Elect a felon, expect crime

The conman in chief remakes the government in his own image.

Paul Waldman

In almost every way imaginable, Donald Trump’s second term is a purer expression of his personality and preferences than his first term was. 

Not only is he far less constrained — by the courts, by the law, by Congress, or by aides who might suffer an unfortunate attack of conscience — he has created a system in which his desires and predilections are translated into policy far more smoothly than before.

So it should not be surprising that a man who built a career on scams, cons, grifts, and swindles has fundamentally reoriented the US government’s approach to corruption. 

It isn’t just that Trump has ramped up his own personal self-dealing (though he most certainly has), or that his administration is tolerant of conflicts of interest in other officials (though it is). Just as important, Trump is enacting a sweeping set of policy changes that will make it more likely that Americans will themselves be the victims of all kinds of scams.

This is less a single strategy than the accumulation of many policy decisions pushing in the same direction: to make America a place where citizens can no longer expect that the government will be there to protect them when they’re being taken advantage of.

There are few better examples than the demise of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), one of the key progressive achievements of recent years. Arising out of the 2008 financial crash, it was based on a simple premise: Americans ought to be protected from financial scams and exploitation. 

And it was extraordinarily successful: According to the Bureau’s data (which for some reason the Trump administration hasn’t gotten around to removing from the web), its actions have returned over $21 billion to consumers and imposed billions in fines on wrongdoers. 

Just as important, it sent a message to anyone contemplating financial exploitation of consumers that there is an agency that will aggressively investigate illegal activity, and there will be consequences for those who break the law.

So when Trump took office, he sought to shut the CFPB down. Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought, the dark lord of the effort to dismantle the government, told its employees to stay home and “stand down from performing any work task.” 

Under its new management, the agency then began dropping lawsuits it had brought against banks, mortgage companies, car dealers, and others it had found were defrauding or mistreating customers. The administration is hoping to fire 1,500 of the agency’s 1,700 employees (that move has been temporarily halted by a judge).

Doing their part, congressional Republicans sought to eliminate the agency entirely in their budget bill. Fortunately, that provision was struck down by the parliamentarian as being inconsistent with the rules of budget reconciliation. Nevertheless, the CFPB has all but ceased to function, which means that the kind of financial abuse it was established to prevent will likely go unpunished.

You’re on your own

The administration is taking a similar approach in area after area, sending a clear message to consumers that you’re on your own, and a message to those who exploit them that they’re free to do pretty much whatever they like.

Trump’s attempts to fire Democrat-appointed members of independent commissions have been described mostly as an effort to consolidate power, which is true, but those moves also mean removing restraints on scams and abuse. 

In other words, he is dismantling the government’s ability to rectify exploitation based on power imbalances. If he succeeds, the Consumer Product Safety Commission will do far less to protect consumers, the National Labor Relations Board will cease protecting workers, and the Merit Systems Protection Board will no longer protect government employees.

If the Department of Education is dismantled, it will no longer police the for-profit colleges that saddled millions with crushing debt and useless degrees (or no degrees at all). With long-awaited reforms at the Internal Revenue Service being quickly reversed — the administration is planning to cut its workforce in half — tax cheats know that they stand a good chance of getting away with their crimes. 

At times it almost seems as though administration officials are searching frantically for anything the federal government does that might be useful or helpful to regular people, and quashing it. They’re even eliminating the Energy Star program, which does nothing but inform consumers about which appliances are energy efficient, saving them tens of billions of dollars in utility costs every year.

There may be no area with more reckless dismantling going on than finance, where the system of regulation and law enforcement now reflects Trump’s personal views. He himself was repeatedly investigated by the federal government for various financial misdeeds, and he obviously believes that finance is and ought to be an arena where rules are for suckers and succeeding at the con game just means you’re smart.

To understand how and why, Trump’s reversal on the crypto industry is the key piece of context. In years past he had described crypto as “a scam,” but at some point he had a realization: If crypto is a scam, the scammer-in-chief surely ought to be in on it. 

The then-unprecedented corruption of Trump’s first term pales in comparison to what his family is now doing, building a crypto empire — stablecoins, meme coins, bitcoin mining — with ample opportunities for criminals, foreign governments, or anyone else who might want something from the president to put money right in his pocket.

