Sunshine Patriots and Summer Soldiers

Posted on September 30, 2026 by bpriddy

There is only one way the average citizen can stand up to Donald Trump and his increasingly repressive acts:

Vote against any candidate who either supports his administration or who lacks the courage to speak against it.

We will lose some good Republican office holders in November not because they are incompetent but because they are silent. As Thomas Paine wrote in Common Sense in 1776:

Voters should evaluate their candidates with much greater thought and care this time, more than any time we have experienced. They and the state and the nation will be well-served by allowing their inner Independent to emerge and evaluate each candidate on both sides of the ballot with thought and concern.

We do not advocate wholesale rejection of the Republicans. A Democrat might have less to offer to voters and should not be elected solely because that candidate has a D above their column. Likewise, individual Republicans should not be solely evaluated because of voter hostility toward the President. Think. Evaluate.

At the same time, this is no time to be a summer soldier and a sunshine patriot. There must be a strong message from the citizens of this country that blind loyalty to Donald Trump carries a cost.

We have lived through the completely unnecessary election disaster that his demand for another Republican congressional district has caused with the Secretary of State turning himself into a pretzel trying to defend his actions and his party’s decisions supporting Trump’s wishes.

If I was a Republican candidate for the General Assembly, whether as a new person running for a House seat or a House member hoping move up to the Senate, I would look at the overwhelming rejection of two GOP amendments in August, the dropping survey figures for the President and for our Governor, the furor over congressional districts, and sense that approval of Republican proposals on the November ballot might not go well and I would carefully consider what kind of lawmaker I will promise to be—

—and then hope I get a chance to keep that promise, knowing that in just two years as a State Representative I will have a record no matter what I say I am for in this election.

This is a time for candidates on both sides of the aisle to honestly evaluate who they are. It is not enough for a Democrat to run on the concept that he or she is not a Republican. It is not enough for a Republican to remain silent about current times and issues or to deny what they have done to contribute to them.

This is a time to start over for some, perhaps many, of our lawmakers to convincingly promise not to be who they have been and for others to be specific about what they want to do that will be better than what has been done.

It is not true that in politics a leopard cannot change his spots. Whether that leopard can be convincing in trying to do so is for voters to decide.

It is American to vote back and forth on the ballot. We are living the danger of determining fitness of office only on the basis of an R or a D. Do not be afraid to cross party lines. Your vote is secret. Only you will know. Voters must exercise their conscience when their party’s candidate will not exercise his.

Whether voters realize it or not, the future of our state is very much in their hands in November.

We voters should keep in mind the words of Lincoln in his address to a joint session of Congress in 1862:

“We of this Congress and this administration will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance, or insignificance, can spare one or another of us.” What was good advice for Congress at the start of the Civil War is good advice for the electorate today. These are dangerous, historic, times and we must remember, as Lincoln also said 164 years ago, “We cannot escape history.”

For generations we have failed to recognize the value of what we have obtained too cheaply and esteemed too lightly.

A President who has no loyalty to this nation and its people but only to himself is an albatross around the necks of many candidates who have not or will not stand apart from him and in their silence sanction the evil that he is and that he does.

Our preachers tells us it is never to late to repent and it is never too late to respect the truly penitent. That’s a good point to think about in the voting booth.

History will measure us severely by the choices we make in November.

(Image credit: libquotes.com)

A Nation of Laws

Posted on September 23, 2026 by bpriddy

The spotlight on our court system has been glaring in the last few weeks as the dispute about our congressional districts has intensified and, as we write this, might be in its final throes. Nationally we have a President and his supporters who have launched strong personal attacks against judges at all levels who disagree with their aims.

Our legal system requires attorneys to represent even the worst of us as well as the best and judges who must find justice from within the passionate arguments on behalf of each.

The annual meeting of the Missouri Bar and Judicial Conference held in Kansas City last week featured a luncheon address by Missouri Supreme Court Chief Justice W. Brent Powell. We think his remarks alluding to our times and the judiciary that is immersed in the issues of our times are appropriate to pass along. They are being passed along in hopes we might better understand the role our court system must play, particularly in divisive and threatening times—and how we as those lay people might be better served if we lived by those principles, too.

Powell began by readministering the oath of admission attorneys take upon joining the Missouri Bar, allowing them to legally practice law. One of those in the audience with his right hand upraised was his father. We have done some very light editing for context.

Taking our solemn oath places us in a distinct position of honor and responsibility. Honor, because of the prestige our profession holds in our society – and responsibility, because as attorneys, we are entrusted to tend to the vast legal needs of our fellow citizens and community.

I find it especially fitting to reaffirm our oaths now, 250 years after our nation declared its independence from England. Lawyers played a vital role in that monumental event. Nearly half the colonists who signed the Declaration of Independence were lawyers; many lawyers were elected to serve in the Continental Congress; and lawyers were instrumental in drafting our constitution and shaping our nation’s government. For this reason, our profession is a living bridge, linking us to a time when our founders transformed revolutionary ideals of self-governance and democracy into a new government for a new nation.

Our oath…carries forward the same promises our founding lawyers drafted into our Declaration of Independence and constitution. One of those lawyers was John Adams, who famously proclaimed our nation would be a “government of laws, not of men.” This simple proclamation defined who we are as a people: bound together – not by a monarch or politician – but by the laws enacted through our own self-government. We, as a people, agree to be governed and abide by this law because the law emanates from ourselves. This is our social contract enshrined in our federal and state constitutions, ensuring the rule of law – not autocrats or tyrants – govern our way of life.

But we all must recognize what Adams and our legal predecessors understood: for our government to survive and thrive, the rule of law – this foundation on which we all coexist – must be guarded continuously and preserved purposefully. Recognizing the importance of this civic virtue, Benjamin Franklin famously remarked we have a republic, if we can keep it. This responsibility – the responsibility to preserve our republic – falls to us and all our brothers and sisters in our profession…

One of the first and paramount obligations our oath places upon us is to support the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of Missouri. This dual allegiance protects the grand experiment of federalism and the balance of governmental power our founders envisioned. Together, those constitutions establish a system of governance balancing authority between federal and state sovereigns and among three branches of government. They also preserve for all citizens the right to self-governance and guarantee their individual rights.

This balance of governmental authority rests on a precarious fulcrum. The power reserved for our citizens, and the rights guaranteed to them, can easily be overlooked and abused. The scales can also be tipped – improperly shifting power among government authorities. Our oath requires us to safeguard this delicate balance, ensuring neither the people’s rights nor the authority bestowed upon each of our three branches of government are trampled or ignored. This is our collective role in a constitutional republic built on checks and balances.

But today, we face threats – threats from those who seek to detract from the ideals of our republic and to undermine faith in our sacred institutions – including our legal profession and our courts. Unfortunately, some of these threats originate from within our own ranks. We must respond to these threats as our founders responded to the tyranny of an autocrat. It is incumbent on all of us as lawyers and judges to rise up and defend our constitutions and the rule of law.

We must vigorously and emphatically advocate the values of our republic by educating our fellow citizens about how laws are passed, how courts work, how judges make decisions, and how we are bound by these laws and court decisions – even when we may legitimately disagree with them. We owe our allegiance to the constitution and the law, not to our personal or political preferences – even, and especially, when doing so conflicts with our own views and beliefs.

For this reason, the trust endowed in us is extraordinary. Individuals trust their doctors with their health and wellbeing. They trust their accountants and bankers with their money and financial security. And they trust architects and engineers with the soundness of the structures and products they design and build. But they trust lawyers and judges…with the systems and institutions to provide the just and fair society in which we all live.

This trust is immense and carries with it an equally somber recognition – that we must continue to earn that trust every day, through every action we take and every word we speak, to prove to our fellow Missourians we lawyers can carry the weight of their trust.

How we prove we are worthy of this trust is demonstrated in the words of our oath. We promise to maintain the respect due to courts of justice, judicial officers and members of our profession. We promise to conduct ourselves with dignity. We promise never to mislead a judge or jury by any artifice of false statement of fact or law. And we promise to conduct ourselves in accordance with the rules of professional conduct.

Stated simply, our oath as lawyers instructs us to always act with the dignity and uprightness our profession demands. It applies not only inside conference rooms and courtrooms but in the community as well. Being a lawyer is not just a job; it must be who we are and what defines us as professionals. If we act dishonorably, we cannot expect anyone else to honor our legal institutions and the rule of law. If we act dishonestly, we cannot be surprised when others treat our laws and courtrooms with disrespect and disdain.

