard means the party must fashion a collective response to Trump and Musk. And the newly elected Democratic National Committee chair, Ken Martin, is not the answer. His job is mainly to serve the state committee chairs in managing the internal workings of the DNC, not serve as the party’s gladiator.

As I suggested weeks ago, the Dems need a war room that organizes a daily counterassault with those kickass House members and senators—and prominent experts and figures—who are stoked to fight their way into every news cycle to combat the Musk-MAGA propaganda. To point out the consequences of these firings. To promote the overarching message that a campaign to eviscerate government for the benefit of the elites is underway. This can’t be done just by a flurry of press releases. These pols need to be warriors blitzing across social media platforms with posts and video. They must hit whatever news outlets will have them. They must orchestrate PR stunts and events featuring fired workers whose work was essential. And they must do this over and over. There’s a simple strategy to adopt: Everything, everywhere, all at once.

It's not quite rocket science to have Democratic legislators and leading scientists point out that cutbacks at NASA could help China or other nations gain an edge in space research and exploration or climate change technology. And then there’s another event the next hour on how the slashing at the USDA will lead to less safe food.

This is not going to be easy. Combatting fascism often isn’t. Some Democratic legislators—many?—are not street brawlers and would rather concoct insiderish strategies for how to deal with the pending spending legislation, arguably an important front. But the party as a whole needs to be on the battlefield and acting as if it is fighting for its political life—because that is what’s at stake, as well as the lives of many Americans across the country.

Here is John Oliver roasting Jeffries for his Aaron Judge comparison:

Got anything to say about this item—or anything else? Email me at ourland.corn@gmail.com.

When I launched this feature, I didn’t expect it to be so focused on the media. But, it turns out, that’s where so much accomplicing is occurring. While the Associated Press took a stand and decided not to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America”—just because Trump snapped his fingers—and was banned from White House press events, Axios eagerly jumped on the Appease Trump Express and put out this statement: 

Our top priority at Axios is to provide readers with clinical, fact-based reporting. Our standard is to use ‘Gulf of America (renamed by U.S. from Gulf of Mexico)’ in our reporting because our audience is mostly U.S.-based compared to other publishers with international audiences. At the same time, the government should never dictate how any news organization makes editorial decisions. The AP and all news organizations should be free to report as they see fit. This is a bedrock of a free press and durable democracy.

Meanwhile, in Jeff Bezos’ world, the Washington Post backed out of a $115,000 buy from two liberal groups for this ad:

When it comes to privately owned newspapers, there’s no such thing as the right of free speech. But it seems that at WaPo, regarding Elon Musk, there’s not even a right to paid speech. Democracy can die in the light when you suppress criticism of those attacking democracy.

I’m getting tired of being pissed off by the New York Times, but the most important media outlet in the nation just can’t stop cooking up the wrong contexts for the crisis at hand. After the Trump White House posted this Time magazine cover knock-off depicting Trump as a king…

 …this is how the Times covered it, noting his “fondness for regal themes,” as if it were a cute trait.

A president likening himself to an autocratic ruler—while waging a war on democratic governance (see Dumbass Comment of the Week below)—is a far more serious matter. But to be fair to The Gray Lady, it did do a good job of compiling a list of illegal acts Trump has committed as president in the past month. Guess how many it counted before you click on this link.

If you read the last issue, you know the next Our Land Zoom get-together will be February 25 at 8 p.m. The last one, held the day after the inauguration, functioned as something of a support group. A month later, we probably need that support even more. Please join us.

These gatherings are only open to premium subscribers—those of you who kick in a few bucks a month so we can keep this newsletter going. A reminder: Without the support of premium subscribers, Our Land would cease to exist. So these generous readers not only receive a host of extra features—additional items on the news, behind-the-scenes reports on the media, the Dumbass Comment of the Week contest, the interactive Mailbag (you write in; I respond), hot or medium-warm takes on books, music, films, and TV shows; and the one-and-only MoxieCam™—they also can bask in the satisfaction of knowing they are responsible for the continuing publication of Our Land. If you appreciate my work and this newsletter, I hope you will join this noble crowd. You can sign up here.

On the day of the Zoom shindig, premium subscribers will receive an email with a Zoom link. At the appointed hour, click on that, and our highly trained bouncers, who earn extra money teaching people how to play the harp, will let you in. See you soon.

