Whither Mike Kehoe?

Before we dive into this project, it’s best that you understand some important points. There is a difference between the person and the politician. The person you’d barbecue hamburgers and drink beer with on a pleasant weekend afternoon must be to a greater or lesser degree someone different when they hold a political office.

In my long reportorial career, I’ve never allowed myself to get too close to someone in political office although there have been a few social occasions in which the notebook was put away and the other took off the necktie and the political title.

We know Mike Kehoe is a personable guy; you don’t become a successful car salesman if you aren’t. Niceness aside, his first two years as Governor have not been good.  He’s 0 for 5 or 6 on ballot issues in the last three months.  For some, he’s been a touch or more too Trumpy.  He’s been an integral part of a Republican-dominated state government that has descended too deeply into ideology and has been clubbed bloody by voters in August and November.

He seems to recognize that. He issued a statement after the elections last week calling for “thoughtful reflection and honest conversations” about what’s next. What’s next might involve finding an issue or two that will strike enough of a public chord to move the first two years closer to the backs of voters’ minds.

“Taking real action on the policies that help families afford to pay their bills, improve the education of our children, and ensure our communities are safe matters much more than well-delivered lines in campaign commercials,” he said the morning after, continuing, “These are the issues that matter most. These are the issues that our party can deliver on.”

—even though it hasn’t delivered on them so far and a cold look at state finances raises questions about how Republicans can afford to reach the goals he set out in his statement.

He says he will run for a second term. But there are within his own party some people who think he can be taken out.  None has announced plans but here are four who might see him as vulnerable and see themselves in his office in 2029, assuming some Democrat doesn’t have a better idea.

Former Attorney General Andrew Bailey has resigned his federal job as assistant director of President Trump’s FBI.  He’s back in the state and playing it cool for now but a lot of Republicans are giving him sideways glances.

State Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick, just elected to a second term, might consider his re-election in a blue wave state a solid credential for something bigger in two years.

Lt. Governor Dave Wansinger might find it hard to ignore 2028 to achieve a higher ambition.

And there is Catherine Hanaway, our latest high visibility Attorney General, the first woman to hold that job and the only woman to be Speaker of the House, a recognized leader who helped bring Republicans to legislative power. It’s easy to forget how young she was when she did that. She could be the most formidable possibility among them.

Let’s watch all five of them for a year—less actually because none can wait that long to make a move. A legislative sessions is rapidly approaching. It will provide time and public exposure for Kehoe and his party to turn things around.

But we also know that this year’s election issues have given Democrats big piles of ammunition to fire in 2028.

If you like to watch politics, this coming year will be great entertainment.

0-0-0-0-0

The Twilight Of Donald Trump

As usual, Donald Trump blames everything and everyone except himself for the blue wave—some have called it a tsunami, a “bluenami,” someone has said, giving us a new political word that will become tiresome on second use. Regardless, it overwhelmed Republicans all the way down from Congress to legislatures and maybe to some county elections.

Trump claims the wave would not have materialized if he had been on the ballot. It seems, however, that this election indicates a majority of politicians and citizens strongly disagree with him. It’s interesting to see the number of high-ranking GOPers who now are citing Trump’s policies and actions with which they never previously disagreed as reasons for voter repudiation.

Trump told FOX News he will accept the results but not the blame. In one interview he said, “I don’t like to consider it a defeat for me; I wasn’t on the ballot. No matter how good the president is, you lose.”

As usual, he did two things. He lied and he avoided taking any responsibility for failure.   He, his policies, and his personality WERE on the ballot.  In fact, during some of his campaign “admire me, forget the candidate” speeches he urged the crowd to imagine he WAS on the ballot.  He will never admit it publicly and we wonder if he is capable of admitting in privately that he IS largely responsible for his party’s political disaster last Tuesday.

But his party cannot make a case that Trump alone is its scapegoat.  The Republican Party’s loyalty to him ultimately led to its ballot box disaster.  They gave him the ship of state and watched quietly as he ran it hard aground.

