The United States Constitution could not be clearer: Only Congress, not the president, has the power to declare war.
Furthermore, in 1973 — over half a century ago, and with enough votes to override a veto from President Richard Nixon — Congress passed a law known as the War Powers Act that prohibits any president from committing the United States to prolonged armed conflict without congressional authorization.
Yet, late Saturday night, Donald Trump unilaterally started a reckless, illegal, and unconstitutional war with Iran.
We all know — or should know — the lessons of Afghanistan and Iraq: Initial “victories” turn into endless wars with unimaginable death and destruction, where the only “winner” is the military-industrial complex.
In a move right out of the authoritarian playbook, Trump hopes that this display of military aggression will distract the American people from all the other unpopular things he’s doing here at home and around the world. And he will exploit this self-made catastrophe in an effort to seize even more undue power.
A bipartisan War Powers Resolution has been introduced in the Senate (by Democrat Tim Kaine of Virginia) and the House of Representatives (by Democrat Ro Khanna of California and Republican Thomas Massie of Kentucky) that would require President Trump to get approval from Congress for any further U.S. military action against Iran.
Congress must fulfill its constitutionally mandated role and act immediately to end Trump’s illegal and reckless war.
Progressive Democrats of America Jun 23, 2025 We are thrilled to have Illinois State Senator Robert Peters join our Town Hall this Sunday, running in the 2nd Congressional District to follow Robin Kelly, who is stepping down to run for the U.S. Senate. Here’s what Senator Bernie Sanders had to say when endorsing State Senator Peters: I am proud to support Robert Peters in Illinois’ 2nd Congressional District, a principled leader and organizer with a record of winning big progressive policy fights. I know he’ll be ready to do battle alongside me as we take on big money in politics and save our democracy from the billionaires trying to tear it down. Together, we’ll not only block Republican efforts to cut Medicaid and Medicare, but we’ll keep pushing for Medicare for All, because Robert shares my fundamental belief that health care is a human right. Right now, we need bold voices in Congress who will stand up to Trump and his wrecking crew, and I am confident that Robert is ready for the fight. You’re not going to want to miss this Town Hall! We’ll also hear about the most significant victory in recent memory against big money in the Democratic Party, courtesy of the PDA-founded Progressive Council of the Arizona Democratic Party. And urgently, we will discuss the need for all of us to work to build a powerful, vibrant, and permanent anti-war movement that stands for Peace, opposes US involvement in the Iran-Israel War, and demands that Congress reassert its War Powers authority. You’ll leave energized, organized, and more hopeful. RSVP now, and invite your progressive friends! We look forward to seeing you! In solidarity, Alan Minsky for the National PDA Team
The Senate is expected to vote by July 4 on the “Big Beautiful” bill, which could allow the sale of up to 3 million acres of public land across 11 western states. In California, 16 million acres are eligible, including land near Yosemite and Lake Tahoe.
As The Hill reports, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — who’s Chair of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources — added a provision to the bill that directs the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management to sell between 0.5% and 0.75% of their holdings.
The targeted land excludes national parks and wilderness areas but includes National Forest and BLM-controlled land. The Chronicle has a map from the Wilderness Society showing affected parcels scattered throughout California, from Sierra wilderness zones to rural Central Valley foothills.
Lee argues the sale could promote housing development, energy production, and generate up to $10 billion for the federal government. “Washington has proven time and again it can’t manage this land. This bill puts it in better hands,” he said.
But conservationists and community groups see it as a major threat to public access, environmental protections, and wildfire management. “Once the land is sold, we will never get it back,” warned Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Montana), who helped remove the land sale provision from the House version of the bill before it resurfaced in the Senate.
As Fresno’s KSFN reports, environmental groups like Unite 4 Parks have raised alarms about the speed and scope of the sales. “All of us are going to lose if we lose access to this landscape that we’re used to camping in and so forth,” said Deanna Wulff. She added that three million acres isn’t a small number: “If you took Yosemite, and the Sierra National Forest, and then the Sequoia/Kings Canyon range… that whole stretch, that’s 3 million acres. That is huge.”