Never forget it was tyranny of a monarch an ocean away that led the colonists to declare our independence, but history is full of lessons of tyranny reemerging and thriving when citizens lose faith in justice and the rule of law. Citizens rely on us as lawyers and judges – as professionals sworn to uphold the law – to make justice happen every day in every community in our state. Every transaction and every trial conducted fairly and openly reinforces the foundation laid in 1776. In this way, our profession – and our professionalism – are critical to preserving public trust in government.

But professionalism does not require grandiose deeds or acts – and can be accomplished in quiet, effortless ways. We must seek to solve disputes, not create them. We must act with grace, honor, and a moral and just purpose. We cannot let zealous advocacy devolve into malice, acrimony, vitriol, meanness, or nastiness. And in a world in which it is increasingly difficult to tell fact from fiction, and hyperbole from downright lies, it is essential we – as lawyers bound by a common oath – never, ever forget we are bound to tell the truth. Your reputation as an individual lawyer – and the reputation of our entire profession – depends on never letting advocacy get in the way of truth.

I don’t need to tell you that we live in a divided nation and state. This is not a new phenomenon, but technology provides new ways to divide us. Spurred by misinformation, disinformation, and the echo-chamber traps our social media algorithms build, the discord and viciousness in our society has invaded our schools, our churches, and even our family living rooms and dinner tables, where divisiveness was ordinarily absent…

We don’t have to sacrifice our beliefs and values. But we must listen to one another … including those with whom we vehemently disagree. We must show empathy … especially when doing so is uncomfortable. And we must care for others … particularly those we may find distasteful or disdain. These are important lessons I learned from my dad. And it’s what our oath requires of us.

Another lesson I learned from my father is a shared commitment to service. Our oath commits all of us, as a profession, to serve others. Our oath requires us to practice law with consideration for the defenseless and oppressed. This ending to our oath is deeply rooted in our history, as both lawyers and as Americans. Our Declaration of Independence boldly proclaims all people are created equal. Throughout history, it has fallen on lawyers – and judges – to bridge the gap between this founding ideal and the realities in which we live. Because for too many, this promise remains unfulfilled.

The promises secured for us in the Declaration of Independence and our constitution are only as strong as our profession’s ability to deliver them. But today, some of those promises are beginning to collapse around us. Half of Americans think our legal system offers two systems of justice: one for those with money or connections, and one for everyone else. We struggle to provide quality legal services to people in every corner of our state at rates people can actually afford. More than three-quarters of our fellow citizens don’t know where to turn for legal help and they believe they must go to court, draft contracts, probate estates, or get divorced without a lawyer – because they can’t afford one.

With the rise of AI, we must be concerned about pricing ourselves out of our own profession. Everyone in this room understands the value of an attorney in shepherding clients through their legal issues, both inside and outside the courtroom. But a short hop online illustrates the folly of this belief. The internet offers any number of AI “solutions” to address legal needs. But the world-wide web is also full of cautionary tales of what happens when a lawyer or self-represented litigant relies too heavily on AI to “help” them with a case. An AI solution may look like help, it may sound like help, but the whole thing might just be a hallucination. And the types of legal issues people face in their everyday lives – contract disputes, family law issues, probate matters, and other civil disputes – are far too important to be left to hallucinations. People deserve human lawyers like you to assist them with their legal needs.

Make no mistake: AI is here to stay. Every year, every month, every day, and every second, AI continues to revolutionize how things are done, in ways we struggle to comprehend. But we cannot just stand idly by, because others will fill any gap we choose to ignore. Our rules of professional conduct require us to remain vigilant and do our homework – including learning about new technology that may scare us at times.

We also need to do some soul-searching, as a profession. More than ever, the rise of technology requires us all to remember our oath to serve others for the benefit of those in need of affordable legal services. We owe it to our fellow Missourians to demonstrate our value; embrace technology tools appropriately to enhance the services we provide the public; and keep the crucial role of human lawyers intrinsically involved in providing legal services to those who need it…

Our duty is to our clients and the public at large, not our individual concerns. None of us should let personal success make us apathetic toward the needs of our fellow citizens. Instead, we should use our education and privilege to serve others. But giving of oneself – abiding by our oath as lawyers – is not easy. It means devoting our lives to others, overcoming our inherent desire to improve our own condition. I confess, I struggle with this. It’s hard to live up to such a high standard, and far easier to find comfort in serving my own needs and desires.

Fortunately, I have been so very blessed to see my father modeling what being a lawyer is truly all about – diligent, ethical, and honorable service … to his clients, to his profession, and to his community. Throughout his decades of practice, he was a strong advocate, but he also knew how to disagree without being disagreeable, and how to build bridges through compassion and kindness rather than sowing seeds of dissention. In a nutshell, he fulfilled our solemn oath every single day. Let’s all strive to be a lawyer like my father.

If I can ask one thing of all of you – just one thing – endeavor every single day to fulfill the oath you reaffirmed this afternoon. By fulfilling our solemn oath, we can build upon the blueprint of the Declaration of Independence and our constitutions, ensuring the rule of law and our way of life endure for the next 250 years. If we do this one thing, then I have faith and hope the stability of our republic and civil society will be sustained. And you, I, and those who come after us will all be better off because of it.

We appreciate Chief Justice Powell’s remarks, not just in reference to what lawyers and judges should be and should do, but in the kind of citizens all of us should strive to be.

(Photo credit: The Missouri Bar and Google Images)

What’s Left After Contempt and Concession

Posted on September 14, 2026 by bpriddy

Records in the State Supreme Court Historical Society indicate Secretary of State Denny Hoskins’ contempt of court case is the first contempt case before the court since 1878 and might be only the fifteenth in state history, none of which involved a statewide office holder. All of the old cases were appeals of lower court contempt holdings. This could be the first time someone was held in contempt of the Missouri Supreme Court itself.

In my sixty years of reporting in Jefferson City, this is the first contempt of the Supreme Court case that I have ever seen.

Shortly before the court was to return with its finding Thursday afternoon, Hoskins buckled to the inevitable and notified local election officials that the congressional district map approved by the legislature in 2022 would be used in the November election.

His earlier notice said that the Republican gerrymandered districts adopted to please President Trump would be used—although other court rulings had blocked that usage.

The tricky issue of deciding a proper penalty for violating the court’s earlier order forbidding use of the gerrymandered districts was thus avoided. Chief Justice W. Brent Powell noted that Hoskins could purge himself of his previous statement and orders and that he had done so with his letter to election authorities. The contempt ruling stands but there will be no punishment from the court. Whether feelings of voters when Hoskins is up for re-election in two years will take their due is something we’ll have to wait for.

There might be many bottom lines from this series of actions. Legislative Republicans are 0-for-3 on major public policy decisions this year with two really hot issues on the ballot in November—

Amendment 3 prohibits abortion in most cases, and blocks gender transition procedures for people younger than 18. The amendment would overturn a more pro-choice amendment adopted by voters in 2024 after a petition campaign generated enough signatures for a ballot position. It got about 52% of the vote.

Amendment 6 says the legislature cannot change a law proposed by a petition and approved by voters without 80% percent of the voters agreeing with the change.

The other proposition is the one that upholds the gerrymandered redistricting plan, proposition A. What all of this fuss and feathers has resolved is that voters still can approve the new districts by adopting proposition A, which will make the districts available in the 2028 elections but not useful in protecting President Trump from a House and/or Senate controlled by Democrats after November’s election.

Republicans could go 0 for 6 this year on ballot issues if the People Not Politicians movement maintains its momentum or, with these court rulings, picks up strength.

There still remains one piece of absurdity in this ugly worship of The Donald.

A few hours before the court’s hearing and its ultimate ruling on contempt, fourteen members of the legislature threatened the court with impeachment.

The seven judges didn’t even blink when hearing of this threat. They not only went ahead with the hearing and found Hoskins in contempt.

So now what?

The only thing goofier than the threat would be for these fourteen Republicans (and their colleagues) to file articles of impeachment in this week’s veto session. The court’s lack of interest in their threat gives them a choice: Look foolish for filing the threat or look foolish for going ahead with it.

How would they go about impeaching and convicting the court—all seven members?