Various news agencies are reporting that Republicans finally realize their silent acquiescence to his demand for redistricting to protect his congressional majority was a mistake.  But loyal party members cannot ignore that they lacked the courage to tell him “no.”  That and the war and its impact on energy prices which tend to be felt at the gas pump and the grocery store alike and in the diesel prices for farmers and truckers, his nonsensical tariffs, his self-serving schemes became part of the many albatrosses around GOP necks far down the ballot.

Vice-President Vance tiptoed around the issue in a lengthy social media post:

“The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night,” Vance said. Trump also expressed no regrets and said he’d do it again, given the circumstances that he claims exist.  And Vance, ever loyal, left a couple of words out of his explanation.  What he could have said was “The reason we lost is President Trump’s war….”  But he couldn’t bring himself to go that far.

Trump’s colossal ego was on full display at every campaign stop in the last month before the election. The rallies were never about promoting the candidate or candidates. He babbled more about himself and made tasteless non-jokes that he thought showed him to be a charming fellow.  Frankly, we’re surprised more Republican candidates didn’t ask him to stay away.

He says he’ll work with the big Democrat majorities, claiming he has “lots of friends that are Democrats…I’ve already spoken to some of them.” He has not told us who are the ones he claims to have spoken to and as we write his, no Democrat has mentioned receiving any calls.

His now former chief of staff said Trump will keep being Trump, advocating cutting taxes and kicking out aliens.  He has indicated that he’ll rule with vetoes and executive orders.

His appointment of Stephen Miller as his new chief of staff sustains that opinion.

Democrats are in their strongest position ever when it comes to impeaching him a third time and the possibility of removal seems brighter because there’s no reason for Republicans to protect him.  Democrats also have the power to block appointments to fill key vacancies. One of the vacancies might be Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who is contemplating retirement. He’s 76.

If Alito takes that course, it might be best if he does it now.  Trump is going to need all the time he can get to argue for confirmation of Alito’s successor. Hoping the Senate Democrats will let Alito’s successor sail through confirmation are woefully misplaced.

An important question, though, is whether impeaching Trump a third time should be the Democrats’ highest priority. While that lengthy and contentious process goes on, Trump can be doing a great deal more damage.

It will be interesting to see how Republicans try to wash the Trump tar from their hands in the next two years.  Will he be invited to their national convention in ’28?  Probably.  It would be a mistake to let him speak after 10 a.m., though.

Here in grassroots country, we will see how far down the list of state and local government offices Trump’s negatives continue to be felt in 2028.  Voters might remember those who did Trump’s bidding and aside from that, tried to make outlandish changes to the Missouri Constitution.  How the Republicans, with their shrunken majorities in both the Missouri House and the Missouri Senate behave in the next two years could determine whether the majorities shift.

Donald Trump has displayed long coattails that benefitted his party.  Now we wait to see if his party will be comfortable in his coattails for the next two years both in Washington and in Jefferson City.

Start/Stop the Steel 

President Trump’s steel tariffs are supposed to spur a steel industry renaissance in the United States.  He has bragged about the nation’s biggest-ever steel plant that will be built in Iowa but it doesn’t appear his tariffs have meant anything to a 120-year old steel company a day’s drive away in Wisconsin. Or the 25-year old steel plant across the river from St. Louis.

Earlier this year, Alton Steel announced it was closing, the company has announcing it’s going to sell its 381-acre plant site to a developer—–

—that is going to build a 200-megawatt data center there. And that’s just a start. TerraWatt is talking about building five data centers there that will add up to a one-gigawatt operations.

One might think such a project would generate a ton of jobs.  Nope. TerraWatt says fifty people could produce only FIFTY fulltime jobs.

Then there’s Trump’s big plans for Iowa and no plans for Wisconsin.  We’re not sure the creating of the big steel plant makes up for the problems Iowa farmers who voted for him two years ago are facing thanks to his various ill-considered policies.