The bill allows “any interested party” to purchase land, which critics say opens the door to wealthy individuals and corporations outbidding state and local governments that lack the budget to compete. As Michael Carroll of the Wilderness Society told SFGate, “They capped it at 3 million acres, but 258 million acres is on the menu.”
U.S. Senator Adam Schiff (D-California) said he will fight the bill “tooth and nail.”
Image: YOSEMITE NATIONAL PARK, CA – JUNE 18: The Merced River flows through the center of the Valley as viewed on June 18, 2024, at Yosemite National Park, California. (Photo by George Rose/Getty Images)
New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani attends a campaign rally, calling for the full enforcement of the city’s Sanctuary City laws on June 21, 2025 in Diversity Square in Queens, New York City.
(Photo: Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty Images)
“Cuomo winning will not only legitimize the Islamophobia that has dominated this race… but would also prove that you really can just waltz in and buy an election,” said one observer.
With two days to go until the last day of voting in New York City’s mayoral primary, two last-minute endorsements for disgraced former Gov. Andrew Cuomo from top Democratic establishment figures underscored how the election’s impact could reach far beyond the city’s borders.
“This NYC mayoral primary NEEDS to be a referendum on the direction of [the] Democratic Party itself, as well as a repudiation of the uninspiring dinosaurs who run it,” said writer Ashley Reese in response to former President Bill Clinton’s announcement of support for Cuomo.
In a move that was called “predictable” by several observers, Clinton said he would endorse the former governor—who resigned amid numerous allegations of sexual harassment—and record a robocall telling voters that Cuomo “knows how to get things done.”
The announcement came two days after progressive state Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani walked the length of Manhattan and met with voters across the borough, after biking through Brooklyn with city Comptroller Brad Lander, another mayoral candidate who recently cross-endorsed with Mamdani—calling on voters to rank them first and second on their ranked-choice voting ballots.
On Friday, the centrist Democratic think tank Third Way published a memo saying it was “deeply alarmed” by Mamdani’s candidacy, which has gained national attention as the democratic socialist has surged in polls and released viral online videos promoting his plans to freeze rent for rent-stabilized tenants and to open government-run grocery stores to keep prices on essential goods low.
Third Way said it was concerned about Mamdani’s affiliation with the Democratic Socialists of America and highlighted what they said were “extreme” policy proposals embraced by the DSA, including demands to:
Guarantee publicly available water, energy, transit, food, and other necessities for all, free of charge;
Provide free and democratic public college and, where viable, free private college for all;
Establish public ownership and funding of our healthcare system; and
Dramatically slash U.S. military spending to a level sufficient for a genuine national defense, not the projection of power outside the country.
“If a DSA member like Mamdani were to win the Democratic nomination for New York City mayor—or, worse, win the general election in November—it would be terrible for the city,” reads the Third Way memo. “Do New Yorkers really want socialist city-run grocery stores?”
According to an April survey by the Climate & Community Institute and Data for Progress, they do. Two-thirds of New Yorkers said they support the creation of municipal grocery stores, five of which would be run alongside private stores under Mamdani’s plan, including 72% of Democratic voters. Eighty-five percent of respondents said they were paying more for groceries than they were last year.
Cuomo, whose donors include billionaires who also supported President Donald Trump, has consistently been in first place in most polls ahead of the Democratic primary election, but Mamdani has gained momentum while relying largely on small-dollar donors and has doubled his support among some groups of voters, including Latinos.
Politico reporter Emily Ngo said the race has emerged as a “proxy battle” between Democratic centrists and progressives nationally, with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) urging New Yorkers to back Mamdani.
In the last days of the race, progressives have accused Cuomo of embracing Islamophobic attacks on Mamdani. The former governor said Mamdani’s refusal to condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada,” which includes the Arabic word for uprising and has been associated with the fight for Palestinian rights, could “fuel hate” and “murder.” He also attacked Mamdani at a debate for saying Israel has a right to exist as a country “with equal rights.”
“Cuomo winning will not only legitimize the Islamophobia that has dominated this race, or highlight the fact that the party doesn’t care about women’s safety, but would also prove that you really can just waltz in and buy an election,” said Reese. “Cuomo must lose on principle.”
