• Search for:
    29Sep, 2025
    Coal Leasing on Federal Lands

    Selling America’s Backyard for a Quick Buck

    “Oh, Coal-Scarred Land of Plenty” Lyrics by Judy T. Song created by Suno.

    Release of new coal leases on federal lands is more than bad energy policy. The consequences extend beyond energy, threatening rivers, mountains, and wide-open spaces that belong to everyone. Epstein connections may dominate other headlines, but the files here reveal political favoritism benefiting coal companies. Files obtained from public records show millions of acres handed to corporations with close ties to the administration. This is not patriotism — it is a sell-off of America’s future.

    Coal leasing is a step backward for the nation

    For decades, the U.S. made steady progress toward cleaner, more affordable energy. That progress reduced pollution, created jobs, and built stronger local economies. Now the White House is pushing us in reverse. By reopening 13 million acres for coal leasing, green-lighting massive mine expansions like Montana’s Rosebud Mine, and scheduling new lease sales across Alabama, Utah, and the Powder River Basin, leaders are locking communities into pollution and decline until 2039 and beyond.

    This push is not about reliable energy. Markets already moved past coal because renewable power and natural gas are cheaper. Instead, this is a bailout for a dying industry, funded with taxpayer dollars and taxpayer land.

    Source: The Guardian

    Why every American should care

    Coal mining does not just scar landscapes. It scars communities. The jobs promised today often disappear tomorrow, while the damage lasts for decades. Families are left with polluted water, rising health costs, and fewer opportunities in industries like tourism and clean energy.

    Meanwhile, corporations profit from land that belongs to the American people. Conservatives and progressives alike should see the problem: stewardship matters. Leaving something better for the next generation is not partisan. It is a core American value.

    What we stand to lose

    • Powder River Basin (WY/MT): New leases could unleash massive new coal tonnage.
    • Rosebud Mine (MT): A major expansion adds 33.75 million tons of federal coal and extends operations until 2039.
    • Lease sales in Alabama, Utah, Montana: Thousands of acres pushed to auction.
    • Federal protections revoked: Barriers once blocking mining near sensitive areas are being stripped away.

    Every one of these moves takes public wealth and hands it to private interests.

    A betrayal disguised as leadership

    Coal’s decline is not about politics. It is about economics. Energy markets rejected coal years ago. Propping it up now is not leadership — it is looting. It is giving away America’s future for a short-term headline and a campaign talking point.

    This betrayal should matter to anyone who values jobs, water, or land. If you have ever believed in conserving what is good about America — from the family farm to the national park — this fight belongs to you.

    What you can do right now

    • Stay informed: Follow public notices from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Department of the Interior (DOI) about lease sales.
    • Speak up: Submit comments during lease review periods, attend local hearings, and share verified information with your community.
    • Build bridges: Talk with neighbors across party lines. Stress shared values like clean water, healthy land, and jobs that last.
    • Demand accountability: Ask local representatives to oppose giveaways of public lands for coal leasing.

    Closing: A choice about America’s future

    The fight over coal leasing on federal lands is not about nostalgia for the past. It is about who controls America’s future. Do we leave our children polluted rivers and gutted landscapes, or do we hand them thriving communities built on clean, lasting energy?

    The White House has made its choice. Now it is up to us to make ours.

    Head Guerilla, Judy T.

    P.S. In case you missed it, Release the Epstein Files!

    Resources:

    28Sep, 2025
    Des Moines Superintendent: On ICE

    They call it “On ICE.” But this isn’t family entertainment — it’s state-sanctioned cruelty.

    Des Moines Superintendent Arrested by ICE

    Date Updated: October 14, 2025

    Location: Des Moines, Iowa

    This article was originally critical of Ian Roberts’ arrest, primarily reflecting community shock. However, since then, verified facts have come to light that require correction. Therefore, the content below has been updated to reflect accurate information regarding his deportation, credentials, and legal circumstances. As a result, please disregard any previous calls to free him based on the original version. At the same time, while evidence suggests he may have been targeted as a person of color, his criminal record remains a significant factor in this case.

    Overview

    Ian Roberts, former superintendent of Des Moines Public Schools (DMPS), was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on September 26, 2025. Subsequently, recent investigations revealed that Roberts was living in the United States illegally and had falsified key elements of his professional credentials.

    Therefore, this article has been updated to reflect verified, accurate information about his deportation status, educational background, and related legal matters. Importantly, readers can now review the facts directly.

    Immigration Status

    Roberts entered the United States on a student visa in 1999. Later, in May 2024, an immigration judge issued a final order of removal. As a result, Roberts was considered in the U.S. illegally at the time of his arrest. Additionally, these developments highlight broader challenges in immigration oversight and compliance.

    Educational Credentials

    Ultimately, investigations confirmed that Roberts misrepresented his academic achievements. He claimed to have earned a doctorate from Morgan State University, but the university confirmed that he did not hold that degree. Furthermore, other claimed credentials could not be verified. Consequently, the district has updated official records and revoked his professional license. Thus, the accuracy of public records is reinforced.