Is he just spreading more bovine by product around to keep his Republican congressional majority?  For somebody who has no concept of agriculture, he is one of the world’s great byproduct spreaders. Maybe THE best.

Will the new steel plant provide jobs for workers who will get his $5,000 checks for voting for the GOP tomorrow.?

While he was Trumpeting great things for Iowa, reporters were telling about some folks in neighboring Wisconsin who were hearing Taps for their jobs in the steel industry.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel says Maynard Steel is shutting down after twelve decades in Milwaukee.  Sales dropped by about one-third last year and the company is losing more money this year.  At one time it had 725 workers. The newspaper says the 77 remaining employees will lose their jobs and their health care benefits on December 4.  A court-appointed receiver will sell the company’s assets after that. The company cites “business and industry circumstances” as reasons for he closure.

Maybe Trump needs to go to Milwaukee where he can perform the same miracle he performed in Indianapolis ten years ago when he saved all those jobs at the Carrier Air Conditioning plant.  Except he didn’t. The deal actually saved only about one-third of the jobs. Not mentioned in the Trump/Pence bragging about the deal was the Carrier went on to close a Carrier plant in another Indiana City, costing 700 more workers their jobs.

A little more than a year later, Carrier reported it was moving more than 600 other jobs to a new factory in China. In the end, Carrier moved more jobs out of Indiana than it kept.

Maybe the workers in Milwaukee can find jobs at the planned $15 billion big beautiful steel plant Trump has proclaimed will be built in Iowa, “the largest steel plant ever built in the United States,” proclaimed our President. His Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick said there was no doubt the plant would be built.

But it won’t be built by an American company.

There also is doubt, at least for now, about when the plant will be built. Trump said the plant already was under construction. Iowa TV station KWQC did some digging after thae announcement and found no significant property transactions this year in Lee County, where President Trump says it will be. No permit applications had been submitted.  No detailed plans had been sent to county authorities. Definitely no plant is being built right now, Trump notwithstanding. Some property owners, however, say a real estate agent has been snooping around.

Maynard Steel employees will have to go a long time without paychecks and health insurance if they think they can move to Iowa and get steel industry jobs.

Some skeptics think the announcement was a campaign stunt.  Critics think the original plans were for the plant to be built in Minnesota where Mesabi Minerals is developing a big mine and mill operation in the Mesabi Iron Range up north. The project has been delayed, the company complaining the delay is because of 2017 dispute involving a rival who cites “anti-competitive conduct” and charges Mesabi with antitrust violations.

The Des Moines Register has reported Mesabi and its parent company, Essar Group, have a troubled financial history (www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2026/10/01/mesabi-metallics-company-iowa-steel-plant-trump/92036812007/) in this country and in Canada.

Reporter Tyler Jeff has written, “In India, Business Today reported a few years ago that the Essar Group was one of the country’s most indebted companies and “notorious” for defaults dating back to 1999, when Essar Steel failed to pay $250 million to international creditors. In addition to the bankruptcies at the company’s U.S. and Canadian subsidiaries, the Essar Group restructured debt in Canada three times.”

He says the company has sold billions of dollars in assets and now has a big loan from a Russian state-owned financial institution behind its plans to mine taconite in northwest Minnesota and then transport it about 500 miles to Iowa’s southernmost county (Keokuk and Fort Madison area) for processing.

Once more, Trump seems to be doing something nice for somebody in Russia.

Trump’s announcement caused great excitement in Iowa, naturally.  It came at such a convenient time, too. One of Iowa’s seats in the U. S. Senate is very much in play this year with a Democratic challenger threatening to flip the seat now occupied by Joni Ernst, who is not seeking a third term.  The most recent poll shows Democrat Josh Turek, a state representative, and Congresswoman Ashley Hinson are close in a state Trump carried by 13 points two years ago. The Suffolk University poll says one-fourth of the voters Hinson has lost say her support of Trump is the reason.

So is Trump’s grand announcement just an effort to hold on to the traditionally red state of Iowa?   Or is it the real thing?  A Russian-financed Indian company with a rugged background is going to put $15 billion dollars into a steel plant about 500 miles from the place where the ore is mined.