Despite signs that voters are responding positively to Mamdani’s call for “a city we can afford,” Third Way executive vice president Matt Bennett insisted in an interview with Politico on Saturday that a Mamdani victory would allow Republicans to attach the Democratic Party “to ideas that are outside of the mainstream” on a national level.
The Third Way memo was released as another high-profile endorsement for Cuomo, from U.S. Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.), was announced. The congressman said Cuomo—who recently suggested protests against the Trump administration’s immigration raids at workplaces in Los Angeles were an “overreaction”—would “play an important role in the future of the national Democratic Party” and had the “character to not just serve New York, but help save the nation.”
Progressive organizer Aaron Regunberg said Clyburn’s endorsement was a display of “geriatric Democratic elites” pushing to “hold onto their power” at the expense of their voters.
“Since November, the party has been plagued by battles over whether it has moved too far to the left,” wrote Mara Gay at The New York Times on Thursday. “But there are signs that Mr. Mamdani is gaining support not only among the far left but also among those who have long voted for establishment Democrats. One poll showed him eating into Mr. Lander’s base in brownstone Brooklyn, an area of middle-class families, young professionals, and moneyed homeowners. It appears a growing number of Democrats don’t see Mr. Mamdani’s vows to provide free buses and free child care and to increase taxes on the wealthy as threatening or outlandish. They see them as necessary.”
Musician and journalist Jesse Brenneman allowed that establishment Democrats may have reason to worry about Mamdani’s growing appeal to New Yorkers.
“If a popular, non-party-aligned left politician gets elected and tries to follow through on popular reforms it could lead to people thinking the same thing could happen elsewhere,” said Brenneman, “the Democratic Party’s worst nightmare.”
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., conducts a news conference in the U.S. Capitol in Washington on May 20, 2025. Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images
AS PRESIDENT DONALD Trump barrels toward a direct war with Iran, the most powerful Democrats in Congress are issuing statements that are at best tepid and confusing. At worst, they are cheering escalation.
Even with some Democrats on Capitol Hill pushing for a War Powers Resolution and other legislation to stop Trump from attacking without congressional approval, the Democratic Party’s most powerful politicians refuse to mount any meaningful opposition to a strike. Many outright favor direct U.S. involvement in yet another regime change war.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the most powerful Democrat in the Senate, where he is the minority leader, presents himself as a major opponent of Trump. As recently as June 15, for example, he boasted about his participation in the No Kings Day mass protest against Trump.
Yet when it comes to the prospect of a direct war with Iran, Schumer is not only supporting Trump, but less than three weeks ago was goading the administration to be “tough” on Iran and not make any “side deals” without Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s approval.
“The United States’ commitment to Israel’s security and defense must be ironclad as they prepare for Iran’s response,” he said in a follow-up statement released on June 13, after Israel attacked Iran. “The Iranian regime’s stated policy has long been to destroy Israel and Jewish communities around the world.”
Schumer did include a perfunctory nod to talks — “a strong, unrelenting diplomatic effort backed by meaningful leverage.” The “meaningful leverage” in question, however, is bombing Iran — something Schumer tacitly supports.
Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., the most powerful Democrat in the House, responded to Israel’s attack with a toothless statement that was vaguely supportive of war and packed with every pro-Israel cliche in the book. “Our commitment to Israel’s security is ironclad,” he said. “It is clear that the Iranian regime poses a grave threat to the entire free world. There is no circumstance where Iran can be permitted to become a nuclear power.”
Jeffries, too, mentioned diplomacy, but with no urgency. “As soon as is practical, it is imperative to find a rigorous diplomatic path forward and avoid any situation where U.S. troops are put in harm’s way,” he said. As with Schumer, “diplomacy” is a box to be checked, a vague normative preference, but not a demand — and certainly not a requirement.
A host of powerful Democrats issued strikingly similar statements. They repeatedly reinforced every premise of Trump’s pending bombing campaign, namely the alleged imminent danger posed by Iran. This premise is undermined by U.S. intelligence assessments and leaks to both the Wall Street Journal and CNN, which suggest Iran hadn’t decided to make a bomb and would be three years away from producing one if it did.