    Criminal and Safety Considerations

    Roberts has an extensive criminal record, including previous arrests for narcotics and firearms possession. Moreover, during the ICE arrest, authorities found a loaded handgun, a fixed-blade hunting knife, and approximately $3,000 in cash. Together, these facts clarify the legal context surrounding his detention. In addition, they underscore why authorities acted when they did.

    District Response

    Since the arrest, the Des Moines Public Schools board has faced criticism for inadequate vetting during the hiring process. Therefore, they are reviewing procedures and may face legal action regarding Roberts’ employment. In the meantime, the district is also evaluating ways to improve future hiring practices.

    Community and Education Impact

    Roberts had worked in education for over two decades. Consequently, his arrest highlights the challenges school districts face when verifying employment credentials and legal status. As a result, the community is examining policies to strengthen oversight and ensure the safety and stability of educational leadership. Additionally, parents and staff are seeking reassurance that schools remain safe and well-managed.

    Correction Notice

    As a result, this article has been updated on October 14, 2025, to include verified details about Ian Roberts’ deportation, falsified credentials, and related legal proceedings. In addition, we are committed to providing accurate and up-to-date information for our readers. Finally, this notice clarifies any previous statements made in the original version.

    Head Guerilla, Judy T.

    References

    PS. We haven’t forgotten the Epstein Files. Release them now.

    P.P.S. Honestly, still the greatest piece of modern art to date!

    P.P.P.S. This was originally posted on 9.27.2025, due to a need for a backup installation, it had to be reposted.

    Original References:

    1. Des Moines Public Schools. (2025, September 26). Ian Roberts detained by ICE. Retrieved from https://www.dmschools.org/2025/09/announcements-on-detention-of-dr-ian-roberts/
    2. KCCI. (2025, September 26). Des Moines superintendent detained by ICE. Retrieved from https://www.kcci.com/article/ian-roberts-des-moines-public-schools-superintendent-bio/68081908
    3. Iowa Public Radio. (2025, September 26). Des Moines superintendent Ian Roberts detained by ICE. Retrieved from https://www.iowapublicradio.org/ipr-news/2025-09-26/des-moines-public-schools-superintendent-ian-roberts-detained-by-ice-immigration-agents
    4. Ferghana Partners. (n.d.). Ian Roberts. Retrieved from https://ferghanapartners.com/staff-member/dr-ian-roberts/
    5. University of Warwick. (n.d.). Dr. Ian Roberts. Retrieved from https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/modernlanguages/academic/ianroberts/
    6. Des Moines Register. (2025, September 26). Who is Dr. Ian Roberts? A closer look at the Des Moines Public Schools superintendent. Retrieved from https://www.desmoinesregister.com/videos/news/2025/09/26/who-is-dr-ian-roberts-iowa-a-look-at-the-des-moines-public-schools-superintendent-dmps/86375017007/
    7. The British Academy. (n.d.). Professor Ian Roberts FBA. Retrieved from https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/fellows/profiles/ian-roberts-FBA/
    22Sep, 2025
    Boycotts for Policy Changes

    Introduction to the Boycott Landscape

    In 2025, a significant wave of consumer activism has emerged, particularly among left-leaning and progressive communities, in response to perceived political shifts and corporate policy changes. This movement has led to widespread boycotts targeting companies and media outlets that are seen as aligning with or supporting the current administration’s agenda. The following table provides a comprehensive overview of these boycotts, categorizing entities into “Use,” “Avoid,” or “Caution” based on their involvement in controversial policies or actions.

    Comprehensive Boycott Table — Left-Leaning / Progressive Focus (2025)

    Company / ServiceReason / ContextRecommended ActionOutcome of Boycott
    Amazon / Prime VideoDEI rollback, labor practices, political donationsAvoidFinancial impact minimal; no policy change
    Walmart / Sam’s ClubDEI rollback, labor practices, corporate greedAvoidFinancial impact minor; no policy change
    TargetDEI rollback, withdrawing diversity goals / supplier programsAvoidSignificant financial impact (~$12B loss); no policy change
    McDonald’sDEI rollback, supplier diversity changesAvoidMinor financial impact; no policy change
    PepsiCoPausing DEI programs, reducing minority partnershipsAvoidMinor financial impact; no policy change
    Constellation BrandsRemoval of DEI initiativesAvoidMinor financial impact; no policy change
    Barclays (US)Dropped gender/ethnicity representation targetsCautionFinancial impact unclear; no policy change
    FordDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    Lowe’sDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    Harley-DavidsonDEI rollback; production move to ThailandCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    ToyotaDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    MetaDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    AT&TDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    Victoria’s SecretDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    State StreetDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    UnitedHealthDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    Paramount+ / CBSCancellation of Colbert; perceived political pressureAvoidSocial/financial impact minor; no policy change
    ABC / Disney (TV)Suspension of Jimmy Kimmel Live! after political pressureCautionSocial impact minor; no policy change
    Disney+ / HuluLabor disputes, union recognitionCautionMinor subscriber impact; no policy change
    Starz (standalone)Minimal controversyUseNot targeted; safe
    AMC+Minimal controversyUseNot targeted; safe
    NetflixLabor issues (strikes)UseNo boycott impact; safe
    No Music For Genocide / BDS-aligned platformsCultural / human rights boycottCautionSymbolic impact; no policy change
    AirbnbListings in settlementsCautionMinor impact; no policy change
    Booking.com / ZARA / Inditex brandsOperations in settlementsCautionMinor impact; no policy change
    Economic Blackout / 24-hour spending pauseProtest of DEI rollback, corporate greedAvoidSymbolic financial impact; no policy change