The steel industry is changing but Trump’s campaign promise to return the industry to the United States certainly have an odd twist to it.

A Russian-financed company from India and the acquisition of U. S. Steel by Nippon Steel of Japan seem to be an odd way to go about  Making America Great Again in terms of the steel industry.

Will this deal turn out to be what Trump says it will be?  Or is it just another Carrier case?

He seems to be big on India and Japanese ownerships in the steel industry and doing favors for Russians. But for a 120-year old company in Milwaukee?   Where is he for those folks?

Maybe they don’t count because Minnesota is a blue state. And soon to be out of work steel company workers in Wisconsin and already out of work and already-unemployed steel workers in the St. Louis aren’t worth any attention when he’s desperately trying to keep Congress red.

-0-

 

MEMO 

To: J.D. Vance

From: Me, concerned citizen

If you have not already started—although I am sure you have—you need to be thinking of how you would serve as the interim President of the United States until the 2028 elections and how you might deserve to be considered for an extension.

I am sure you have watched your boss’s deteriorating poll numbers and the inter-party defections, especially among those Republicans who hope to resurrect their own candidacies for the House or the Senate by turning on President Trump. Unfortunately, theirs seems to be a case in several instances of “Too soon old; too late smart.”

You are, I am sure, cognizant of the possibility that the blue wave will continue to build and have started thinking of what would happen if Democrats and some badly-disillusioned Republicans provide the needed votes to let President Trump transition to being a fulltime golfer.

What will you do or advocate doing to separate yourself from a President you have so slavishly followed for a couple of years but who now is a lead weight for the party?

You’re in a tricky position. You know you cannot be Trump 2.1 after the Original Trump is banished if you want the job fulltime in 2028 or not to face the same removal movement that deposed him sooner.  Two years is a short time to wash the Trump stain from your credentials and to create a new you-image.  You will inherit what is charitably called an international train wreck. You must be thinking how to end military and tariff wars without a total admission of grievous error but acknowledging serious mistakes for which you will accept no blame while emphasizing the things you will do to promote national and international healing.

Remember this: A mob, having enjoyed the thrill of hanging one, might not be satisfied with hanging only one.  The crowd might still be quite restless when you make the oval office your own. You must be thinking and assembling others from outside the present executive team who will find ways for you to look good digging out from under the rubble of this president’s disaster.

Renewing domestic and international trust and respect in such a short time might be beyond your best efforts, but it is important that you tell us what you will do if you are going to make sincere efforts and achieve some improvements.

If doing what you have to do means throwing Trump under the bus to join all of those he has thrown there, so be it. You must be prepared to show a major shift not only in ideology but also in style. You are, after all, the Hillbilly Eulogy guy, not the rich big city guy whose life experience has been far from your own and has no relation to the lives of most Americans.

You must be carefully lining up cabinet members who are not amateurs in their roles. Some of those replaced by the current administration might be good choices to return and be your guiding team. Start now to establish back-door relationships with Iran, China, North Korea, Russia and Israel that could be useful after you are sworn in as the successor to President Trump.

Make plans to dump the FCC Chair who seems all too willing to be the mini-Trump in the war against the media. In fact, you should announce as soon as you are in office that the war against the media is over, that you recognize the importance of a free and independent media, that the role of the media is not to be your friend and mouthpiece but to be an observer and when necessary be a critic.

Make your new Director of Homeland Security someone one with a Spanish surname and put ICE on ice.

Make a personal commitment to give late night talk show hosts something to talk about other than you. But understand that making fun of people in power is a very old matter of human nature. Poking fun at politicians probably began before written language was created.

Be strict with yourself about this: Nights are for sleeping. Days are for talking and acting. Do not try to mix the two. Remember that verbal temperance even in disagreement is more likely to engender respect than irrational attacks will.

If you wish to call someone a derogatory name, do it in your shower, not in public.