Guess who conducts the trial of an impeached state official? The Supreme Court, that’s who. Impeaching one at a time leaves the other six to run a trial of a colleague, a pretty goofy idea. Maybe they could import the supreme court of a surrounding state to do it.

Goofiness seems to be the order of the day.

Will their threats generate votes for them and their party in November? It’s hard to see that it will because of national surveys showing that President Trump’s behavior as a political bully isn’t going over anymore and in fact is turning people off, way off. .

What we have here, folks, seems to be that too many Republicans are lowering the anchor of the ship of state, not realizing the chain is wrapped around their own ankles.

The Republicans have handed Democrats wheelbarrows full of campaign issues that the D’s can use in the next two months or so to pound on R’s.

And in two more years, when the Governor, Attorney General (who represented Hoskins), and Hoskins come up for re-election along with legislative Republicans seeking re-election or election to a higher office, the Democrats still will be well-armed.

Republicans need to do some serious image repair. They need to pick up a major issue (or many major issues) that will sympathetically resonate with the people.

(Picture credit: Front row (from left): Judge Fischer, Chief Justice Powell, Judge Ransom; Back row (from left): Judge Gooch, Judge Wilson, Judge Broniec, Judge Russell —Missouri Supreme Court; Goofy—Etsy)

Chaos

Posted on September 9, 2026 by bpriddy

(Two important updates to this posting occurred overnight as the gigantic mess that will be our congressional elections in November has gotten even worse) Look for the boldface additions in this revised–for the third time—column).

The two people in this household are going to vote in the November election. As of today, we are not sure who we will want to be our member of Congress because we aren’t sure which congressional district we will be in.

Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh might have settled it yesterday when he flatly rejected the appeal of the Missouri Supreme Court’s ruling that the old districts will be used for the election. Kavanaugh is a Trump appointee and we would not be in this mess if Trump had not asked his loyal Republican-dominated legislature to skew congressional districts to help keep him in power.

However, shortly after that, a lower federal court judge ruled the other way. We went to bed last night glad the day was over but knowing it is likely today will produce more political and judicial mayhem that none of us deserves but that all of us are getting, thanks to a President thinks our political system was invented just to keep him happy.

But since then, things have really heated up.

Shortly after that, the Chief Federal District Judge of this region, Stephen Clark, ruled the other way, issuing a temporary restraining order telling Hoskins to use the gerrymandered map while the case goes forward in the federal court system. We went to bed last night glad the day was over but knowing it is likely today will produce more political and judicial mayhem that none of us deserves but that all of us are getting, thanks to a President thinks our political system was invented just to keep him happy.

Governor Kehoe thanked the judge for providing “much needed clarity for Missouri voters and the election process.” Since yesterday was the last day to make changes to the November ballot, he said, “the Missouri First Map will be used in the general election.”

He said, “Voters and candidates deserve consistency, certainty, and not to have the rules changed between elections,” an observation that is interesting because that is exactly what President Trump, the legislature, and Governor Kehoe have done “between elections” in 2024 and 2026.

The scramble yesterday has left the Missouri Supreme Court, shall we say, in a state of high urinary agitation. We awoke this morning to read a Missouri Independent report that the court has ordered Secretary of State Denny Hoskins to appear before it in person at 10 o’clock tomorrow morning to show why he should not be held in contempt of court for telling election officials to go ahead with a district map the court has forbidden him from using. It seems Hoskins had, as soon as Clark’s order came down, certified the official state ballot using the rejiggered congressional districts and sent the order, and his certification of the districts out to local election officials. He says the Clark order, in effect, overrules the Missouri court’s order.

The Chief Justice of the Missouri Supreme Court wants Hoskins to explain exactly why his actions “is not an affirmative violation” of the court’s injunction which has the backing of a United States Supreme Court judge (who ranks higher on the judicial food chain than Clark) and, “if he is not willing to comply with this court’s injunction, he should take no action in all things related to the congressional district map until guidance is received from a higher court…”

Chief Justice W. Brent Powell made it clear this hearing is a face-off between Hoskins and the court. Nobody else will be allowed to intervene.

The last time we can recall a sitting state official to answer to the Missouri Supreme Court was when the court tried and convicted Secretary of State Judy Moriarty in 1994 of committing impeachable offenses—-

—–which raises a question about how all of this could eventually play out for Hoskins, should anyone want to make a case of it. If the GOP continues to control the legislature, that question likely is going to be moot.

This whole ugly thing is compliments of the same political party that gave us two amendments that were stomped flat by voters in August, allowed a small number of maverick state senators to produce two or three of the least productive legislative sessions—probably since the Civil War when we had a government supported by the U. S. Army in Jefferson City and a bunch of exiles pretending to be a Confederate government based in Texas, and who so badly fumbled a chance to pass a sports gambling law that the interested parties gave us a constitutional amendment that is of grave disservice to the people of Missouri

Republicans have no one to blame but themselves if voter in November seek retribution for this craziness by promoting many GOP lawmakers back to private life. Will the majorities in the House and Senate switch in November? Probably not. But we’ll be watching to see if the two-third majorities and the accompanying arrogance that comes with such margins disappears at the hands of voters who think these lawmakers have gone too far.

The Missouri Supreme court has blamed our Secretary of State, who was one of those maverick senators, for this mess. And the court underlined its feelings with a unanimous vote.

The court suspended the congressional district maps drawn because President Trump is afraid he’ll lose control of Congress in November and asked the Missouri legislature to approve maps that will oust one of our senior congressmen, Emanuel Cleaver of Kansas City. That would giving the GOP one more Congressman from Missouri who can protect Trump.. The legislature was more than happy to oblige him.

But then some citizens who felt such manipulation of the political system more focused on government of one person, by one person, and for one person is not exactly what this country is all about. They went around and collected signatures of about 300,000 other dissenters demanding the new map not go into effect until the people had agreed to it. The number of signatures was more than adequate to put the question on the ballot.

Secretary of State Denny Hoskins apparently found some wiggle room in a federal district judge’s ruling last December that the new map would be suspended if the petition had enough signatures and a vote could be held on overturning that map. The judge’s opinion noted, however, that Hoskins believed he had the power to declare the petition itself was unconstitutional.

The Missouri Supreme Court told him, twice, that he had to rule on whether the petitions had enough signatures to put the issue on the ballot.

Rather than do that before the primary election that used the questionable new districts, Hoskins waited until the primary election was already underway before proclaiming the petition unconstitutional.

The Missouri Supreme Court said he screwed up, saying there actually are no new districts because opponents had gathered adequate signatures to have an election on their legitimacy. Unless voters approved the districts, they did not exist.

But Hoskins let the election proceed with the new districts. So now we have candidates in our eight districts and—-

Justice Kavanaugh’s terse rejection of the districts is a second loud slap in the face of Hoskins and the obedient Trumpicans in our Capitol, coming after our Supreme Court’s ruling.

As we understand it these two rulings, we have no districts except the old ones and the candidates did not run in the old districts. They ran in the new ones which the court says don’t exist. The Missouri court has said rather clearly that Hoskins is responsible for any confusion the people of Missouri might have.

That’s a very heavy load of responsibility. Hoskins will be up for re-election in 2028. Missourians are likely to be reminded of these events.

Out of this complicated embarrassment so far, however, is something vitally important. The Constitutional right of Missouri citizens “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” to enact laws through a petition process and to overturn offensive laws enacted by the people who are supposed to represent us has been upheld. The court decisions have upheld Missourians’ right to initiative and petition in overwhelming numbers. (Next year will be the 120^th anniversary of the adoption of initiative and referendum in Missouri. We need to have a big celebration.)

Hoskins disputes the Missouri court’s ruling that he’s the one to blame. He seemed to argue in a radio interview (KFTK) that the Trumpian map should be valid for November because voters used it in the primary election.

—although the State Supreme Court says they (we) voted in illegal and therefore nonexistent districts. Justice Kavanaugh obviously didn’t buy Hoskins’ arguments either.

We must confess that we are as befuddled as most people are and we’re not convinced we understand all of this folderol or if we have explained the situation correctly.

If the districts were not legal, then there actually was no congressional primary election, right? And those of us who voted were just rehearsing for the real thing. Can that be correct? Are we headed to November with candidates nominated in a non-election?

And since the petition issue gathered enough signatures to merit a vote and no districts, old or new, will be established until voters have decided on the petition issue, how can we vote for our congressional delegation in November?

If it turns out that one of the winners in August is not a resident of the old district that might be in effect in November—-

Well?