If all of the statements look similar, it’s because, according to DropSite and the American Prospect, many members of Congress are simply copy and pasting approved language from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, the flagship pro-Israel lobby group. These outlets found that, in statements on congressional websites and social media, nearly 30 members of Congress used nearly identical language about how they “stand with Israel” and another 35 gave their unequivocal support in similar terms but without the magic words.
Among the influential Democrats pledging their unflinching support for Israel was Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Like many others, Meeks hauled out a talking point about how “Israel has a right to defend itself” — meant to front-run any discussion of Israeli aggression by asserting the premise that any and all military action is inherently defensive. It’s a dubious premise in most contexts, but especially Orwellian in this one since Israel preemptively attacked Iran based on claims of an “imminent threat” in direct contradiction of US intelligence. Even if one thinks Israel has a “right to defend itself” in the abstract, under no neutral reading of international law is Israel doing so by bombing another country without legal basis to do so.
The decidedly unhelpful approaches by powerful Democrats don’t end there. Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, D-Fla., and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-NH, influential members of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, respectively, both issued mealy-mouthed statements trying to split the baby between “diplomacy” rhetoric and reinforcing every pretense for U.S. involvement in Israel’s bombing of Iran.
Anti-Anti-War
These non-positions — or worse, positions in favor of unprovoked, almost certainly illegal war — are notable precisely because there are some lawmakers who are at least trying to do something to stop a direct, all-out conflict between the U.S. and Iran. According to the latest count by Prem Thakker, 37 members of Congress have thrown their weight behind some kind of effort to stop war. These fall into two camps. The first is a resolution in both the House and Senate that invokes the 1973 War Powers Act, which says that only Congress can declare war, a principle that has been routinely violated by U.S. presidents.
Harvard University’s campus in Cambridge, Mass., on May 27, 2025. Photo: Sophie Park/Bloomberg via Getty Images
HARVARD DIVINITY SCHOOL broke precedent by refusing to publish a video of its commencement speech after a speaker went off-script to call attention to the perilous conditions in Gaza, The Intercept has learned.
“There are no safe zones left in Gaza after 600 days and 77 years of genocide,” said Zehra Imam, who graduated from the Harvard Divinity School and participated in the embattled Religion and Public Life program. Imam, who is Muslim, was speaking with two other students from Christian and Jewish faiths who had cleared a draft of their planned remarks with the school — and agreed that Imam should go off-script to address the ongoing genocide.
“I center Palestine today, not just because of its scale of atrocity but because of our complicity in it,” Imam said. “Class of 2025, Palestine is waiting for you to arrive. And you must be courageous enough to rise to the call because Palestine will keep showing up in your living rooms until you are ready to meet its gaze.”
Harvard did not publish a video of the speech on its website or YouTube page, as it did with commencement speeches in past years. When Imam and her co-speakers asked why, the school told them the decision was made due to “security concerns.”
The decision runs counter to the public perception that Harvard is crusading against President Donald Trump’s threats to cut university funding to crush speech, according to seven Harvard Divinity School students and staff who spoke to The Intercept. While the university has been publicly praised for fighting back against Trump, its efforts to censor Imam’s speech and wipe out the civic engagement she took part inhave raised concerns among students and staff that the school is actually capitulating to pressure from the White House.
The school made a password-protected version of the speech temporarily available to people with a Harvard login, a Harvard spokesperson confirmed to The Intercept. But choosing not to release it publicly “feels to a lot of students suspicious and just contradictory,” said Perlei Toor, a second-year divinity school student. “That’s not what happened last year or the year before that.”
Behind the scenes, the school has been quietly dismantling the Religion and Public Life program in which Imam participated. Until recently with an initiative led by the Divinity School’s only Palestinian staff member, the program has drawn Trump’s ire — and criticism from some alumni, campus leaders, and students.
Imam ended her portion of the speech with a poem from a student in Gaza — one of several refugees to whom she offers poetry lessons via an organization she founded connecting U.S. students with students in refugee camps. She and her co-speakers received a standing ovation.