    Impact of Current Boycotts

    Recent studies and surveys indicate a notable shift in consumer behavior:

    • 36% of Americans report participating in or planning to participate in boycotts, with 53% of Gen Z and 51% of Hispanic Americans leading this trend. Stagwell
    • 24% of U.S. shoppers have abandoned their favorite stores due to political stances taken by these retailers. The Guardian
    • A 6.8% year-over-year decline in foot traffic at Target stores was observed during a week coinciding with a major boycott. Forbes
      • 12.4 billion lost during 40 day boycott
    • In the entertainment sector, over 1,800 actors, entertainers, and producers, including Olivia Colman, Emma Stone, and Mark Ruffalo, have signed a pledge refusing to work with Israeli film institutions, condemning them as complicit in alleged genocide and apartheid against Palestinians during Israel’s military actions in Gaza. Reuters

    These statistics underscore the growing influence of consumer activism and its potential to impact financially, due to corporate policies and practices.

    Side-note

    Many of the boycotts reflected in this table generated measurable financial impact (e.g., Target’s ~$12 billion market value decline), yet for most companies, no substantive policy changes were made. The primary effect of activism in these cases has been economic, without producing the policy outcomes that organizers had sought.

    So How Do We Affect Real Policy Change?

    Activist Toolkit for Driving Policy Change in Targeted Companies

    StrategyHow to ApplyTools / ExamplesNotes / Tips
    1. Public Pressure CampaignsAmplify the issue via media, social channels, and public statements.Social media campaigns (#BoycottTargetDEI), press releases, open letters to CEOs, influencer partnerships.Focus on clarity: what policy you want changed, why, and how ignoring it harms reputation.
    2. Petition & Signature DrivesGather large-scale public support to demand policy changes.Online platforms (Change.org, MoveOn), email lists, community signups.Include specific, measurable policy requests (e.g., “Reinstate supplier diversity program by Q2 2026”).
    3. Shareholder AdvocacyPurchase minimal shares to gain voting rights or submit proposals at AGMs.Publicly traded companies (Target, Walmart, Amazon).Even small shareholder proposals draw attention and can be reported in financial news.
    4. Direct Corporate EngagementAttend public meetings, Q&As, and send letters/emails to leadership.Town halls, investor days, corporate social responsibility (CSR) contact forms.Be professional but firm: reference reputational risks, customer loyalty, and public expectations.
    5. Employee / Insider CoalitionsSupport or organize employees who advocate for policy change internally.Employee networks, unions, whistleblower protections.Insider voices often sway corporate decisions more than external boycotts.
    6. Regulatory / Legal PressureHighlight potential legal or regulatory risks tied to current policies.Complaints to EEOC, OSHA, consumer protection agencies; ESG rating agencies.Focus on transparency, compliance, and reputational risk.
    7. Positive Incentives & PRShow companies that acting on the request can generate goodwill and customer growth.Highlight successful companies that improved DEI and gained positive media coverage.Encourage a “win-win” narrative: policy change = better brand perception + loyalty.
    8. Conditional Financial PressureTie boycotts or spending reductions to clear, achievable policy goals.Public statements: “We will resume purchases/subscriptions if X happens by Y date.”Deadlines and measurable objectives make boycotts actionable rather than symbolic.
    9. Coalition BuildingPartner with advocacy groups, unions, and NGOs to increase pressure.People’s Union USA, labor advocacy groups, DEI-focused organizations.Coordinated campaigns increase credibility and visibility.
    10. Monitoring & ReportingTrack progress, make updates public, and celebrate successes.Websites, newsletters, social media updates on compliance or lack thereof.Transparency helps maintain momentum and holds companies accountable.

    While boycotts can produce measurable financial impact, as seen with Target and other companies, they often do not result in substantive policy changes on their own. To create meaningful change, it is essential to combine economic pressure with coordinated public advocacy, direct engagement, shareholder activism, coalition-building, and clear demands for specific policy outcomes. Activists can maximize their influence by making it clear what must change, setting measurable goals and deadlines, and publicly tracking progress. In this way, consumer activism becomes more than a symbolic gesture—it becomes a strategic tool for holding companies accountable and driving real, lasting change in corporate policies.