I feel as if I am wading in the dark through an endless swamp of mashed potatoes and the legislature led me to it. Lawmakers are back at the Capitol for a day or two next week to consider overriding any of the Governor’s vetoes from the spring session. Can they, will they, do anything to restore some orderliness in our state political system?

To paraphrase an old saying:

“To err is human. To really screw up things you need a politician.”

I am now going to take some aspirin and lie down and hope this all passes.

(picture credit: Demotivators)

The People Will Not Be Defeated

Posted on May 18, 2026 by bpriddy

I walked out of the Missouri Supreme Court building last Tuesday and saw large crowd across the street chanting:

“The People,

United

Will Not Be Defeated.”

It was a “People Not Politicians” demonstration urging the court to throw out the new congressional district map enacted by the legislature to protect President Trump from a new Congress that would hold him more responsible for his acts than his timid GOP Solons are doing now.

Later the group crossed the street and paraded in front of the court building.

—-and about four hours later, the court ruled against People Not Politicians on all three cases it had heard that morning.

Please do not take this to suggest people should not gather for this purpose, but protest demonstrations and marches in these situations are of limited utility.

Rallies to get and to keep people involved in public policy-setting are important. But in terms of forcing a change in direction by government far more is required.

Every year during a legislative session, thousands of people representing one cause or another, or one profession or another, organize “Day at the Capitol” events when they bus in dozens of people, many of whom have no experience in Capitol politics, to go to legislative offices to make their cases. For many, perhaps most, of these people, this is the only time they relate to their lawmaker, who usually is in the chamber working on legislative business. So they drop off some brochures or information packets and then check their lists to see whose office they will visit next.

Days at the Capitol join demonstrations and marches, in general, with having little lasting impact.

Here are some things that do work:

Money.

Sayings such as “Money greases the wheels of politics,” or “Money is the lifeblood of politics” are, unfortunately, part of our system of government. This is not to say that those we elect can be bought, at least not directly. But money buys lobbyists. Money for campaigns speaks loudly.

It is often said that money doesn’t buy politicians; it just buys access to politicians. However, the more access you can have, the more influence you might be able to exercise. That is the world they live in. It is wrong, however, to assume that all who live in this world are corrupt. In all my forty-some years of covering Missouri government, probably no more than twenty legislators and state officers were sent to prison or removed from their jobs, less than two percent of all of the people I covered in the pressure cooker of Missouri politics.

When your legislators drive across the bridge or under the viaducts to enter Jefferson City, they are entering a bubble that has a tendency to be all-absorbing of their attention. It is a special world where the focus of those working in it is entirely on the issues in front of them. Home can become a long ways away. The pressure is enormous and it grows even greater as the pages are peeled off of the calendar.

On Tuesday, the day the Supreme Court heard the redistricting cases, the House and the Senate met for the 68^th time this year.

The session ended after 71 working days. Here’s what the lawmakers were facing: 1,002 Senate bills and resolutions introduced this year and 2,101 bills and resolutions introduced in the House—by our count. That’s 3,103 proposals, many of them duplicates or more.

The legislative process becomes a highly-selective and highly subjective matter. What goes on in the Capitol is an intense winnowing that will produce, in a good year, 100-125 agreements on legislation. This year, the total was about 90, a big improvement over recent years when a few members of the Senate decided that if they could not get their way, the large majority wouldn’t get anything done.

About twenty of those bills each year detail the way the state will spend money on programs and services that people want or need. Even the most skilled lobbyist for even the wealthiest interest group realizes that legislative sessions resemble a crap shoot. Few things are guaranteed from the outset. Not even the governor is guaranteed approval of his issues.

It is easier to get some things approved when one party occupies two-thirds of both seats in the House and Senate—such as the protect-the-President redistricting plan upheld by the Supreme Court last Tuesday. Many of the protestors likely would have asserted that some words carved into a Missouri Senate wall were clearly ignored: “Nothing is politically right that is morally wrong.”

Noble words carved into Capitol stone are easier said than honored at times, in a system that is shaped by humans.

None of this should be considered excuses. It’s just the real world.

While all of this might sound as if there is no hope for principled protestors such as the People Not Politics demonstrators Tuesday, there is hope.

The congressional districts are drawn presumably to change our 6-2 Republican delegation in the United States House to 7-1. Even some Republicans have admitted publicly that the new maps should not be considered a predetermined result. They know a lot of public opinion can be swayed between now and November.

If that is going to be the case, Tuesday’s marchers will have to be more effective at home than they have been in Jefferson City. One day at the Capitol cannot replace many well-organized days on the streets at home. Their cause is more persuasive among the voters than among the lawmakers and judges. No Republican candidate should feel comfortable in their re-election campaigns this year, especially since the court has upheld that map. Donald Trump can be his party’s own worst enemy regardless of congressional district lines. The PNP demonstrators can become a formidable force if they organize at home and advocate against those who support President Trump in spite of all of his sins—especially those who passed the redistricting bill that manipulates our political system.

The battleground is not in front of the Supreme Court building. It is in the cities and counties of each congressional district and each legislative district. Redistricting can become a major issue against the party that did it, whether it’s the legislators who drew the lines or the congressional candidates who want to take advantage of them.

The Republicans have gotten what they wished for. But you know the old saying about being careful that what you wish for because what you got can become an issue of voter retribution.

This is not a suggestion that all of the rascals should be turned out. It is, instead, an observation of how those opposed to the redistricting scheme can turn it against the scheme’s advocates and a warning to those advocates to be prepared in their own defense.

In 2016, Senator Ted Cruz told ABC’s Face the Nation, ““If we’re given the White House and both houses of Congress and we don’t deliver, I think there will be pitchforks and torches in the streets. And I think quite rightly,” a metaphorical reference to England’s Peasant’s Revolt of 1381 against a perceived unjust government.

Will the Supreme Court marchers from last Tuesday go home and become the organizers and the activists—the pitchfork and torch carriers—whose biggest and most effective protest will be at the ballot box?

Will they create a united people who will not be defeated?

We’ll all see an answer in a little more than five months.

Putting Politics Back Into Our Highest Courts

Posted on April 15, 2026 by bpriddy

Most Missouri judges are elected, but years ago the state and its people decided the highest courts should be as isolated from partisan politics as possible. That nationally-recognized plan is under attack in the Missouri Legislature this year—and the process that created that insulated system also is under attack.

The decision was made after the collapse of the Pendergast political machine that so dominated Democratic politics in Missouri in the first forty years of the Twentieth Century that it could field a substitute for a gubernatorial candidate who died three weeks before the election and push previously obscure Platte County Judge Guy B. Park to a win by the third largest margin in state history up to that time, 61 percent of the vote against the incumbent Lieutenant Governor, Edward H. Winter. (That winning percentage had been exceeded only twice before—Thomas Fletcher with 70.3 percent in 1864 and by John Miller, who had no opposition in1828) or after, by Warren Hearnes’ 62% in 1964 and John Ashcroft’s election in 1988 with 64.2%)

Members of Missouri’s appeals courts—which includes the Supreme Court—had been elected throughout state history until citizens had had enough of Kansas City political boss Tom Pendergast’s grip on state politics. A citizen-led initiative led to voter approval of “The Missouri Plan” in 1940. The legislature tried to overturn it but voters rejected the effort. The plan was made part of the Missouri Constitution when the present document was adopted in 1945.

The plan applied to the Supreme Court and the appeals court as well as lower courts in a few counties. The changes were put in our Constitution in 1976.

Missouri rarely has been a leader in political thinking but this is a case where the state should be proud—because about forty states have adopted a version of The Missouri Plan which established a non-partisan Appellate Judicial Commission that takes applications for open judgeships handle appeals from local courts. The commission reviews applications for appellate judgeships and forwards three names to the governor who appoints one of them. The Senate does not confirm the appointment, another step to limit political influence in the makeup of our highest courts.

The commission is made up of three members of the Missouri Bar and three private citizens appointed by the Governor. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court chairs the commission.

The Missouri House Committee on General Laws has voted 8-6 to recommend the full House pass a bill junking the nonpartisan court plan and giving appointment power to the Governor with confirmation by the Senate.

If you think the similar system used to let a President pick U. S. Supreme Court Justices and federal district judges is the best way to have a non-partisan court system un-influenced by partisan factors, this bill is right up your alley. If the spectacle we see every time a new Supreme Court Justice is nominated approaches or exceeds your unbearable level, this bill is toxic.