Find someone who knows and has the respect of and for the military to be ready with a mop, a broom, and a carpet cleaning system to replace Pete Hegseth. It should be someone who doesn’t measure military competence in terms of color, gender, or testosterone level. Before he goes, report on HIS testosterone levels.

Have somebody with some honor in the medical field replace Health Secretary Kennedy, who undoubtedly will complain he is a victim of a conspiracy. Admit he’s right and then vaccinate yourself from his influence.

Don’t be afraid to keep some of the competent people President Trump accidentally appointed to top positions. Would Rubio be more effective without Trump above him?  Of course, letting him stick around leaves him poised to be one of your challengers in the 2028 primaries.,

Prepare a list of executive orders to immediately roll back Trump’s plans for—

—-well, just about everything he has proclaimed.

Be thinking about the points you will earn with the public by cancelling the EgoArch, by restoring a sane board to the Kennedy Center, and announcing you are ending all efforts to etch the name Trump on any buildings he did not earn the right to rename, which would be none.

And restore the proper names to one of the Great Lakes and to The Gulf.

You’ll need to emphasize that you are not trying to erase President Trump’s name from history but are restoring our history to its accurate place in telling  ALL of the nation’s story, including his. Do not volunteer to speak at the dedication of his presidential museum and lie-brary.

Unsticking yourself from Trump might be difficult because of the tar baby he has been. But you need to give it your best efforts. Otherwise, your long-term future in what is left of the White House will be brief.

Retire attack dogs such as our Senators Schmitt and Hawley to a political kennel. You don’t need their kind to be distracting the public from the good works you do to restore a modicum of confidence in our country.

When President Trump was elected in 2016 without my approval, I was among the many who hoped he would grow into the office. But he has proven accurate an observation President Woodrow Wilson made: “Every man who takes office in Washington either grows or swells, and when I give a man an office, I watch him carefully to see whether he is growing or swelling.”

President Trump is an example of one who swelled excessively and constantly. And look what it got him. Hire people who won’t be afraid to tell you before it’s too late that you’re looking a little puffy.

Good luck with your contingency planning. Do not be wasting time in making preparations. Your future is at stake, by 2028 if not sooner.

Citizen Bob

Execution UPDATE  UPDATE  UPDATE

President Trump has overruled our offensive Defense Secretary and says there will not be a publicly-broadcast of the firing squad execution of Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan.  He still will be shot to death but not with a worldwide audience watching.

While there are some parts of the world that think it’s a mistake not to make the execution public, most not only don’t want the death penalty at all.

The Death Penalty Information Center reports only 17 countries executed people last year, up from a record low fifteen in 2024.

Four countries (Japan, South Sudan, Taiwan, and the United Arab Emirates) resumed executions after a hiatus, while two countries (Oman and Syria) which carried out executions in 2024 did not in 2025. Of note, the United States was the only nation to execute people in the Americas for the 17th consecutive year.

In addition to Iran, which carried out at least 2,159 executions in 2025, significant increases were recorded in several other countries. Saudi Arabia carried out at least 356 executions, exceeding their historic high of 345 executions in 2024. Together, Iran and Saudi Arabia accounted for 93% of all executions worldwide. Egypt (13 to 23), Singapore (9 to 17), Yemen (38 to 51), and the United States (25 to 47) all approximately doubled their prior year execution totals, and Kuwait nearly tripled (6 to 17).

Paralleling global trends, the increase in the United States was attributable to a regional rise in executions in Florida, which accounted for nearly half of all executions. Amnesty International notes that this rise in U.S. executions occurred as “officials at the federal level and in some states promoted inflammatory and flawed narratives on the death penalty and its effect on crime, advocating for an increase in its use.”

Both the U.S. and Saudi Arabia were global outliers in execution methods with the use of nitrogen gas asphyxiation and beheadings, respectively. As in previous years, the 2025 execution total does not include the thousands of executions estimated to be carried out annually in China, regarded as the world’s leading executioner. Both China and Vietnam classify data on the death penalty as a state secret. Restrictive state practices in North Korea, Laos, and Belarus also result in little to no information being available for those countries.