    16Sep, 2025
    🎬 Watch the Sizzle: USAID – The Documentary

    Explore the human, political, and global impact of U.S. foreign aid.

    Official site: USAIDdocumentary.com

    GoFundMe:

    Used with permission by Greg Perrie

    About the Documentary
    USAID – The Documentary takes an in-depth look at the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and examines what happens when the U.S. scales back or halts foreign aid. This timely documentary investigates the motivations behind these decisions, the geopolitical and humanitarian ripple effects, and the voices of those directly impacted around the world.

    Featuring insights from world leaders, UN experts, and global health authorities, the film also highlights the role of U.S. soft power and strategy in shaping international relations. With contributions from prominent figures in Hollywood such as Angelina Jolie, George Clooney, Morgan Freeman, Tom Hanks, and Matt Damon, this documentary brings star power to a story with real-world significance.

    Why It Matters
    Foreign aid is more than financial assistance—it’s a lifeline for millions and a critical component of U.S. influence abroad. USAID – The Documentary not only explores the political shifts driving aid decisions but also humanizes the effects on communities, families, and nations that rely on support for health, education, and stability.

    We’re proud to support this project led by Diane’s (Social Media Guer-u-illa) brother, and we encourage our community to explore the issues at the heart of this documentary. Dive deeper by viewing the accompanying PDF, which provides additional insights, context, and highlights from the film.

    USAID pitch deckDownload

    You can learn even more here:

    8Sep, 2025
    Supreme Court Ruling on Racial Profiling

    What It Means for Our Communities

    How We Got Here

    For years, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in Los Angeles were known to stop people who looked Latino, spoke Spanish, or worked low-wage jobs. A federal judge stepped in and blocked those tactics, saying they amounted to racial profiling and violated constitutional protections. During that block, ICE was forced to change how it operated, and the number of arrests dropped significantly.

    The federal government fought back. Their argument was simple: those restrictions made it too difficult to enforce immigration law. That fight made its way to the Supreme Court, where the conservative majority sided with ICE. The ruling lifted the lower court’s ban and gave agents the green light to return to old practices.

    What the Supreme Court Said

    Six justices formed the majority. Justice Brett Kavanaugh explained that it is “common sense” for officers to look at language, type of job, or location when deciding if someone might be undocumented. He claimed that if someone is here legally, a quick stop would prove it, and then they would be free to go.

    Three justices disagreed sharply. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, wrote a fiery dissent. She warned that this ruling allows the government to stop people just because they look Latino, sound like they speak Spanish, or work in certain jobs. Her words were clear: this undermines the Fourth Amendment, which protects all of us from unreasonable searches and seizures.

    What This Means Right Now

    Because of this decision, ICE agents can once again stage sweeps in places like parking lots, car washes, and neighborhoods where many Latino residents live. Even U.S. citizens and legal residents may get stopped if an officer thinks they “look suspicious.” For immigrant families, that means living in constant fear of being pulled aside and questioned for no reason other than appearance or language.

    Civil rights groups responded quickly. The ACLU of Southern California called the ruling dangerous, saying it forces Latino communities into a “papers-please” world. MALDEF added that Justice Kavanaugh’s reasoning relies on stereotypes and opens the door for widespread discrimination. Their warnings echo what many families already feel: that safety and dignity are now at risk.

    What Happens Next

    This case is not finished. It will go back to lower courts, and new arguments will be heard. But while the case moves forward, ICE has free rein to use these tactics in Los Angeles. That means the fear and uncertainty begin now, not later.

    Congress could, in theory, pass laws to stop racial profiling. Unfortunately, the current political climate makes that unlikely. Until then, communities will need to rely on local organizing, legal support, and watchdog groups to track abuses.

    Summary Graphic: Please download and share with ALL people of color, so they understand what can and will happen.

    Moving Forward Together

    So what can people do? First, know your rights. You do not have to answer questions about where you were born. You do not have to show immigration papers unless you are driving. Second, stay connected. Organizations like the ACLU, MALDEF, and immigrant rights groups provide updates, resources, and legal support. Third, document and report abuses. If you are stopped unfairly, record what happened and seek help right away.

    The Supreme Court ruling on racial profiling is a setback for justice, but it is not the end of the story. Courts will hear more arguments. Communities will resist. Allies will step forward. The fight is not over, because our democracy depends on ensuring that no one is judged—or stopped—based on race, language, or where they work.

    Judy T.