When you have a President and a Senate under one party’s control, or a Governor and a state senate under one party’s control, there is room for discomfort about the fairness of the judicial system and whether money influences those who must confirm nominations.

Missouri no longer has political bosses such as Tom Pendergast, but it has something as bad—big-money political donors who have tried to buy state laws through the legislature or to buy sections of the state constitution (think of $43 million spent to get sports betting passed in 2024).

Moneyed political influence in shaping the laws mixed with political influence in determining the laws’ constitutionality is a dangerous combination.

There is a second dangerous move afoot in the two-thirds Republican General Assembly. It’s the proposal saying no petition issue can be approved by voters unless it gets majorities in every one of our eight congressional districts. That means one district in which an issue fails by one vote can render positive votes in the other seven districts meaningless. Call it what it is—tyranny by the minority.

On one hand, our politically-independent upper judiciary is being threatened. On the other hand is a new threat—to the concept of majority rule, replaced with a one-eighth majority tyranny. Those backing this scheme certainly would not hold that no one could be elected to the legislature who did not carry every precinct in their district. Nor would they support the idea that no one could be elected to state office without carrying every legislative district. Or that no one could be sent to Congress without carrying every county in their district.

But they will silence the voice of the people when it comes to taking their grievances against government to the ballot box.

It’s a one-two punch to our democracy. The last time legislative Republicans tried to weaken the plan was 2012. Voters went 76 percent against it.

Fourteen years later they’re trying again. Let’s hope voters aren’t duped this time either.

The Boodle Scandal, part Two

Posted on March 18, 2026 by bpriddy

Monday we promised you an opportunity to see a forgotten Missouri political, one of the most sensational ones of the Twentieth Century. Muckraker Lincoln Steffens described how money can distort public policy, a common and visible public concern today.

What was this scandal about? An innocent everyday-used substance that is part of our diet today. Steffens’ magazine article is long. As you read it, you might think, “Nothing has changed.” We’ll comment afterward what happened to some of the participants in his historic controversy.

Enemies of the Republic

Lincoln Steffens

[Reprinted from McClures, VOL. XXIll, October, 1904 No.6]

THE POLITICAL LEADERS WHO ARE SELLING OUT THE STATE OF MISSOURI, AND THE LEADING BUSINESS MEN WHO ARE BUYING IT – BUSINESS AS TREASON-CORRUPTION AS REVOLUTION

EVERY time I attempted to trace to its sources the political corruption of a city ring, the stream of pollution branched off in the most unexpected directions and spread out in a network of veins and arteries so complex that hardly any part of the body politic seemed clear of it. It flowed out of the majority party into the minority; out of politics into vice and crime; out of business into politics, and back into business; from the boss, down through the police to the prostitute, and up through the practice of law, into the courts; and big throbbing arteries ran out through the country over the State to the Nation-and back. No wonder cities can’t get municipal reform! No wonder Minneapolis, having cleaned out its police ring of vice grafters, now discovers boodle in the council ! No wonder Chicago, with council-reform and boodle beaten, finds itself a Minneapolis of police and administrative graft! No wonder Pittsburg, when it broke out of its local ring, fell, amazed, into a State ring! No wonder New York, with good government, votes itself back into Tammany Hall!

They are on the wrong track; we are, all of us, on the wrong track. You can’t reform a city by reforming part of it. You can’t reform a city alone. You can’t reform politics alone. And as for corruption and the understanding thereof, we cannot run ’round and ’round in municipal rings and understand ring corruption; it isn’t a ring thing. We cannot remain in one city, or ten, and comprehend municipal corruption; it isn’t a local thing. We cannot “stick to a party,” and follow party corruption; it isn’t a partizan thing. And I have found that I cannot confine myself to politics and grasp all the ramifications of political corruption; it isn’t political corruption. It’s corruption. The corruption of our American politics is our American corruption, political, but financial and industrial too.

Miss Tarbell is showing it in the trust, Mr. Baker in the labor union, and my gropings into the misgovernment of cities have drawn me everywhere, but, always, always out of politics into business, and out of the cities into the state. Business started the corruption of politics in Pittsburg; upholds it in Philadelphia; boomed with it in Chicago and withered with its reform; and in New York, business financed the return of Tammany Hall. Here, then, is; our guide out of the labyrinth. Not the political ring, but big business,-that is! the crux of the situation.

Our political corruption is a system, a regularly established custom of the country, by which our political leaders are hired, by bribery by the license to loot, and by quiet moral # support, to conduct the government of city, state, and nation, not for the common good, but for the special interests of private business. Not the politician, then, not the bribe-taker, but the bribe-giver, the man we are so proud of, our successful business man-he is the source and the sustenance of our bad government. The captain of industry is the man to catch. His is the trail to follow.

We have struck that trail before. Whenever we followed the successful politician his tracks led us into it, but also they led us out of the cities-from Pittsburg to the State Legislature at Harrisburg; from Philadelphia, through Pennsylvania, to the National Legislature at Washington. To go on was to go into state and national politics and I was after the political corruption of the city ring then. Now I know that these are all one. The trail of the political leader and the trail of the commercial leader are parallels which mark the plain, main road that leads off the dead level of the cities, up through the States into the United States, out of the political ring. into the System, the living System of our actual government. The highway of corruption is the ” road to success.”

Almost any State would start us right, but Missouri is the most promising.

Continue reading →

Tantrum

Posted on February 2, 2026 by bpriddy

I am getting tired of Government by Tantrum.

Our Missouri Senate has been an unfortunate participant for several years, some years so badly that some recent legislative sessions were among the most unproductive in state history.

The latest tantrum was last week’s display of political pettiness not at all befitting a chamber that used to be known for its deliberative and far more collaborative approach to governing.

It seems that some senators were so upset because the Missouri Supreme Court had the audacity to rule that the Senate had passed an unconstitutional bill that they forced cancellation of the annual State of the Judiciary address by the Chief Justice W. Brent Powell.

That oughta teach that uppity court a lesson.

The State of the Judiciary address goes back to 1974 when Judge Robert T. Donnelly asked for the legislature’s support of modernizing the court system. It was the early days for widespread use of computers in government and the court needed more people to use this newer technology to produce a more efficient court system.

But some Republican Senators were filibustering, keeping senators from going to the House of Representatives for a joint session for this year’s speech.

In the past, the Senate (and the House) would just have gone to work writing a bill that didn’t violate the Constitution. But Senator Rick Brattin ranted about “a runaway court” that he claimed was created to be the lesser of the three branches of government. And he threw in some other disrespectful comments not worth repeating here. Senator Adam Schnelting, whose is a licensed realtor and minister, complained of the court’s continued “usurpation of power.” He charged the court had usurped the power of the Senate to pass laws that apparently are above review.

Senator Nick Shroer, who is a lawyer, accused the court of legislating from the bench, in effect vetoing a bill. Somehow he did not think the court should have the power to interpret the law and protect us from serious legislative mischief.

The court ruling, by the way, was 7-0, including three judges appointed by our immediate-past governor, Mike Parson.

State Representative Rudy Veit, a lawyer who practices in Jefferson City, suggested, accurately, that the Senate’s carrying-on was “immature.” He told a reporter that one of the court’s roles is to determine when the legislature doesn’t follow the constitution in writing laws.

He’s right. The Senators are wrong. The founders created three separate branches of government and set up a system of checks and balances that protects citizens from one branch rule.
The legislative branch passes a law. The President or governor can veto it or sign it. If it’s a bad law and arguments against it are sufficient to prove it so, the courts can void it. There is nothing that prohibits a legislative body from rewriting its proposal so that it fits within proper legal guidelines. A mature Senate would be doing that.

The senators’ filibuster that resulted in the cancellation of a speech traditionally short on drama but long on the business of the court system was disrespectful of the court and the constitution.

The courts are government’s referees. Their rulings at the higher levels sometime carry an unspoken message: “Try to do it better next time.” Petulance in the face of such an admonition serves no purpose and delays getting down to work doing better.

The Missouri Senate would be well-served if some of its members demonstrated the kind of maturity that is expected from the deliberative body that senates at the national as well as state level are supposed to be.

Donnie and Nico

Posted on January 7, 2026 by bpriddy

“Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun,” said Chairman Mao as he led his armed struggle/revolution in the 1930s.