President Trump maintains Hasan deserves the several bullets that will be coming to him and admits to having some misgivings about cancelling the public event.  However,

“Nidal Malik Hasan, a former U.S. Army Major turned traitor, is a very bad and evil man, who killed 13 people, including a pregnant soldier, who died, along with her unborn son, and injured, very seriously, 32 more innocent people. Barack Hussein Obama’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) intercepted electronic communications between Hasan and the radical Yemeni-American cleric, Anwar al-Awlaki. When reviewed by his FBI terrorism task force, investigators concluded that Hasan’s emails were not a threat. This assessment of the Obama Administration’s actions was later considered to be a key intelligence failure. With all of that being said, I think streaming the execution for all to see might have been a strong deterrent for the World to witness how America deals with Terrorists and SCUM like Hasan but, many very good and well meaning people would rather not watch him die, through streaming, or through any other visual device. He will die, as scheduled, by firing squad, but this event will not be streamed. That said, the execution may be viewed in person by the immediate families of the victims, if they so choose. They deserve to witness JUSTICE! Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DONALD J. TRUMP.”

Trump’s obsession with blaming President Obama (and his constant cheap shot mentions of his middle name) is well over-stated.

NPR’s Mark Memmott reported in November, 2009:

Author Jerome Corsi, who was among the group that “Swift Boated” Sen. John Kerry during the 2004 presidential election and more recently penned The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality, has another eye-catching story at the conservative World Net Daily website.

The headline reads: “Shooter Advised Obama Transition; Fort Hood Triggerman Aided Team On Homeland Security Task Force.”

And the story begins with this:

Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the alleged shooter in yesterday’s massacre at Fort Hood, played a homeland security advisory role in President Barack Obama’s transition into the White House, according to a key university policy institute document.

Here’s what NPR national security/intelligence correspondent Tom Gjelten tells us about Corsi’s conclusion:

This claim is so exaggerated as to be without merit.

Nidal Hasan was one of 308 people whose names appear on a list of “participants” in a series of public roundtable meetings organized by the “Presidential Transition Task Force,” a project of the Homeland Security Policy Institute (HSPI) at George Washington University. Hasan was not himself a member of the Task Force.

Frank Cilluffo, the HSPI director, says the participants’ list, published as an appendix to the Task Force report, was no more than a tally of those people who RSVP’d to a notice of the roundtable meetings, which took place between June 2008 and February 2009. “Hasan joined as a member of the audience,” Cilluffo says.

When Cilluffo saw a picture of Hasan, he remembered him making a public comment during one of the roundtable meetings. “I had to cut him off, because he was going on too long,” Cilluffo says. He says he can not recall what Hasan was saying.

Corsi’s report, by the way, does something of a U-turn about midway through. “While the GWU task force participants included several members of government, including representatives of the Department of Justice and the U.S Department of Homeland Security,” he writes, “there is no indication in the document that the group played any formal role in the official Obama transition, other than to serve in a university-based advisory capacity.”

And an “editor’s note” attached to Corsi’s story after its publication says “Hasan is being reported as a participant in the GWU Homeland Security Policy Institute’s Presidential Transition Task Force, not as a member, noting the group was a university think-tank, not part of the Obama administration official transition team.”

So, he begins with a sure-to-shock conclusion — that Hasan played a “homeland security advisory role” in the transition. Then, at a point in the story that many readers won’t reach or hear about, Corsi reverses course.

NPR is not, as we all know, a source of information for our president.

Some cynics might be surprised Trump passed up a golden opportunity to market the Official Donald J. Trump Execution Rifle. As with the Trump Bible, it could be issued in various editions, one of which would be the “Pete Hegseth edition.”

The sad thing is that a lot of people would buy the things. We wonderful if one of the weapons that will be used someday will be on display in the Trump Liebrary and Museum.

At least we are spared the sad spectacle of this event being streamed into our homes and into too many children’s cell phones.