    5Sep, 2025
    Week of Sept 1

    Executive actions & nominations (Sept 1 → Sept 5, 2025)

    Quick summary (at a glance)

    • The administration issued an executive order implementing the U.S.–Japan framework (15% baseline tariff; sector exceptions; retroactive to Aug 7). The White House
    • Japan is said to have committed ~$550 billion in investment; details and enforceability remain vague and disputed in reporting. ReutersCSIS
    • Several presidential nominations (and a few withdrawals) were formally sent to the Senate this week — including the BLS nominee E.J. “Erwin/E.J.” Antoni and multiple maritime, commerce, Treasury, and State nominees. The White House
    • The Western District of Virginia U.S. Attorney nomination/appointment situation remains messy after a sudden resignation — raising oversight questions. Department of Justice
    • The Department of Defense has been renamed to the Department of War — raising questions of why we seem to be going on the offensive and a precursor of what is to come. The Guardian

    Below I’ve laid this out day-by-day (Sept 1 → today), each entry short, clear, and with: (1) what happened, (2) why it matters, and (3) red flags / what to watch. I triple-checked the main facts against primary sources (White House / EO text), major news coverage, and official agency pages; links are at the end.

    Sept 1, 2025 — (week-opening notes)

    No single White House “presidential actions” item dated Sept 1 on the official feed. This week’s actions cluster on Sept 2–5.

    Sept 2, 2025 — Nominations (selected)

    What happened

    • The White House sent a batch of nominations to the Senate (examples reported earlier this week include Tammy Bruce to be Deputy Representative to the U.N., plus other ambassadorial and judicial nominations). The White House

    Why it matters (left-leaning lens)

    • Filling diplomatic and judicial slots shapes U.S. policy and how laws get applied for years. Ambassador picks affect trade, human rights enforcement, and global coordination on climate and labor standards.

    Red flags / What to watch

    • Check nominees’ records for corporate ties or past advocacy against labor or environmental rules. Senate hearings are the moment to demand documents, voting records, and recusals where conflicts exist.

    Sept 3, 2025 — Nominations (large, high-turnover batch)

    What happened (core items drawn from the White House list)

    • Erwin (E.J.) Antoni — to be Commissioner, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 4-year term (replacing Erika McEntarfer). Reuters
    • Laura DiBella and Robert A. Harvey — to be Federal Maritime Commissioners (two FMC vacancies). The White House Lloyd’s List
    • Steven Haines — Assistant Secretary of Commerce (replacing Grant T. Harris, resigned). The White House
    • Trent Morse — Board member, Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (5-year term). The White House
    • Joshua Simmons — General Counsel, CIA (replace Kate Heinzelman, resigned). The White House
    • Christopher Yeaw — Assistant Secretary of State for Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Stability (replace Mallory Stewart, resigned). The White House Hudson Institute
    • Withdrawals sent to Senate (documents show a few withdrawals were formally transmitted) — including Terrence Gorman (Veterans’ Appeals), Penny Schwinn (Deputy Sec. of Education), and Christopher Gilbert (U.S. Attorney, Western District of Virginia). The White House

    Why it matters

    • The BLS commissioner is central to trust in labor and inflation data. A politicized BLS can distort economic policy debates and hurt working people. Reuters
    • FMC appointees shape port rules and shipping costs — important for supply-chain resilience and import/export fairness. Lloyd’s List
    • Appointing a State Arms Control lead with a strong defense/industrial background matters for treaty posture and arms-control diplomacy. Hudson Institute

    Non-MAGA critique & red flags

    • E.J. Antoni (BLS) — He comes from the Heritage Foundation; critics warn this could politicize federal statistics. The BLS needs technical independence. Senators should press for traceable evidence that nominees will not change data collection or revision processes for political ends. Reuters
    • FMC slate (DiBella / Harvey) — Both tied to Florida economic-development networks; the pattern looks like regional patronage. Watch for business or port-industry conflicts of interest. Public benefit must trump private port contracts. Lloyd’s List
    • CIA General Counsel (Joshua Simmons) — He’s a career legal adviser in State; the GC role requires both independence and a record on civil-liberties protections. Senators should probe his positions on surveillance, targeting, and whistleblower protections. The White House International Court of Justice
    • High turnover — Several positions are “vice X resigned.” Replacing many career or long-tenured officials quickly reduces institutional memory and weakens checks on power. That invites policy instability and potential cover-ups.

    What to watch in confirmation process

    • Demand full financial disclosures and recusal agreements.
    • For BLS: technical briefings showing no political interference with sampling methodology, seasonal adjustment rules, or revision policy.
    • For FMC: disclosure of port contracts, grants, and any ties to private investors who will benefit from tariff or regulatory changes.

    Sept 4, 2025 — Executive Order: Implementing the United States–Japan Agreement

    What happened (straight fact)

    • The President issued an executive order implementing the U.S.–Japan framework agreement. It: (a) sets a baseline 15% tariff on most Japanese imports (with sector-specific treatment for autos, aerospace, generics, and certain natural resources); (b) makes many aerospace products duty-free; and (c) applies retroactively to entries on or after 12:01 a.m. EDT on August 7, 2025. The EO text is posted on the White House site. The White House

    Public reporting & the investment pledge

    • The administration and press report that Japan agreed to $550 billion in U.S. investment commitments as part of the deal; reporting describes that figure as a mix of equity, loans, and guarantees, but details on legal commitments, timelines, and enforcement mechanisms remain thin in official documents. Reuters The White House

    Non-MAGA critique (what concerns should people have?)