Today we have an impulsive, petulant short-attention span child with a pistol who has invaded Venezuela and kidnapped its president and his wife and brought them to our country to face American criminal charges. As is usually the case with Trump, there is little indication that any kind of long-term thinking went into this scheme. He says the United States is going to “run” Venezuela but it is clear there is no plan in place to do so. There are no planeloads of diplomats in Caracas developing a transition plan, no one sent in to calm an uncertain and certainly angry population.

Secretary of State Rubio tried to clarify to a minor degree that we do not plan to “govern” Venezuela only to have Trump double down that we are going to “run” the country. The Washington Post, citing two White House Sources say a personal grudge might be a factor in Trump’s actions. Suggestions had been made that Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Machado should be put in charge of the country. Trump showed no interest in the idea? Why? Because Machado accepted the Nobel Peace Price last year. And we all know that Trump for reasons that only he cannot understand stood no chance anyway.

The Prize Committee cited her “tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela.” She had her detractors including a faction that disagreed with her support of Trump’s oil embargo.

So who IS in charge now?

Vice-President Delcy Rodriguez Gomez has been sworn in as acting president. She has declared the country deserves peace and dialogue, not war and is offering cooperation with the United States. On Saturday however, after the kidnapping, she had a different tone, calling the kidnapping “barbaric” and saying she still considered Maduro the leader of the county. Time and circumstances, however, bring a reality to things. She’s a lawyer and a diplomat who has been Vice President since 2018.

She seems to have put forth somc contradictory messages. On her social media channels Sunday, she said Venezuela wants to develop ‘balanced and respectful international relations…based on sovereign equality and non-interference. She called on Washington to agree with a program “oriented toward shared development, within the framework of international law.”

At the same time, she ordered police “to immediately begin the national search and capture of everyone involved in the promotion or support for the armed attack” by the United States.”

President Trump’s gunboat diplomacy leaves so many questions unanswered.

What does that look like, his plan to run Venezuela, apparently with no interest in “balanced and respectful international relations” and shared development within the framework of international law?” Unfortunately those are not things Trump respects. Will our miliary take the place of the police and other security forces? How long will it take them to become as well-versed as the existing Maduro loyal miliary, police, and security establishment? And how much blood will be shed in gaining military control of the country?

(For that matter we have not heard the human cost of the arrests of the Maduros, or the building damages caused by the raid and whether this county will rebuild the damaged properties.)

Who will the United States install as it military governor, or whatever the title might be?

One would think that a true leader would have these things decided and in place within hours after turning a country upside down. But not our impulsive child-president with a pistol.

There is precedent for this kind of thing but we haven’t heard Trump justify the Maduro arrest by citing the arrest Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega exactly 36 years earlier, to the day. Noriega’s dictatorship had been supported by the U.S. government that had paid him large sums to fight drug trafficking, and to keep an eye on Cuba. He fell out of favor by pushing for Panamanian Independence. There also were suggestions he was taking bribes to let drugs reach our country. President George H. W. Busch sent in American troops to topple the regime. He spent 20 years in an American prison for drug trafficking, and seven years in France for money-laundering. He was returned to Panama with a 60-year term for murder, corruption, and embezzlement. He was 83 when he died in 2017.

The trial arguments will be fascinating. Whether they are similar to the Noriega is something we want to see. The idea of snatching the president of another country, and putting him on trial for violating the laws in a another nation will be an interesting discussion point and one that the United States Supreme Court will have to parse.

If we can arrest Maduro, can we enforce our speed limits on British roads? Can a French person who shoplifts an American product in Paris be prosecuted here? Can the president of a foreign country be charged under American law for exporting a product that is legal in his county to meet a growing demand that product in the United States?

By the way—-what happened to the Fentanyl excuse? Now all of the talk from Trump is about Venezuelan oil.

Associated with that question is this: Can a President of the United States be prosecuted here or anywhere, for failing to reduce the demand for Maduro’s product, in effect sanctioning by inaction its use?

When did Venezuela’s drug captains become more important than the Columbian Drug Cartels that dominated our drug concerns for so long? Trump has indicated Colombia, Cuba, Greenland, Iran, and Mexico are potential targets of someone who agrees that power comes from the barrel of the gun. He drools over Greenland, especially, which has never been a threat of any kind to us.

I probably could cook up more questions but I’ll leave that to you. But here is another one?

If we’re going to run Venezuela, why not make it a 51^st state? If we want Greenland for its rare earths, why would not Venezuela and its oil be the new star on our flag?

Our cynical self has peeled around my shoulder and suggested we would rather have Greenland and Canada because Venezuela has brown people in it, and Canada and Greenland people are white. But, “We’ll worry about Greenland in about two months,” the child with a gun said on Air Force One.

In the meantime, the spotlight is off the Epstein papers for a while. That’s okay. When it swings back, there will be a huge volume of material sifted from the most recently studied papers.

Finally, this note on this topic—Maduro is a bad guy. But is violating international law and other standards the answer to the problems he caused?

And how should NATO respond when his guerillas hit Greenland

Have at it folks. The box below would welcome you comment and concerns. We are, after all, in this world box together.

We All Know What Tomorrow Is

Posted on January 5, 2026 by bpriddy

How can we forget?

I had been asked to keep a pandemic journal because we had no personal journals from the 1918 Spanish Flu Pandemic that told how people survived day by day during that scary time. We share some of those times because there was, at the start, no known medicine to treat whatever it was, and—as was the case with the misnamed Sanish Flu (it could have been the Kansas Flu)—the first advice was to mask up, stay indoors, close public gathering places such as bars, restaurants, churches, etc.

I was working on my Journal on January 5, 2021, watching video of the Trump rally that was becoming more dangerous with every lie that he told. I was not very forgiving of him for years before and I will never forgive him for this day. He remains the most despicable person in public or private life I have ever run across. I added some photos to the entry as they became available and a text of Trump’s incitement to riot a couple of days later so journal reader a century from now (or longer, of course, I hope) will know how our country survived a pandemic but darned near didn’t survive Donald Trump—the first time. As long as there is a United States of America it will be a national shame that he was elected again, and more and more people are understanding that now. Here is how I watched in horror—as I hope you did—what happened that day. Wednesday, January 6, 2021

0-0-0-0-0

I begin this entry at 1:50 p.m. while watching something happen in Washington that neither I nor my citizen ancestors going back to the days of Washington, Jefferson, and even earlier founders could have imagined—thousands of supporters of our president, egged on by him in an hour-long tirade near the White House—have laid siege to the United States Capitol, interrupting the debate on certifying results of the Electoral College. I am watching FOX, the network that has been uncomfortably friendly with our president for years, as some demonstrators are trying to break through the doors into the House of Representatives.

Reporters just said law enforcement officers are guarding the doors with guns drawn, and another of the reports said moments ago that he’s been getting text messages from ambassadors saying this country would be highly critical of other countries if anything such as this happened there.

What we are seeing is appalling. One observer calls it “a breakdown of the constitutional process.” It’s the most significant incursion inside our Capitol since the British attack in 1814. There is no doubt our president stoked this outrage and has been doing it for months, years. This morning, he and his children and other supporters had a rally near the White House. His son, Donald Junior—who hopes to become the next national chairman of the Republican Party—told the crowd that their presence should tell mainline Republicans their day is past. “It should be a message to all Republicans who have not been willing to actually fight, the people who did nothing to stop the steal. This gathering should send a message to them: This isn’t their Republican Party anymore. This is Donald Trump’s Republican Party. We’re going to try and give our Republicans the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.” Then his father ranted for about 90 minutes, speaking to a crowd he had been begging for several days to show up in Washington today. He urged the protestors to go to the capitol.

They did and about an hour after Congress started the process and started dealing with the first protest—of the Arizona results the House and Senate suddenly adjourned. When I saw that happen (on C-SPAN) I switched to CNN and then to FOX because I suspected there was trouble developing.

FOX reporters are as stunned as anybody on the other (less Trumpish) networks by what is unfolding in front of them. Others got into the hallways and office areas.

Protestors get into the capitol and are shown on video walking through Statuary Hall.

One reporter on Pennsylvania Avenue just reported things are becoming increasingly violent in the streets. Senators and Representatives are locked in their offices. The Vice-President, who was presiding over the joint session, has been evacuated. The President apparently is in the oval office where he earlier sent a Tweet criticizing the VP for lacking courage to overturn the election results today. That was after VP Pence told members of Congress he would not try to singlehandedly throw out electoral votes. He had sent a letter to all members of Congress saying, “It is my considered judgment that my oath to support and defend the Constitution constrains me from claiming unilateral authority to determine which electoral votes should be counted and which should not.”