This week the inevitable arrived: Donald Trump took Vladimir Putin’s side in the war criminal’s fight against Ukraine. He referred to the democratically elected Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a “dictator,” blamed Ukraine for the war Putin began, and initiated so-called peace talks with Russia—which covertly helped him win the 2016 election—that, no surprise, froze out the Ukrainians. There was so much idiocy expressed by Trumpers to justify this sellout of democracy and embrace of a murderous tyrant. But the judges were stunned by a cavalier comment from Nicole Shanahan. Remember her? For a few nanoseconds, she was Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s running-mate during his independent presidential bid last year, chosen because she has a treasure chest of billions due to her marriage to and subsequent divorce from a Google co-founder. After the Trump White House announced it would hold direct talks with Putin absent Zelenskyy, Shanahan posted what she must have thought was an oh-so-clever observation: “Yes. It’s an adults-only meeting.”

Imagine the immaturity and cruelty that goes into snark like this. Zelenskyy has valiantly led a nation that has been brutally and criminally assaulted by Putin and that has suffered tragic losses and destruction, including the Russian kidnapping of Ukrainian children. And Shanahan thinks it’s cute to denigrate Zelenskyy as a child. She’s a person with no soul.

Trump prompted a rightful ruckus when he posted this declaration: “He who saves his Country does not violate any Law.” This is a remark attributed to Napoleon, who was an emperor, not a democrat, and Trump delightfully embraced this fascistic notion. The judges wish to call attention to a similar sentiment expressed by a lesser-known member of Trump’s coterie: Will Scharf, the White House staff secretary. The person who holds this post oversees the paper flow of the Oval Office, and one of Scharf’s responsibilities is to be the emcee when Trump signs executive orders. As Trump affixes his John Hancock, Scharf explains what’s being approved.

This week, when Trump signed an order imposing more White House control over independent agencies created by Congress, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Trade Commission, Scharf went far and above explaining this power grab. He maintained the order “reestablishes the longstanding norm that that only the president or the attorney general can speak for the United States when stating an opinion as to what a law is.”

This statement contravenes the essence of our constitutional republic—three co-equal branches of government with checks and balances—and it ignores 222 years of jurisprudence (ever since Marbury v. Madison) that affirmed the power of federal courts and the Supreme Court to determine the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress and enacted by the president. Trump cannot be declared a king by either a social media post or a statement from the staff secretary.

In yet another competitive week, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick was for a time leading the race. Appearing on Fox News, he proclaimed that Trump would end federal taxes for all Americans: “His goal is very simple: to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and let all the outsiders pay.” Lutnick prattled on about cruise ships and supertankers that don’t pay US taxes. “This will end,” Lutnick exclaimed, suggesting the collection of such taxes will obliviate the need to tax hard-working Americans.

Taxing these businesses is not a bad idea. But the cruise industry, as Lutnick, a supposed financial expert, should know, brings in about $23 billion in revenue annually. Even if you slap a 20 percent tax on that, you’d get less than $5 billion, a piddling amount considering the US federal budget is about $7 trillion.

CNBC’s Carl Quintanilla had a sharp response to Lutnick’s nonsense: “A 10% universal tariff on $3.25 trillion of annual US merchandise imports would potentially raise ~$300 billion. Last year, US personal income tax brought in nearly 30x that.” The judges don’t like to do math. But they can figure this out. Here was more-than-fuzzy math designed to hoodwink voters.

They were ready to award Lutnick the prize; then an entry from Veep Vance came in. Speaking to the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (a.k.a. CPAC), JD Vance proclaimed, “Our culture sends a message to young men that you should suppress every masculine urge…My message to young men is don't allow this broken culture to send you a message that you're a bad person because you're a man, because you like to tell a joke, because you like to have a beer with your friends."

The judges shook their head at this one. If you watch any sporting event in America on television and pay attention to the commercials, it would be hard to contend that American culture tells young men that they are "bad" if they like to have a beer with friends. This far-right, culture-war drivel wins the day—this week—for Vance.

Last week’s issue on the many deaths of the GOP sent a lot of readers to their keyboards. Turns out that it sometimes pays to write the obvious. 