    • Transparency & enforcement: The EO says Japan will “provide” investments selected by the U.S. government, but the EO itself does not include binding enforcement language, timelines, or independent audits. That leaves open the question: What counts as deliverable capital and who verifies it? The WhiteHouse Reuters
    • Retrospective tariff changes: Making the tariff change retroactive to Aug 7 could trigger refunds or complex customs reconciliations. Retroactivity can quietly shift who benefits (importers, large corporations) and who bears short-term costs (workers facing supply shifts). The White House
    • Delegation power: The EO delegates broad authority to Commerce and DHS to implement and to define “products of Japan.” That gives agency officials latitude — which can be necessary — but also raises risk of opaque rule-making without adequate public oversight. The White House
    • $550B — real or aspirational? Media reporting indicates the $550B figure has been repeatedly touted by administration officials, but independent analysts urge skepticism until commitments are legally documented. Watch for any “investment committee” structures, profit-sharing arrangements, or conditionality clauses that could hide giveaways to corporations or leave public oversight weak. Reuters CSI S

    What to watch next

    • The Commerce Department notice(s) to the Federal Register (they’re required within days under the EO). Those notices will show details — exclusions, HTS modifications, and timelines. The White House
    • Treasury / Commerce briefings or Japan government releases spelling out the $550B mechanics. Insist on documentation: who signs, what legal form the commitments take, and how compliance will be verified. Reuters

    Sept 5, 2025 — Notes & continuing developments

    • Press coverage and fact-checking are ongoing. Several outlets flagged the $550B number as a headline figure with sketchy public back-up and urged caution. Independent watchdogs will need to follow the Federal Register and any intergovernmental memoranda of understanding. Reuters CSIS
    • While this was being completed for posting, there was a news flash, Trump has changed the name from Department of Defense to Department of War. The Guardian

    Red flags across the week — grouped (short checklist)

    1. Data agencies at risk of politicization — BLS nominee comes from a partisan think tank; confirmers must protect statistical independence. Reuters
    2. Big trade deal with thin public enforcement language — $550B headline needs legal documents to be meaningful. Demand more than press statements. The White House Reuters
    3. Rapid turnover & withdrawals — multiple resignations and withdrawals reduce continuity and increase opportunities for back-channel deals. The White House Department of Justice
    4. Potential cronyism in nominations — regional and industry ties for FMC nominees warrant careful vetting. Lloyd’s List
    5. Delegated, fast rulemaking — the EO authorizes quick HTSUS modifications that could be implemented with limited notice. Watch the Federal Register for the rule text. The White House
    6. Potentially antagonizing the world — Changing the name of the Dept. of Defense to Dept. of War is peek at the hand of Trump’s plans.

    How to push for accountability (practical next steps)

    • Demand the Federal Register notices tied to the EO and bookmark them. The notice will show the exact tariff changes and any exclusions. The White House
    • Ask the Senate to hold thorough confirmation hearings that dig into conflicts, data-methodology protections (for BLS), and nominees’ ties to industry. Use the hearing record to request documents. The White House
    • Watch the Commerce Department for the investment documentation — e.g., MOUs, formal guarantees, or project lists. If nothing public appears, press for FOIA and independent audits. Reuters
    • Civil-society monitoring — labor, environmental, and procurement transparency groups should monitor how investments are selected and whether they create jobs with good wages and protections. CSIS

    Final notes — verification & sources

    I verified the EO text and tariff rules directly from the White House presidential actions page (executive order text). I cross-checked major facts about the Japan package and the $550B headlines against Reuters and independent policy analysts, and I used the White House nominations posting plus Department of Justice and reputable trade/port trade outlets for nominee backgrounds and the U.S. Attorney developments. Key supporting documents and reporting are below.

    Primary sources used (top references cited inline above)

    Additional reporting/background consulted

    All sources referenced above / used to triple-check facts

    4Sep, 2025
    America First: A Path Toward Handmaid’s Tale Politics?

    Women’s Rights Under Threat

    When people hear “America First,” they often think of strong borders, patriotic slogans, or economic protectionism. But beneath that surface lies a much more dangerous current—one that threatens women’s autonomy. Framed under “pro-family” or “traditional values” slogans, the real goal is often to roll back reproductive rights, restrict access to healthcare, and send the message that a woman’s place is at home, raising children. This narrow vision erases a woman’s identity beyond motherhood. Many see echoes of The Handmaid’s Tale—a chilling dystopia where women lose control over their own lives, all for the sake of order and tradition.

    Where “America First” Began

    The slogan “America First” traces back to the 1940s, when the America First Committee, led by aviator Charles Lindbergh, urged isolationism and opposed U.S. entry into World War II. But Lindbergh’s remarks blaming Jewish influence for encouraging war stained the movement with antisemitism—a dangerous precedent, showing how even patriotic ideals can slip into bigotry.