A few minutes ago he tweeted, “Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our country. Stay Peaceful!”

One senator just tweeted a picture of protestors in the Senate Chamber.

The Mayor of Washington has instituted a 6 p.m. curfew.

So far, Josh Hawley has been silent—and he’s one of those who lit this fire several days ago when he announced he would challenge the election results. He was later joined by a dozen others, and the president who “rallied” his supporters in Georgia Monday and who encouraged demonstrators this morning to march on the Capitol.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, interviewed on FOX “cannot be sadder or more disappointed. This is not the American Way. I’m with capitol police; I’ve heard on the radio shots have been fired.” (we later learned a woman had been shot, apparently while with the crowd trying to break into the House chamber.) “This is Un-American, what’s going on.” He called on Trump to make a statement. The president sent out a Tweet shortly after that, about 2:15: “I am asking everyone at the U. S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No Violence! Remember WE are the Party of Law & Order—respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!”

About the same time, Brett Baier on FOX reported Speaker Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer had asked that the National Guard be deployed to clear the protestors.

2:30—FOX shows protestors breaking windows and climbing into the building.

Fox at 2:50 showed a photograph of a demonstrator sitting in the chair in Nancy Pelosi’s office.

The New York Times reported later that night that he’s from Arkansas, Matthew Rosenberg, who left a quarter on the desk and took a personalized envelope from the office. And he could be in very bad trouble. His Congressman, Steve Womack, tweeted about him, “I’m sickened to learn that the…actions were perpetrated by a constituent. It’s an embarrassment to the people of the Third District and does not reflect our values. He must be held accountable and face the fullest extent of the law. This isn’t the American or Arkansas way.” And Arkansas Senator Jim Hendren tweeted “Don’t know this guy, but he needs to go to jail.”

Another photo shows a demonstrator sitting in the Senate President’s chair.

Haven’t seen an I-D of this creep yet.

(all Photos in this post are from Google Images)

2:52—Pelosi and Shumer call on president to go on the air and call on protestors to leave.

2:55—DOD mobilizes troops. A barrier will be set up around the capitol, crowd to be cleared out. And a tight lockdown will be put in place.

2:20—FOX reports at least one person has been shot.

2:20—senate secured and demonstrators are being pushed out of the second and third floors of the rotunda.

3:05—President-elect Biden goes on the air. He began, “At this hour, our democracy is under unprecedented assault, unlike anything we’ve seen in modern times. Let me be very clear: The scenes of chaos at the Capitol do not reflect the true America, do not represent who we are. I’m genuinely shocked and saddened that our nation, so long a beacon of hope and light for democracy, has come to such a dark moment. America’s about honor, decency, respect, tolerance. That’s who we are. That’s who we’ve always been.”

He demanded the president call on his supporters to end an “unprecedented assault” on democracy. “I call on President Trump to go on national television now to fulfill his oath and defend the Constitution and demand an end to this siege.” He urged the protestors to end their occupation of the House and Senate and blamed today’s violence on Trumps refusal to accept defeat. “At their best, the words of a president can inspire. At their worst, they can incite…This is not dissent. It’s disorder. It’s chaos. It borders on sedition, and it must end now. I call on this mob to pull back and allow the work of democracy to go forward.” He finished, “President Trump, step up.”

A few minutes later the White House released a taped message from Trump encouraging people to go home—-but most of his 61-second message was a whine about the election:

“I know your pain, I know you’re hurt. We had an election that was stolen from us, it was a landslide election and everyone knows it, especially the other side. But you have to go home now, we have to have peace. We have to have peace. We have to have law and order we have to respect our great people in law and order. We don’t want anybody hurt. It’s a very tough period of time. There’s never been a time like this where such a thing happened where they could take it away from all of us from me from you from our country. This was a fraudulent election. But we can’t play into the hands of these people. We have to have peace. So go home. We love you. You’re very special. You’ve seen what happens, you see the way others are treated that are so bad and so evil. I know how you feel. But go home and go home and peace.”

We love you. You’re very special. ?????? No condemnation, no criticism. Whine and pat these domestic terrorists you have encouraged on the heads and tell them to go home.

3:40—FOX shows video of woman shot in the capitol. She’s reported critical at a hospital. This is the only reported shot fired and only reported person injured.

It’s dusk in Washington now and reporters and city officials are worried about what will happen tonight, despite the curfew. The Mayor and metropolitan police have announced anybody on capitol grounds after 6 p.m. will be arrested.

4:15: Rep. Steve Scalise says he hopes to get the capitol open and continue the debates tonight. Some other members reportedly feel the same way but we haven’t heard from the Congressional leadership yet.

At some point in all of this, this afternoon, the networks proclaimed John Osoff had won the Georgia Senate election although the margin is so thin that a recount is likely. He’s 33 and will be the youngest member of the Senate although not the youngest person elected. That honor goes to Joseph Biden.

About 4:55 it was announced that police think the capitol is secure again.

About an hour ago, Hawley tweeted: Thank you to the brave law enforcement officials who have put their lives on the line. The violence must end, those who attacked police and broke the law must be prosecuted, and Congress must get back to work and finish its job.

He drew three quick responses:

Samuel George

Sir – you inflicted this by rejecting the vote of the people

Your name will always be associated with today. Cool legacy.

Alex Rozar

This was your doing.

Former President George W. Bush released a statement late this afternoon “A statement on the insurrection at the Capitol,” a pretty plainspoken comment. It’s especially impactful because he has seldom spoken about things since leaving the White House—as past presidents traditionally have done. But there’s no love lost between the Bush family and Trump.

“Laura and I are watching the scenes of mayhem unfolding at the seat of our Nation’s government in disbelief and dismay. It is a sickening and heartbreaking sight. This is how election results are disputed in a banana republic — not our democratic republic.

“I am appalled by the reckless behavior of some political leaders since the election and by the lack of respect shown today for our institutions, our traditions, and our law enforcement. The violent assault on the Capitol — and disruption of a Constitutionally-mandated meeting of Congress — was undertaken by people whose passions have been inflamed by falsehoods and false hopes.

“Insurrection could do grave damage to our Nation and reputation. In the United States of America, it is the fundamental responsibility of every patriotic citizen to support the rule of law. To those who are disappointed in the results of the election: Our country is more important than the politics of the moment. Let the officials elected by the people fulfill their duties and represent our voices in peace and safety.

“May God continue to bless the United States of America.”

Former President Clinton: “Today we faced an unprecedented assault on our Capitol, our Constitution, and our country. The assault was fueled by more than four years of poison politics spreading deliberate misinformation, sowing distrust in our system, and pitting Americans against one another. The match was lit by Donald Trump and his most ardent enablers, including many in Congress, to overturn the results of an election he lost.”

Former President Obama: “History will rightly remember today’s violence at the Capitol, incited by a sitting president who has continued to baselessly lie about the outcome of a lawful election, as a moment of great dishonor and shame for our nation. But we’d be kidding ourselves if we treated it as a total surprise. Right now, Republican leaders have a choice made clear in the desecrated chambers of democracy. They can continue down this road and keep stoking the raging fires. Or they can choose reality and take the first steps toward extinguishing the flames. They can choose America.

“I’ve been heartened to see many members of the President’s party speak up forcefully today. Their voices add to the examples of Republican state and local election officials in states like Georgia who’ve refused to be intimidated and have discharged their duties honorably. We need more leaders like these — right now and in the days, weeks, and months ahead as President-Elect Biden works to restore a common purpose to our politics. It’s up to all of us as Americans, regardless of party, to support him in that goal.”

Jimmy Carter: “This is a national tragedy and is not who we are as a nation. Having observed elections in troubled democracies worldwide, I know that we the people can unite to walk back from this precipice to peacefully uphold the laws of our nation, and we must. We join our fellow citizens in praying for a peaceful resolution so our nation can heal and complete the transfer of power as we have for more than two centuries.”

Twitter has shut down our president’s access for 12 hours because of a message he put out this afternoon. Facebook took down his “We love you” video and has banned him for 24 hours.