“I had a dream / I went back home / slept in my bed / felt warmth again,” she read. “I had a dream / My eyes forgot the blood, the loss, the patience … My nose forgot the smoke smell, the deaths, the corpse rotten … My body skipped what I had lived.”
THE SUPPRESSION OF Imam’s speech capped off a chaotic year for the Divinity School’s Religion and Public Life program. As of last month, Harvard had pushed out the program’s three leaders, canceled a class, suspended one of its initiatives, and cut most of its staff.
The program itself is still relatively new: Harvard launched Religion and Public Life in late 2020, following worldwide protests against police brutality to focus on “educating leaders to understand the civic consequences of religion, in service of building a just world at peace.” During a time of uncertainty, the program would “shape our character and trajectory both in the years to come as well as in our tumultuous present.”
After the October 7 attacks, the program’s troubled trajectory began to take shape. Program leaders, faculty, and staff sent a newsletter urging affiliates of the Divinity School to “challenge single story narratives” that justified retaliation against Palestinians. Harvard Divinity School Dean David F. Holland disavowed the statement, as the Harvard Crimson reported, saying it did not represent the school and described it as “unproductive.”
The following year, the group Students Against Antisemitism sued Harvard over claims that the school had failed to stop antisemitism on campus. The suit criticized the Religion and Public Life program for hosting a screening of the film “Israelism,” which documents changing Jewish attitudes toward Israel, and took aim at the program’s flagship course, which took students on a trip to Israel and the West Bank. Harvard agreed to a confidential settlement in the suit last month.
Last May, the Harvard Jewish Alumni Alliance released a report on campus antisemitism that took further aim at the letter program faculty sent after the October 7 attacks. It also criticized the program’s Religion, Conflict, and Peace Initiative, which ran the flagship course and examines how religion can promote peace in situations of violent conflict and mass displacement. The initiative, the report claims, “appears to focus entirely on the Palestinians.”
According to Toor, the second-year student, this framing is emblematic of misconceptions about the Religion and Public Life program. News stories and discourse about the program often miss “just how much Religion and Public Life does besides Palestine and Israel,” she told The Intercept.
The program provides opportunities for students to connect religious studies to the public sphere through tracks in government, journalism, and humanitarian aid, among other topics, and to take on related internships. It also plans more than half of the school’s programming and events.
Late last year, facing political pressure and security concerns, program leaders decided not to take students on the trip to Israel and the West Bank or offer the flagship course this spring. Shortly after, the departures of several program leaders were announced. In January, Assistant Dean Diane Moore, who built the program and taught the course, retired early. The next day, Assistant Dean Hussein Rashid announced he would leave the program at the end of the academic year because of what he described as the school’s anti-Muslim bias and a “hostile environment to Muslims and Arabs.”
Moore did not respond to a request for comment. Rashid declined to comment on the record.
According to Toor, the program has been a necessary home for people of all faiths.
“Because of the diversity of the staff and because of the range of topics that students were able to explore,” Toor said, “especially since the inauguration of Trump, [the program] has been a real space of ministerial comfort.”
But in April, Harvard’s much-anticipated report on antisemitism presented a narrative closer to the one from the Jewish Alumni Alliance. Releasedjustafterthe school said it would not comply with a letter with Trump’s demands, the April report was a result of the efforts of Trump’s antisemitism task force. The school had just pushed out leaders of its Center for Middle Eastern Studies and ended its partnership with Birzeit University in the West Bank.
The new report identified the Religion and Public Life program as one of several offenders that contributed to the “frequency and intensity of treatment of Israel as an oppressor state and the Palestinians as an oppressed people in courses and public events throughout the campus.” This, according to the report, was “indicative of institutional bias and hostility.”
”While the program was publicly launched with what seemed like a broad mandate to explore the intersection of religion and various aspects of public life, in practice, it focused heavily on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, presenting a perspective widely perceived as consistently anti-Israeli and aligned very narrowly with a strand of pro-Palestinian politics,” the report read. “This narrow focus on this exceptionally polarizing topic appears to have stemmed from the decision, made soon after RPL’s founding, to center its programming around a multi-year case study on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”
The program focuses on a wide range of topics like the economy, democracy and voting rights, education, and humanitarian aid, said Toor. Topics related to Israel and Palestine are a fraction of the work it does on campus.