And since crypto is becoming so central to his own wealth, Trump very much wants to ensure that the industry is regulated as little as possible, if at all. To that end, his Justice Department disbanded its National Cryptocurrency Enforcement Team and told prosecutors to stop investigating certain kinds of crypto crimes. 

Under the leadership of Paul Atkins, the crypto advocate Trump made chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the agency has dropped a dozen pending enforcement actions against crypto firms for various kinds of alleged violations, including some involving major donors to Trump. 

Few were happier about the policy about-face than Justin Sun, the Chinese-born crypto billionaire who was charged by the SEC in 2023 with various forms of fraud. After Sun bought $75 million in crypto tokens from World Liberty Financial, a firm controlled by the Trump family, the SEC halted the investigation and asked a judge to set the case aside.

As the Wall Street Journal recently reported, enforcement of laws against all kinds of white-collar crime is atrophying and “in some cases, the administration is effectively redefining what business conduct constitutes a crime.”

It’s only getting started

It can be a shock to remind oneself that we’re still less than six months into Trump’s term, so when it comes to changing the government’s position on scams and cons, he may just be getting started. Though most people probably weren’t aware of it, the Biden administration amassed an impressive record of regulation aimed at preventing consumers from being misled and manipulated — all of which could be vulnerable to the current administration’s regulatory rollback.

For example, the FTC under Biden created a “click-to-cancel” rule, which requires companies to make it no more difficult to cancel a subscription or a service than it is to sign up in the first place; if you’ve ever tried to cancel a gym membership, you know why this was necessary. 

But the Trump administration has delayed implementation of the rule, and it’s unclear as of yet whether they’ll try to kill it entirely. Will they reverse the regulation cracking down on junk fees in hotels and concert tickets, or the one banning fake online reviews? They certainly might.

Why, one might ask, would Donald Trump want Americans to live in Scamville? The answer is that it’s the place that made him, where he thrived by preying on those with less money and power than he had. 

When he sees that America has a law that bans our companies from paying bribes overseas, he recoils in disgust and tells the Justice Department to stop enforcing it; after all, that’s just how things work. It’s a dog-eat-dog world out there.

Corruption and scams are not the same thing, but they are close cousins. They add a note of tension and uncertainty to life — the knowledge that rules are not necessarily followed, fair treatment is not the default, and we’re more vulnerable than we ought to be. All of which is fine with Trump and the administration he leads. 

America ought to be a place where everyone is expected to act with integrity and the government protects people from abuse and exploitation. But in the phrase the Trump administration uses so often, that would be “not consistent with the president’s priorities.”

🫵 Subscribe to Public Notice 🫵

This I'd like to see

Check

'Unforgivable': FEMA Missed Thousands of Calls from Texas Flood Victims After Noem Fired the people who answer the phones

A preview of what will happen when it's Charlestown's turn to deal with a disaster

Stephen Prager for Common Dreams

Outrage continues to grow against U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem over her response to the deadly floods that ravaged Texas last week.

According to a Friday report from The New York Times, more than two-thirds of phone calls to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) from flood victims went unanswered after Noem allowed hundreds of contractors to be laid off on July 5, just a day after the nightmare storm.

According to The Times, this dramatically hampered the ability of the agency to respond to calls from survivors in the following days:

On July 5, as floodwaters were starting to recede, FEMA received 3,027 calls from disaster survivors and answered 3,018, or roughly 99.7 percent, the documents show. Contractors with four call center companies answered the vast majority of the calls.

That evening, however, Noem did not renew the contracts with the four companies, and hundreds of contractors were fired, according to the documents and the person briefed on the matter.

The next day, July 6, FEMA received 2,363 calls and answered 846, or roughly 35.8 percent, according to the documents. And on Monday, July 7, the agency fielded 16,419 calls and answered 2,613, or around 15.9 percent, the documents show.

Calling is one of the primary ways that flood victims apply for aid from the disaster relief agency. But Noem would wait until July 10—five days later—to renew the contracts of the people who took those phone calls.