    America First in Modern Politics

    Donald Trump brought “America First” back in 2016, using it to push policies prioritizing U.S. interests—immigration restrictions, tariffs, reduced global engagement, and expanded national security enforcement. The America First Policy Institute continues promoting these ideas under the pretext of defending families, jobs, and sovereignty. But reading between the lines reveals a deeper, more troubling aim.

    Stephen Miller—America First’s Architect

    The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    Stephen Miller is one of the key architects of this movement:

    1. America First Legal (AFL): Miller founded and leads America First Legal, a hardline group backing legal battles over immigration, anti-LGBTQ, and educational issues. It served as an adviser to Project 2025, a blueprint to reshape government power. Miller later asked to remove AFL’s name amid public scrutiny.
    2. Project 2025 & Heritage Network:
      • Center for Renewing America (CRA), founded by Russell Vought, appears on Project 2025’s advisory board—promoting a Christian nationalist mission to reorganize government around “God, country, and community.”
      • Project 2025 calls for consolidating executive power, dismantling civil service protections, and reversing reproductive and healthcare gains while embedding Christian values into federal policy.
    3. Policy Powerhouse: Miller serves as Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Adviser—driving hardline immigration reforms, agency purges, and sweeping executive power grabs.
    4. On Women’s Issues—A Stark Record:
      Miller once wrote that women earn less because they choose low-paying, low-risk jobs and don’t work as many hours as men. He stated: “In modern-day America, there is a place for gender roles. I simply wouldn’t feel comfortable hiring a full-time male babysitter…”
      He argued against paid maternity leave, calling it a burden on businesses. This is the man advising on family policy.
    5. Education & Gender Identity:
      Miller recently said schools must teach children to “love America” to receive federal funds and attacked gender identity education as “communist, woke culture.” He went as far as calling gender-affirming care for minors “child abuse.” This aligns tightly with Christian nationalist social norms.

    Behind the Movement—Key Allies

    Stephen Miller isn’t alone. Others deeply embedded in the conservative infrastructure include:

    • Russell Vought, founder of CRA, pushing Christian nationalist visions through Project 2025 and other conservative networks.
    • Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI), founded by Jim DeMint, serves as a hub connecting figures like Miller, Vought, and other hardline allies preparing for the next administration—readying staffing and policy shifts that echo “America First” with religious overtones.
    • Project 2025 Contributors: Include far-right figures like Ben Carson, Ken Cuccinelli, Peter Navarro, who have played major roles in Trump’s past administrations.

    Candidates Running on America First – CA & IA

    (If you want to see your state represented, join our staff and please help us cover your state!)

    This isn’t just ideology—it’s shaping real campaigns:

    • Iowa: Representative Ashley Hinson is running for Senate, pledging to be Trump’s “top ally” and carry forward the America First agenda. Her House seat now opens to successors aligned with this platform.
    • California: Sheriff Chad Bianco is vying for governor in 2026, backed by conservative voters drawn to America First values. While trailing in polls, his candidacy shows how widespread this ideology is becoming.

    Reading in Between the Lines

    On the surface, America First claims to defend families and sovereignty. But its policies push Christian nationalist ideals by:

    • Restricting women’s rights and autonomy.
    • Minimizing LGBTQ and religious freedoms.
    • Narrowing definitions of American identity to favor one religion.
    • Expanding executive power at the expense of democratic checks and balances.

    Our Constitution promises religious freedom—not governance by any single religious viewpoint. America First blurs that line, edging us toward authoritarianism.

    Margaret Atwood once warned that The Handmaid’s Tale was a dystopian story based on germinating truths. If we continue down this path—disempowering women, excluding minority voices, and eroding democratic institutions—Atwood’s vision may come alive.

    References

    6Aug, 2025
    Perry ROD Meet & Greet – Rescheduled

    📅 Saturday, August 23rd
    🕐 1:00–3:00 PM
    📍 Perry Public Library – Conference Room
    1101 Willis Ave, Perry, IA 50220

    Change doesn’t happen all at once. It starts when people come together with purpose, passion, and a plan. That’s why I created Rescue Our Democracy (ROD).

    This movement didn’t pop up overnight. Instead, it’s grown slowly and deliberately—built on trust, community, and commitment. I’ve been behind every part of it: the website, the design, the strategy, and the organizing. ROD is deeply personal to me because I believe in people power and the strength of local voices.

    Now, I’d love to meet you in person.

    🗣️ At this Meet & Greet, you can:
    • Talk with me about what ROD is really about
    • Share your concerns and hopes for the future
    • Help shape our next steps together
    • Learn how to volunteer, join a committee, or become part of our growing team

    This event is casual, welcoming, and open to anyone who cares about where we’re headed. You don’t need to be an expert—just someone who believes we can do better, and who’s ready to talk about how.

    We’re building something real, and we need more voices at the table.
    Let’s make it happen—together.

    See you August 23rd!