The program continued to shrink, this time with cuts. Shortly after the report was published, the school began notifying staff and other program leaders that their contracts would not be renewed due to budget cuts. (Harvard had cut the program’s only Israeli professor the previous spring.) The school also announced it was pausing the program’s Religion, Conflict, and Peace Initiative.
One of the staff cut was Hilary Rantisi, the conflict and peace initiative’s Palestinian American associate director who co-taught the flagship course.
“They terminated the only Palestinian employee that they had,” said Preston Iha, a first-year student in the Masters of Divinity program. “Which is, again, signaling and makes people wonder who is really welcome at a school that claims to welcome everybody.”
Last month, the day after the commencement, the school notified program staff about additional cuts. Four staff members’ jobs were eliminated, and a fifth staffer was given a three-month extension of their contract, which is set to end June 30. A new program director, Terrence L. Johnson, will take over at the end of June — but students and staff told The Intercept it’s not clear what the program will consist of after its staff was gutted.
“It seems like, yes, there could be budget cuts,” said Toor. “But for you to target one program so specifically, and for that program to also be heavily mentioned in the antisemitism report and the Islamophobia report, it seems like too much of a coincidence.”
Please vote for Zohran Mamdani for Mayor. An amazing human being, a fighter for justice, and finally a chance to have a mayor who’s on the side of the people. He will tax the rich and make life easier for the poor. Working people will run this city, not the Oligarchs. How does a creep like Andrew Cuomo (who just moved to the city last year to run for mayor) even think he should ever hold office again? Oh. Right. We elected his doppelgänger as President in November.
** In order to have a troll-free, hate-free comments section — and because if there’s one thing I know about my crazy haters, they would rather spend an eternity in hell with Marjorie Taylor Greene than send me $5 if forced to become a paid subscriber — my Comments section here on my Substack is limited to paid subscribers. But, not to worry — anyone can send me their comments, opinions and thoughts by writing to me at mike@michaelmoore.com. I read every one of them, though obviously I can’t respond to all. The solution here is not optimal but it has worked and my Comments section has become a great meeting place for people wanting to discuss the ideas and issues I raise here. There is debate and disagreement, but it is refreshing to have it done with respect and civility, unfettered by the stench of bigotry and Q-anon insanity.
Intimidation is a powerful weapon. And it comes in many forms — especially in the age of Trump
Toilets are left on a Berkeley street in 2010. A commode sent anonymously to the author appears to send an ominous message about his anti-Trump opinions.
Two Toilets on the Street – 2:02 p.m. – Berkeley These reminded me of outhouses in the Saline Valley, where two toilets were side by side, no door, with the desert as a backdrop. Camera Settings: Canon EOS 5D Mark II, ISO 640, 1/60, f 22, 24mm lensLiz Hafalia/S.F. Chronicle
By David Kirp
June 21, 2025 (SFChronicle.com)
Intimidation is a powerful weapon.
President Donald Trump and his MAGA acolytes have taken a page from the classic autocrats’ playbook, deploying fear to stifle opposition. Anyone who runs afoul of the movement risks the threat of a nasty reprisal.
The threat of physical attacks on lawmakers and their families, fueled by the Trump regime’s inflammatory rhetoric, is a reason why some Republican members of Congress are playing possum.
“We are all afraid,” Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski said, speaking on behalf of colleagues who are fearful of speaking for themselves.
One of the most widely used scare tactics against federal judges who have overturned executive orders involves anonymously sending a pizza to their homes.
This isn’t just a prank. It’s psychological warfare, a black humor way to convey an ominous message — we know where you live and where your family lives.
“Be afraid” is the message. “Be very afraid.”
I get it. I have my own psychological warfare story. While it’s unnerving, I’m still standing.
In my case, it was a commode, not a pizza, that I received.