Preschoolers are unwitting sponges for an evolving cocktail of household and environmental chemicals

Researchers tested 200 toddlers — 96 chemicals were lurking in their bodies

University of California - Davis Health

A national study published in Environmental Science & Technology finds children aged 2 to 4 years in the United States are routinely exposed to a broad range of potentially harmful chemicals. Many of the chemicals the researchers identified are not routinely monitored and may pose health risks.

The research was conducted by multiple institutions across the United States in coordination with the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO), a program supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

The researchers analyzed urine samples from 201 children aged 2 to 4 years. They tested for 111 chemicals. Their study found:

• 96 chemicals were detected in at least five children.
• 48 chemicals were found in over half of the children.
• 34 chemicals were detected in more than 90% of children -- including nine chemicals not currently tracked in national health surveys like the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES).

"Our study shows that childhood exposure to potentially harmful chemicals is widespread. This is alarming because we know early childhood is a critical window for brain and body development," said Deborah H. Bennett, lead author and UC Davis professor in the Department of Public Health Sciences. "Many of these chemicals are known or suspected to interfere with hormones, brain development and immune function."

Children exposed to chemicals through everyday activities

The NIH-funded ECHO Cohort combines data from pregnancy and pediatric cohorts to examine the impacts of early environmental exposures on child health and development. This study looked at samples of 201 children from four states (California, Georgia, New York and Washington).

The researchers looked for childhood exposure to common environmental chemicals, including:

• Phthalates and phthalate alternatives used in plastics like toys and food packaging, as well as personal care products and household items.
• Parabens commonly used in cosmetics, lotions, shampoos and pharmaceuticals.
• Bisphenols found in plastic containers, food can linings and thermal paper receipts.
• Benzophenones found in sunscreens, cosmetics and plastics.
• Pesticides used in agricultural and residential pest control.
• Organophosphate esters (OPEs) used as flame retardants in furniture and building materials and as plasticizers in food packaging.
• Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), byproducts of combustion found in vehicle exhaust, grilled foods and tobacco smoke.
• Bactericides found in antibacterial soaps and personal care products.

Children are exposed to these environmental chemicals through everyday activities, such as eating, drinking, breathing indoor and outdoor air and touching contaminated surfaces.

Frequent hand-to-mouth contact, playing close to the ground, and higher intake rates relative to their smaller body weight make kids especially vulnerable to chemical exposure.

Trends and disparities

In addition to the widespread exposure, the researchers noted some trends.

• Levels of triclosan, parabens, PAHs and most phthalates decreased over the years the samples were collected (from 2010 to 2021).
• An alternative plasticizer, DINCH (di-iso-nonyl-cyclohexane-1,2-dicarboxylic acid), and emerging pesticides, such as the neonicotinoid acetamiprid, pyrethroid pesticides, and the herbicide 2,4-D, showed an upward trend.
• Firstborn children had significantly lower chemical levels than their younger siblings.
• Chemical levels were often higher in younger children (age 2) than in 3- or 4-year-olds.
• Children from racial and ethnic minority groups had higher levels of parabens, several phthalates and PAHs.

Most of the children's mothers had provided urine samples during pregnancy. This allowed the researchers to analyze the chemicals in the mother's urine with the chemicals in the children's urine.

They found the children had higher levels of several chemicals than their mothers did during pregnancy. These included two phthalates, bisphenol S (often used as a BPA replacement) and the pesticide biomarkers 3-PBA and trans-DCCA.

Need for more monitoring and regulation

The researchers emphasize that further studies are necessary to comprehend the long-term health implications of these chemicals.

"Exposure to certain chemicals in early childhood -- such as pesticides, plasticizers and flame retardants -- has been linked to developmental delays, hormone disruption and other long-term health issues," said Jiwon Oh, first author of the study and a postdoctoral scholar in the UC Davis Department of Public Health Sciences. "This new study highlights the urgent need for expanded biomonitoring and stronger regulations to protect children from harmful exposures."

A complete list of authors and funders appears in the paper.

How to limit chemical exposure

It is impossible to eliminate all chemical exposures. Yet, there are many simple steps parents can take to help reduce their children's contact with harmful chemicals.