    20Jul, 2025
    Boycott, who, what, why?

    Are you as confused or overwhelmed as I am with the different boycotts going on?

    You’re not alone.

    With so many headlines flying around—one day it’s Disney, the next it’s Tesla or Paramount—it’s hard to keep up with who’s being boycotted and why. But one thing is clear: Americans are fed up. Whether it’s corporations pushing political agendas, silencing dissenting voices, or prioritizing profit over people, many of us are looking for peaceful, impactful ways to push back.

    One powerful way? Intentional, informed boycotting.

    Below is a clear, categorized list of corporate boycotts you can participate in right now—both nationally and internationally. Whether your concerns center around censorship, worker rights, government overreach, or propaganda pipelines, there’s a way for you to make your dollar count.

    🛑 U.S. Corporate Boycotts You Can Join

    🎬 Media & Entertainment Boycotts

    These companies have been accused of removing dissenting voices, aligning too closely with federal messaging, or suppressing political speech.

    • Paramount Global & CBS – Accused of cutting ties with journalists and entertainers who don’t align with prevailing political narratives.
    • Disney & ABC – Criticized for excessive DEI implementation, narrative control, and political favoritism.
    • Warner Bros. Discovery (CNN, HBO) – Corporate restructuring reportedly tied to content censorship and voice silencing.
    • Spotify – Targeted for removing political podcasts and limiting creator visibility.
    • YouTube (Google) – Accused of demonetizing or hiding protest content and political journalism.

    🛒 Retail, Tech & Service Boycotts

    These businesses face scrutiny for exploiting workers, colluding with government surveillance, or undermining American labor dignity.

    • Amazon – Boycott for union-busting, worker treatment, and surveillance tech partnerships.
    • Tesla – Targeted due to union opposition and political overlap via Elon Musk’s influence and government contracts.
    • Apple – Criticized for restricting app access to protest tools and allowing authoritarian regimes influence.
    • Google (Alphabet) – Boycotts over biased search visibility and surveillance integration.
    • Meta (Facebook & Instagram) – Censorship of protest organizers, biased moderation, and data selling.
    • AT&T / DirecTV – Facing backlash for removing politically aligned networks like Newsmax or OAN.

    🌍 International Boycotts to Consider

    These are not U.S.-focused, but if you’re seeking broader ethical alignment, they may be worth watching.

    • NestlĂŠ – Longstanding boycott over water privatization, child labor, and corporate ethics.
    • Unilever – DEI backlash and ethical criticism around supply chains and political stances.
    • TikTok (ByteDance) – Privacy concerns, youth targeting, and foreign influence over content.

    ✊ How to Protest Beyond Boycotts

    Boycotts are just one way to push back. You can also:

    📚 Resources & Further Reading

    18Jul, 2025
    📣 Let’s Rise Together: Join the One Million Rising Movement

    Hi everyone,

    I want to share a powerful new opportunity with you—one I wish I had shared sooner. It’s called One Million Rising, and it’s a national campaign focused on building real, lasting people power through strategic resistance and organizing. I missed the initial announcement due to taking a short break, and I truly apologize for not getting it out earlier. The good news? You can still catch up and take part!

    What Is One Million Rising?

    One Million Rising is a training initiative to help one million people across the country prepare to fight back against authoritarian threats. This isn’t about one-time action—it’s about long-term strategy, grounded in non-cooperation, community organizing, and campaign design.

    We’re seeing coordinated attacks on our democracy, civil rights, and basic freedoms. From mass deportations to weaponized courts, the dangers are real. However, we don’t have to face them alone. Together, we can organize and resist—with purpose.

    🎥 Missed Session 1? Catch Up Now

    Although the first session already happened, the full recording is available online. Watching it will help prepare you for what’s coming next. It explains the vision behind One Million Rising and sets the stage for action.

    ▶️ Watch Session 1 here:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4496VWDjwS0

    If you can, try to watch it before the second session on July 30.

    🗓️ Upcoming Sessions (All Times 7:00–8:30 PM CST)

    Here’s what’s coming up:

    • Session 2: How to Make It Happen – July 30
      In this session, participants will explore how to host effective community discussions and begin forming local resistance gatherings. You’ll gain practical tools for bringing others into the movement and organizing locally with confidence.
    • Session 3: What Now? – August 13
      This final session covers the basics of campaign planning. It also helps you plug into upcoming national work while applying strategies within your own community. By this point, you’ll be ready to move forward with real impact.

    Why This Matters Now

    Democracy won’t protect itself. While things may feel overwhelming, we have power when we act together. That’s why trainings like this matter. They offer us the structure and confidence to build something stronger than fear—right where we live.

    You don’t need prior experience. You just need the willingness to show up and take that first step. And now is the time.

    Let’s rise together—for truth, for justice, and for the future we’re determined to create. Let’s build something stronger than fear and hate – let’s take real action.

    In solidarity,
    Judy
    Founder, Rescue Our Democracy