It recently arrived at the local post office in a beat-up cardboard box, a few days after the Chronicle published an opinion piece in which I described my ambivalence about living in Donald Trump’s America, where democracy is under siege.
My husband, Niko, picked up the box. Because it was too big to fit into the car, he opened it and brought it into the house.
“Here’s the commode you ordered,” he told me.
“Say what?” I replied, or words to that effect. “I didn’t order it.”
At first, Niko was disbelieving.
“Maybe you bought it by accident,” he suggested, as if someone might buy a commode in a fit of absence of mind. To convince him, I called Amazon, which confirmed that I hadn’t ordered it.
The box didn’t contain a note of explanation from the anonymous sender. Amazon, the shipper for a third-party vendor, was clueless and the manufacturer was unhelpful.
Being sent an unwanted commode sounds like the punch line of a bad joke, but it puts me in the same camp as the judges who are getting those pizzas.
To me, the message was plain: “We are targeting you and your husband, not just by outing you but also by delivering something that’s usually needed by people of a certain age — people like you. Commodes cost more than pizzas (the one I received sells for $42.98 on Amazon), but we’re willing to spend a considerable amount of money to intimidate you.”
“Why me?” I wondered, once I decoded the implications of my “gift.” I’m no firebrand leading the charge against the tyrant in the White House.
For a number of years, I taught a large undergraduate class at UC Berkeley called the “Ethics in the Age of Trump” — the running joke was that it would be a very short course. Mentioning Berkeley to a MAGA acolyte is certainly a bit like enraging the bull with a red cape.
My writings have invariably taken positions that are diametrically opposed to the Trump wood-chopper agenda. Apparently, that’s enough to put me on a list of undesirables.
After my Chronicle column ran, I received a bevy of emails that demanded — in language unfit for a family newspaper — that I, the “scum of the Earth,” do the country a favor and leave immediately.
I’m not easily cowed.
I shrugged off the emails. I know from experience that if you take a controversial position in an opinion piece, you can expect obscene rants. But if the purpose of sending me the commode was to shut me up or convince me to depart, the strategy backfired.
Trump and his MAGA wolf pack want their opponents to “self-deport” because it smooths the glide path to autocracy.
To hell with that.
Instead of rushing to buy a one-way ticket to a saner country, I’ve doubled down on my opposition to the endless stream of outrages emanating from Washington and to the imminent threat to the rule of law posed by the autocrat in the White House.
Millions of Americans have been demoralized by the Trump blitzkrieg. The zigzags can leave you gasping: sky-high tariffs one day, lower tariffs the next day; humiliate Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, then send arms to Ukraine, but threaten to walk away from the war and hand Russia a victory.
The litany of inconsistencies is endless: sledgehammer Columbia University into retreating on academic freedom, then tell the university today that its obeisance doesn’t get it off the hook; require public schools to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion programs, then back down when New York says “no”; propose to annex Canada, then make nice with the prime minister.
The passivity of many of Trump’s opponents during the first five months of his presidency resembles the despondency of the mice in famed psychologist B.F. Skinner’s lab. When they were exposed to random punishments, the mice simply stopped trying.
Yet now, as the implications of the president’s misdeeds sink in, many Americans are trying to figure out how they can fight back. If you’ve read this far, my hunch is that you may be in this camp.
Here’s my advice — do not take it lying down.
There are many ways to oppose this regime — joining demonstrations, writing and phoning your congressional representatives, enlisting in a political campaign, supporting immigrants when federal immigration agents swoop in and contributing to organizations that are defending the rule of law. Doubtlessly, you’ll come up with other possibilities that work for you.
What’s crucial is that you combat the curse of fatalism — that you keep from becoming one of Skinner’s mice — since that’s precisely how the authoritarian administration wants you to react. Overcome your fear. (Yes, I’m still working on that part, too.) Find a way of contributing to the survival of democracy that works for you. The stakes couldn’t be higher.
Meanwhile, the commode episode has a happy ending — my local senior center was pleased to take it off my hands.
Inadvertently, the mystery sender did a good deed.
David Kirp is a professor emeritus at the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley.