1. Choose safer products: Look for "phthalate-free," "paraben-free" and "fragrance-free" labels.
2. Avoid plastics labeled #3, #6, and #7: These may contain BPA or similar chemicals.
3. Wash hands frequently, especially before eating.
4. Ventilate your home and use HEPA filters, when possible.
5. Limit pesticide exposure: Wash produce thoroughly and consider organic options.
6. Clean regularly: Use a damp cloth to reduce dust that may contain chemical residues

TACO Trump is back on his destructive tariff spree

An embarrassing exercise in economic and diplomatic futility

Stephen Robinson

Donald Trump just escalated his mindlessly self-destructive trade war against our (former) economic allies — again.

On July 7, Trump sent rambling letters informing 14 nations, including major trading partners Japan and South Korea, that the US government was slapping them with significantly higher tariffs as of August 1. 

These tariffs are separate from his previously announced sectoral tariffs on automobiles, steel, and aluminum. (This week, he also announced a 50 percent tariff on copper imports for August 1.) 

Trump sent more letters sporadically through the week, with an especially bonkers one to Brazil threatening a 50 percent tariff if the government proceeds with its prosecution of Trump’s partner in coups, Jair Bolsonaro.

Then, Trump announced a new 35 percent tariff on Canada, citing debunked claims about the country turning a blind eye to fentanyl flowing into the United States.

Trump’s new August 1 deadline is completely arbitrary, and his tariff numbers aren’t grounded in any rational economic policy. As everyone seems to understand but the president and his sycophants, these new tariffs will result in increased prices on goods Americans need and can’t magically produce ourselves. Other nations won’t shoulder the costs from tariffs. We will.

The letters all read mostly the same, like shockingly incoherent spam e-mails with the recipient’s name in an obviously different font. They are filled with alarming typos, random Capitalization, and sloppy errors. For instance, Trump’s letter to Željka Cvijanović, the chairwoman of the presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, begins with “Dear Mr. President.”

Trump's cruel and violent imagination

Here are 8 times Trump proudly shared his most twisted fantasies 

By Oliver Willis, Daily Kos Staff

Trump inspects Alligator Auschwitz in Florida

Donald Trump made a big show by visiting Florida’s new immigrant detention center, where he and other GOP officials have made clear their intention to abuse human rights and vulnerable communities.

The so-called “Alligator Alcatraz” brings to life Trump’s lurid fantasies of using wild, violent animals in detaining immigrants, but it’s also a reminder that Trump has spent decades publicly fantasizing about his twisted desires.

Here are 8 other times when Trump subjected us all to the gruesome visions bouncing around in his head.

1. Executing the Exonerated Five

Trump ran a full-page newspaper ad in 1989 calling for the execution of the Exonerated Five—known at the time as the Central Park Five. The 5 teenage boys, who were Black and Latino, were completely innocent.

Years later, after DNA evidence and a confession conclusively proved their innocence, they were released from prison after spending between 6 and 13 years inside. Still, Trump refuses to acknowledge that he was wrong.

2. Shooting immigrants in the legs

According to a 2019 book by two New York Times reporters, White House sources said that Trump went into a “frenzied week of presidential rages” over immigration. At one point, Trump asked his closest advisers to authorize shooting immigrants in the legs to slow their travels across the border.

He also reportedly wanted to put spikes along border walls and electrify immigrants. It was during this frenzy that he apparently began falling in love with surrounding immigrants with alligators and snakes.

3. Shooting protesters

Secretary of Defense Mike Esper, who served during Trump’s first term, revealed in 2022 that Trump wanted to curtail the exercise of First Amendment rights by shooting protesters. 

The authoritarian idea was reportedly in response to the protests for racial justice following the police killing of George Floyd in 2020.

Esper said that he and other military leaders were taken aback when Trump asked, “Can't you just shoot them, just shoot them in the legs or something?” 

Trump was upset because he thought that the protests made the country look weak.

What you voted for

Peaceful Protest on July 17 from 5:00 - 7:00 PM

Coastal relocation gives nature room to breathe and protect

This Retreat Isn’t a Sign of Weakness

By Frank Carini / ecoRI News staff

When it comes to climate change and southern New England’s eroding coastline, managed retreat is an unpopular choice. But there likely will come a time, perhaps sooner than we think, when it becomes the only option.

The climate crisis is altering human reality and the world in which we live. Many coastal policy experts in the region believe managed retreat needs to be part of this new reality.