The Descent into Barbarism

Two more stories about executions have made headlines in recent days for different reasons.

The story of the botched execution in Tennessee reminds us of a botched execution in Missouri. The other story is about plans for a public execution—the livestreaming of a firing squad carrying out a federal death sentence.

Before we get to the story of a botched Missouri execution, I have to get something off my chest about Pete Hegseth’s plans for a public firing squad for Fort Hood killer Nidal Hasan who murdered 13 people and wounded thirty others in the 2009 Fort Hood shootings. If Hegseth gets his way, the internet will show the public the firing squad execution at 1 p.m., our time, on December 3. Something to watch while we’re having lunch. President Trump has okayed the first military firing squad execution since the execution of Private Eddie Slovick in 1945 for desertion.

I cringe even at giving you the time and date of Hegseth’s planned public spectacle.

I covered 22 executions.  All were accomplished with heavy overdoses of three drugs. Missouri now uses one giant overdose of just one drug, as has been used in recent botched executions in other states. It seems to have worked here.

It should be no surprise that Hegseth, an oily testosterone waving narcissist, wants a public execution. Apparently he thinks his self-righteous outrage about a man who killed thirteen members of the military should be displayed by letting ghoulish viewers see a man be shot to death.

It smacks of the old-time executions in the counties when large crowds gathered—some executions even sold tickets to them—with children to watch someone drop through a scaffold floor.  It was a social occasion, presumably an object lesson particularly for the children in the audience.

That’s what Hegseth wants with his sordid plan. He said on a television show last week that people need to see the execution because they have to understand serious crimes merit “serious consequences.” Is there anybody who does not understand that if you kill someone, you will not face “serious consequences?”

We suspect Hegseth wants a public execution to show how tough HE is. It’s an execution that is more about him than it is about the man who will die and his victims.  Death by testosterone.

If he’s so hot to have this done, why doesn’t he be part of the squad?  If our president thinks it’s such a great idea, why doesn’t he join him. After all, one is the commander in chief of all of our military forces and the other head the department that oversees all of them?

And just think how impressive President Trump’s weapon would look in his presidential iebrary.

Former Labor Secretary, now blogger and podcaster Robert Reich asks whether the firing squad will teach any watchers a lesson or will it “just degrade our sense of being human beings.?”  He refers to Hegseth’s plan as “cruel,” and “public sadism” and “barbarism.”

How excited do you think they would have been if they’d watched Christa Pike’s execution. Firing squad executions are over in an explosive second. Her struggle would have been a much better show.

Ultimately, public revulsion of public hanging carnivals led to Missouri and other states taking over executions from local jurisdictions  and holding them within prison walls with only the media, prison officials, and some friends of the person in the gas chamber or in the electric chair or on the gurney in the drug-execution chamber looking on.

The last public execution in this country is believed to have been a hanging in Kentucky in 1936.

Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber who murdered 167 people and injured 684 more with the 1995 blast at the Murrah Office Building died on a gurney at the federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana in 2001. Ten members of the media looked on as did some people he had invited to watch. Some survivors of the bombing saw it on closed circuit TV inside the prison because there wasn’t enough room in the citizen witness area.

McVeigh killed more than ten times more people than Hasan did yet died with as much dignity as an executed mass murderer could expect.

There are those who think Hasan’s public execution will put this country in the same category of two countries we consider cruel, barbaric, and cradles of terrorism. Amnesty International counted seventeen public executions last year. Eleven were in Iran.  Six more were Taliban events in Afghanistan.  Trump and Hegseth want to lower our nation to that level.

Death is not a circus. Executions are double tragedies.  The first is the death of the victim(s) and the grief of their families and friends, memories and longings that never completely disappear.  The second is the death of the killer, a recognition that a person threw away their life long before they threw away their future.

I sometimes caught myself wondering as I watched the drugs flow into the veins of those 22 men what turned that person on the gurney into what he became. When did he or she make the choice to live a life that turned out to be wasted, a life most remembered for its end than for its worth.