“Love has never been a popular movement. And no one’s ever wanted, really, to be free. The world is held together, really it is held together, by the love and the passion of a very few people. Otherwise, of course, you can despair. Walk down the street of any city, any afternoon, and look around you. What you’ve got to remember is what you’re looking at is also you. Everyone you’re looking at is also you. You could be that person. You could be that monster, you could be that cop. And you have to decide, in yourself, not to be.”
― James Baldwin
James Arthur Baldwin (August 2, 1924 – December 1, 1987) was an American writer and civil rights activist who garnered acclaim for his essays, novels, plays, and poems. His 1953 novel Go Tell It on the Mountain has been ranked by Time magazine as one of the top 100 English-language novels. Wikipedia
FILE PHOTO: U.S. Transportation secretary nominee Sean Duffy arrives to meet with U.S. Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., December 11, 2024. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz/File Photo
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said Monday his department would withhold funding from cities where anti-ICE demonstrations were allowed to take place.
In a Monday post on X, Duffy responded to President Donald Trump’s call for ICE agents to target cities led by Democrats.
“The @USDOT will NOT fund rogue state actors who refuse to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement,” Duffy wrote. “And to cities that stand by while rioters destroy transportation infrastructure — don’t expect a red cent from DOT, either. Follow the law, or forfeit the funding.”
Speaking at the G7 on Monday, Trump doubled down on his threat.
“Most of those people are in the cities. All blue cities, Democrat-run cities. And they think they’re going to use them to vote. It’s not gonna happen,” he said.
Help Outreach Working Group lift the fog of corporate media. Donate to help us maintain this website and distribute literature on the street.
One Million Rising: Strategic Non-Cooperation to Fight Authoritarianism Virtual Event · Hosted by No Kings Time Wednesdays 8 – 9:30pm EDT Location Virtual event Join from anywhere About this event Across the country, authoritarian forces are getting bolder and more dangerous. Trump and his allies are not hiding their agenda: mass deportations,... Continue reading →
THURSDAY, JUNE 29, 2023 AT 2 AM – 4 AM PDT How to create trust in a group? Details Event by Extinction Rebellion Empathy Circles online EMPATHY CAFE Duration: 2 hr Public · Anyone on or off Facebook How to create trust in a group? This is the question that arose in our... Continue reading →
When you volunteer for Saikat, it’s on us to give you a great experience and a genuine chance to make a difference. We don’t want to waste a second of your time. That’s why we’re always optimizing. And I’m excited to report that this Saturday we talked with 300% more... Continue reading →
Trump Regime Takedown: Every Saturday Saturday, March 7, 2026 12:00 PM 2:00 PM Tesla San Francisco999 Van Ness AvenueSan Francisco, CA, 94109United States (map) Google Calendar ICS Keep democracy alive every Saturday by showing up, taking a stand, and sticking together for the long haul. Standing together is better than standing alone. Let’s get together... Continue reading →
This Sunday’s Town Hall: Announcing This Week’s Progressive Town Hall: Every Sunday at 4pm ET/1pm PT RSVP HERE Join PDA activists online from across the country to discuss the importance of progressives reclaiming the American story from the MAGA right, an issue of heightened importance as we’re now within one... Continue reading →
Community Coffee – Outer Sunset Sunday, April 19 | 1–3 PM Location: Java Beach Cafe, 1396 La Playa St Sign-up The San Francisco Democratic Party has been hosting community coffee events to connect with residents of our many different neighborhoods in SF every month. No speeches, just conversations and hearing... Continue reading →
We protest Heritage Foundation EVERY MONDAY (Join us!!!!) By admin | September 2, 2025 | Uncategorized Cliff Cash Comedy Premiered Jul 26, 2025 Every Monday at The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Ave. Washington D.C. 4pm protest 6pm pizza Every Friday at Fox News D.C. 400 N. Capitol St. Washington D.C. 4pm protest 6pm pizza We are... Continue reading →
Milk Club April General Membership Meeting Date: Tuesday, April 21 Time: 7-9 PM Location: SF LGBT Center, 1800 Market Street, San Francisco Zoom Link: Click here