Emma Gildesgame, climate adaptation scientist for The Nature Conservancy (TNC) in Massachusetts, believes honest conversations about managed retreat, also known as coastal relocation, are a must. She said the goal is to “work with nature to keep people safer from climate change.”

“This is the home that you bought, that you plan to live in for the rest of your life,” Gildesgame said, “but it’s going to be underwater more often than is sustainable for you to live in … that’s at the heart of the conversation.”

Managed retreat is about giving the shore room to breathe. Measures include voluntary buyouts, razing of buildings, easements, zoning changes, and moving structures.

Here's a shock: Bobby Junior is wrong about seed oils

Scientists Uncover Surprising Benefits of Omega-6

By Fatty Acid Research Institute

A recent study published in the journal Nutrients sheds new light on the ongoing debate surrounding omega-6 fatty acids and their potential role in inflammation.

Public concern over seed oils has been growing, largely because many of these oils are rich in linoleic acid (LA), an essential omega-6 fatty acid. Critics argue that Western diets are overloaded with LA, suggesting this shift is a key contributor to many modern health issues.

According to this view, elevated levels of LA are believed to drive chronic inflammation. But is there solid evidence that consuming more LA — and having higher levels of it in the bloodstream — actually leads to increased inflammation?

Investigators relied on data from the Framingham Offspring Study, a well-known research cohort from the Boston area. The Framingham Offspring Study is a landmark longitudinal research initiative that follows the children of participants in the original Framingham Heart Study to investigate genetic and lifestyle factors influencing cardiovascular and metabolic health. 

Launched in 1971, it has provided decades of valuable insights into chronic disease risk and prevention. The cohort’s rigor and continuity make it one of the most trusted sources for understanding long-term health trajectories.

Budget Bill Massively Increases Funding for Immigration Detention

Congress funds Trump concentration camps

Lauren-Brooke Eisen, Brennan Center for Justice

Donald Trump’s budget bill will codify much of Trump’s immigration agenda, drastically changing the landscape of immigration enforcement and detention. 

Significantly, the bill funds a giant immigration detention apparatus that would likely be difficult to dismantle under future presidents. 

This new money comes as the administration is thwarting attempts at congressional oversight of detention conditions — and alongside new levels of cruelty directed at undocumented immigrants.

The legislation makes U.S Customs and Immigration Enforcement the largest federal law enforcement agency, giving it $45 billion for building new detention centers in addition to $14 billion for deportation operations. It also includes $3.5 billion for reimbursements to state and local governments for costs related to immigration-related enforcement and detention.

The bill funds an expansion to approximately double immigrant detention capacity, from about 56,000 to potentially more than 100,000 detention beds. Private prison firms — many of which were significant financial supporters of GOP candidates for Congress as well as the president’s campaign — will reap major financial benefits from this spending, as nearly 90 percent of people in ICE custody are currently held in facilities run by for-profit firms.

What Trump’s budget says about his environmental values

That he doesn't have any?

Stan Meiburg, Wake Forest University and Janet McCabe, Indiana University

To understand the federal government’s true priorities, follow the money.

After months of saying his administration is committed to clean air and water for Americans, Donald Trump has proposed a detailed budget for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for fiscal year 2026. The proposal is more consistent with his administration’s numerous recent actions and announcements that reduce protection for public health and the environment.

To us, former EPA leaders – one a longtime career employee and the other a political appointee – the budget proposal reveals a lot about what Trump and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin want to accomplish.

According to the administration’s Budget in Brief document, total EPA funding for the fiscal year beginning October 2025 would drop from US$9.14 billion to $4.16 billion – a 54% decrease from the budget enacted by Congress for fiscal 2025 and less than half of EPA’s budget in any year of the first Trump administration.

Without taking inflation into account, this would be the smallest EPA budget since 1986. Adjusted for inflation, it would be the smallest budget since the Ford administration, even though Congress has for decades given EPA more responsibility to clean up and protect the nation’s air and water; handle hazardous chemicals and waste; protect drinking water; clean up environmental contamination; and evaluate the safety of a wide range of chemicals used in commerce and industry. These expansions reflected a bipartisan consensus that protecting public health and the environment is a national priority.

Evolution in action

There's a certain symmetry to this