Maura Shannon agreed:

Thank you so much for calling out the total capitulation of the Republican Party. It does need to be done repeatedly, even though, on the surface, it seems obvious. This betrayal of our democratic process, ideals and cohesion is an immense collective trauma. Trauma is both obvious and frightening to name. Thinkers who are able to name it give us the courage to recover and think for ourselves.

Gerard Cavanaugh emailed:

The seeds of authoritarianism today, were planted by the Reagan administration. Carter was the last presidency that was free of the caustic rot of cynicism and the labelling of a political party as being dangerous. In the 1970s, the New Right and the religious right began a campaign against the Democrats as godless and anti-American, picking up on the McCarthyism of the 1950s. It worked and got Reagan elected. From then, it was always part of the GOP recipe. I’m in my late 70s and am determined to live through Trumpism.

Good luck, Gerard. And I know a book that covers that history: American Psychosis: A Historical Investigation of How the Republican Party Went Crazy. It’s even more relevant now than when it was first published.

Pablo Hoffman wrote:

This article is spot on, but we’ve heard most of it, especially from you, and now it’s basically old news. Yes, the GOP is moldering in its grave, but we’ve known that for three decades at least. The Democratic Party is a more recent casualty; rigor mortis is settling into the cadaver.

I’m reluctantly but ineluctably coming to a realization that I would like to get your take on: This battle has been crushingly lost, and the winners, at a lightning-fast pace, are consolidating and extending their gains in the face of no effective opposition. They openly announced in advance their battle plans and their short- and long-range intentions. These include a profound and drastic evisceration and transformation of a two-and-a-half century old United States of America. They’re barreling along making them all reality. There is no cavalry galloping over the horizon coming to the rescue.

No empire lasts forever, and this one, the most powerful economic, military, and political structure in the history of humankind, isn’t merely ebbing away, it’s crashing. Its erstwhile enlightened leaders, the legislators, the generals, the industrialists, the globalists, the publishers, the educators, who were on the side of the great experiment of democracy, are sidelined, removed, or in fear for their livelihoods, their liberty, and/or their lives.

The masses are coalescing around their messiah. They are not reachable by reason. They celebrate every transgression inflicted on the despised liberals, the intellectuals, the rich, the privileged, and the immigrants. They are convinced that their king will elevate their lives in every way, and, better yet, it will be by casting the “others” into humiliation and submission. History has played this movie countless times, but not even the American Civil War was comparable. Got some thoughts about this, David?

Whew, that’s a lot, Pablo. Above you can see what I think of the state of play at the moment, particularly regarding the Democrats. Unlike you, I’m not yet ready to pronounce the American experiment over, though I do realize it may be heading in that direction. I’m no optimist by nature, but I do believe that if enough Americans give a damn—and, remember, half of the electorate opposed this in November—the worst can be averted.

Paige Stone was very kind:

Thank you for this article. For half of our country, it’s been painful watching American politics and our democracy sinking like the Titanic. You assigned blame where it belongs for the past several years: the GOP. I wish the world had access to Our Land and your words of insight and wisdom.

Thanks much, Paige. You can help on that front—and so can other Our Land readers. Please share the newsletter with friends, relatives, neighbors, strangers, enemies, and encourage them to subscribe at DavidCorn.com. Word-of-mouth (word-of-email?) is the best advertising. If every subscriber got one other person to subscribe each month, we’d grow exponentially!

Julie Walsh had a question:

How would we, as citizens, organize overturning Citizens United? Money seems to be at the root of the rot of the GOP. Are there options? 

Some experts think it would require a constitutional amendment to undo the Supreme Court decision that has allowed virtually unlimited amounts of money from the well-heeled and corporate interests to flood into the political system. That seems a very heavy lift. There are other ideas out there. The Brennan Center has been pushing public financing as a partial solution. But I don't sense enough popular outrage to support a major change. I wish I could be more encouraging.

Neal Aponte also had a question:

Has anyone ever ascertained what Trump was doing with documents pertaining to our nuclear arsenal? Why did he pilfer these documents? And what did he plan to do with them?  

I think there are no answers to these questions, just speculation. Had there been a trial, we might have learned more. But…well, you know.

“You’re still working too hard.”
“I know, Moxie.”
“Scientific research says that if you spend time with your dog, your productivity increases.”
“Really? Who conducted that research?”
“I don’t do footnotes.”