And then I watched them die and sometimes I wondered where they went at that instant.

In the end, they died alone. And no matter how awful their crimes, their death was not some kind of public spectacle nor should it ever be. Justice is too precious to be cheapened by people like Hegseth and Trump.  It is not a game show. It is not an ultimate firing.

Having seen as many executions as I have, do I believe in capital punishment? I am not alone in thinking some crimes are so heinous that the perpetrator forfeits his or her own right to life. But I also sometimes think spending every day waking up to the smell of Lysol or some similar disinfectant used in institutions, living among many who have nothing more to lose, going to a menial job every day, hearing a steel door lock behind you every night, never walking down a street, never having a beer with friends or seeing your grandson play a football game or your granddaughter being a bride, never seeing anything beyond an electrified fence, and eventually knowing the few family members you ever see all have died is better.

Christa Peck spent ninety percent of her thirty years in solitary confinement. Death was to be her only relief, her only escape.

I was interested in what my reaction would be when I watched my first execution.  My reaction was no reaction at all.  I watched a man go to sleep, went back to my motel and filed my stories for the next morning’s newscasts, and then I went to sleep, too, and I did not dream. The next morning I came back to my newsroom and went on with my life as if I had not been up most of the night in Potosi.

Reporters often report on things they wish they didn’t have to report about. Sometimes it’s the events of a life. Sometimes it’s the event of death. The plans of Trump and Hegseth might be the most despicable things this administration has thought up—-and that’s saying a great deal.

I think we’ll save the botched Missouri execution story for another entry. I’m not feeling too well after telling you these stories.

Sunshine Patriots and Summer Soldiers

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)

Snipers and Drones?

Building a triumphal arch overlooking Arlington Cemetery is not enough of an abomination. Our President has not surprisingly found a way to make it worse.

Snipers???  It will house snipers????

Drones?????

Ammunition stockpiles???

What the Hell has prompted him to turn his arch celebrating military triumphs into a mini-fortress or, as he has put it, “a top grade Military Complex.”

He says it’s being done as a matter of national security (which is his excuse for a lot of stuff, isn’t it?) and after a “strong request” from the military.  Could we know who in the military made this strong request?

Will he have ICE snipers up there picking off suspected illegal immigrants as they cross the Arlington Memorial Bridge?  Will drones launched from his arch blend harmoniously into the routes of airliners on their final landing approach to Reagan International Airport?

We wonder when his demented mind will realize the arch would be a good checkpoint to make sure only American citizens of at least three generations are allowed in or out of Washington.  Additionally, officers could block anyone crossing the bridge into the city if there are signs in the back seat or trunk protesting his ongoing fevered dream of defiling the Kennedy Center by putting his name on it. That number might even be much larger these days than the number of dead legal or illegal immigrants.

If it also is to serve as Fortress Trump, perhaps it would be better located at Outpost Hegseth, the Pentagon, and where appropriately the new Hegseth Boulevard could pass through it.

The National Park Service, which one might suspect in normal times would object strongly to this idiocy, instead is equivocating.  It says the arch would affect several historic sites near Arlington National Cemetery including the cemetery’s historic district, the Washington and Lincoln monuments, the Jefferson Memorial the Capitol Mall, and others.

But NPS says it’s okay to go ahead with the arch as long as there are “mitigations,” such as an archaeological investigation before any digging is done. vibration monitoring near the bridge, and a plan so that funerals and wreath-laying ceremonies will not be disrupted—and some new interpretive web pages would help, including one that discusses “the history and significance of triumphal arches.”

We heard last week the digging had started. Forget any archaeological investigations.

There goes the idea of putting it at Outpost Hegseth.

The arch is to have three golden statutes on top of it. A big statue of Lady Liberty will be flanked by two gold eagles that are to represent national pride and strength.

At least the big statue is not of himself.

I really hope these entries are never read to him by anybody. I hate to think I would give him the idea.

The urge to suggest the eagles be replaced by Loons is something I am repressing.

Oops.

A Nation of Laws 

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 

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)