The Kansas City Star tomorrow morning available on line this evening:

“No one other than President Donald Trump himself is more responsible for Wednesday’s coup attempt at the U.S. Capitol than one Joshua David Hawley, the 41-year old junior senator from Missouri, who put out a fundraising appeal while the siege was underway.

“This, Sen. Hawley, is what law-breaking and destruction look like. This is what mobs do. This is not a protest, but a riot. One woman was shot and has died, The Washington Post reported, while lawmakers were sheltering in place.

“No longer can it be asked, as George Will did recently of Hawley, “Has there ever been such a high ration of ambition to accomplishment?” Hawley’s actions in the last week had such impact that he deserves an impressive share of the blame for the blood that’s been shed.

“Hawley was first to say that he would oppose the certification of Joe Biden’s Electoral College win. That action, motivated by ambition, set off much that followed — the rush of his fellow presidential aspirant Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and other members of the Sedition Caucus to put a show of loyalty to the president above all else.

“After mayhem broke out, Hawley put out this uncharacteristically brief statement: “Thank you to the brave law enforcement officials who have put their lives on the line. The violence must end, those who attacked police and broke the law must be prosecuted, and Congress must get back to work and finish its job.” So modest, Senator, failing to note your key role in inspiring one of the most heartbreaking days in modern American history. We lost something precious on Wednesday, as condolence notes to our democracy from our friends around the world recognize.

“Among those Hawley got to emulate him was Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall, whose very first act as a member of the world’s greatest deliberative body was to sell out his country by attempting to overturn the outcome of a legitimate election.

“This revolt is the result, and if you didn’t know this is where we’ve been headed from the start, it’s because you didn’t want to know.”

“’The Frankenstein just tore down the doors to the palace,” U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Democrat from Missouri, told The Star. Which happened because, as he said, “One-third of the nation has bought into a bald-faced lie, and they are living in a fact-free America.’

“’I’m currently safe and sheltering in place while we wait to receive further instruction from Capitol Police,’ tweeted U.S. Rep. Sharice Davids, a Democrat from Kansas. ‘Today is a dark day for our country. It’s unacceptable that we have a President who has repeatedly condoned and even encouraged this despicable behavior. It must stop.’”

“We’ll say again what Davids is too polite to say: Trump did not manage this madness on his own. Far from it.

REPUBLICANS KNEW TRUMP’S FRAUD CLAIMS WERE BOGUS

“Just before the putsch began, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said sadly that we need to once again work from an agreed upon set of facts. Only now has he noticed that lying to the public on a daily basis poisons democracy.

“People have taken this too far,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said on Fox News. Until he had to run for cover, McCarthy was fine with this sick stunt.

“U.S. Rep. Andy Barr, a Republican from Kentucky, said in a statement, ‘Today’s events at the U.S. Capitol are tragic, outrageous, and devastating. They are wholly inconsistent with the values of our constitutional Republic.’

“Yes, they are. But they are wholly consistent with Trump’s calls to overturn this election to address nonexistent fraud. And they are wholly predictable, given the willingness of most Republicans to repeat these baseless claims.

“When we wrote that Hawley’s actions were dangerous — and that those of Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt and others were too, in their pretending for far too long that the election wasn’t over — some readers found that absurd. ‘Oh my goodness, how will democracy and our country survive?’ one reader wrote in sarcasm. ‘How will Biden possibly govern? The Star editorial board’s hysteria over nothing is approaching CNN levels.’

“No doubt plenty of Americans will see even this free-for-all in the temple of democracy as defensible. And those of you who have excused all of the brazen lawlessness of this administration can take a little bit of credit for these events, too. They couldn’t have done it without you.

“Hawley, Marshall and other Republicans who upheld Trump’s con about widespread fraud knew all along that his claims were bogus. Now that they’ve seen exactly where those lies have landed us, decency demands that they try to prevent further violence by making clear that Joe Biden did not win by cheating. Please, gentlemen, surprise us.”

(Hawley gestures to the demonstrators this morning as he goes into the Capitol.)

About 9:30 tonight the Senate defeated the challenge to Arizona’s electoral votes 6-93 as several of the original protesting Senators withdrew their support of the challenge after today’s actions.

A TV station in San Diego (KUSI) says it has confirmed the identity of the woman who was shot to death inside the capitol. It says she’s Ashli Babbit, a USAF 14-year veteran who did four tours overseas. The French news agency, AFP, said tonight that Babbit tweeted yesterday about those going to Washington for the rally, “Nothing will stop us….they can try and try and try but the storm is here and it is descending upon DC in less than 24 hours….dark to light!”,

I had said right after the election that one of my greatest concerns was how much damage Trump could do before he left. I’ve written a couple of pretty harsh blog pieces (the most recent one was Monday) about him. I can’t say I was surprised by what happened today—I was surprised by the scope of the events but not that there was mob violence based on his encouragement of it. Now, with two weeks to go before he departs the White House, there are some concerns being voice in tonight’s news coverage about this deranged man with his finger on the nuclear trigger remaining in his job for those 14 days.

Tonight (it’s 10:15 p.m.) there’s talk about whether steps need to be taken under the 25^th Amendment to remove him. And there are reports of several resignations from his staff and possible resignations from his cabinet or high-level staff. There are also a lot of questions being asked about how the mob could have penetrated the Capitol security.

I don’t think I would want to be in the White House tonight. Our president must be in a rage that borders on insanity, not only because Pence hasn’t done his bidding and Congress not only won’t do his bidding and because some of his closest associates are on the verge of bailing out, but because he has no access to s social media, no way to rant and rave at an unprecedented level.

This has been one of those days that will be a “What were you doing when….” question is asked. It’s a landmark day in national memory much as the Kennedy assassinations and the King murder and the Moon landing, and the Twin Towers attack (and in Jefferson City’s case, the 2019 tornado). This one is so special because even the Kennedy and King assassinations didn’t leave people this shaken about the future of our republic.

It’s now after midnight. The TV nets are reporting the streets of Washington are quiet. The day’s toll, according to various reports: Four dead—one shot to death by a police officer and three who had medical emergencies. Fourteen police injured , two hospitalized, one critical.

The joint session re-convened. Two or three protests were offered but none had a Senator’s name on it—the first House member with one protest said the Senators had withdrawn their names. The count stopped with Pennsylvania when several House members and Senators Hawley and Cruz filed a protest. The Senate dispatched with the Hawley-Cruz part of it 7-92. The House is voting down the protest on its side of things but it’s time to call it a terrible day and go to bed.

While all of this has been going on, the common folks were dealing with the coronavirus. MODOH reports yesterday’s positivity rate was 21.5% and hospitalizations just under 2800. Nationally, yesterday was the deadliest day in the pandemic.

0-0-0-0-0

And now, five years later, having witnessed his tragic-for-our nation return and his actions pardoning himself and his “peaceful tourist” followers from any responsibility for those events, having witnessed his and his followers’ efforts to turn Ashley Babbit into a martyr, having watched him try to prosecute those who would have prosecuted him if he had not kept his lies about that day alive and current, we are starting to see many of those who lacked courage to challenge him then and again in 2024 starting to realize what they have unleashed up on our freedoms and our national honor. Overseas, America’s symbol is Trump and it is a symbol that is daily destructive to our position in the world as a creator of and defender of freedom.

History will look at this generation of Americans and will ask, “How could they have gone so wrong?” Scholars will analyze and theorize, none of which will change what we are because of that day and the days since that all of us have witnessed.

It is 2026. Change seems to be coming. But as it evolves, the movements behind Trump and January 6 are returning also, Oath Keepers, Conspiracy theorists, and the Super-Religious Patriots who see power as more holy than service and who see their God in Trump. This is going to be an ugly year. But a year from now the nation will emerge battered, perhaps soon to be without him, although bearing the deep scars he has left. We must believe the Better Angels will outlast him and we then can get about the business of rebuilding our country.

Bob Priddy

A journalist's random observations

Category Archives: courts

Sunshine Patriots and Summer Soldiers

A Nation of Laws

What’s Left After Contempt and Concession

Chaos

The People Will Not Be Defeated

Putting Politics Back Into Our Highest Courts

The Boodle Scandal, part Two

Tantrum

Donnie and Nico

We All Know What Tomorrow Is

REPUBLICANS KNEW TRUMP’S FRAUD CLAIMS WERE BOGUS

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

REPUBLICANS KNEW TRUMP’S FRAUD CLAIMS WERE BOGUS

Share this: