We aim to be a voice in the ongoing political discourse, providing both factual information and opinionated analysis, from a progressive or center-left perspective, free from the direct influence of major established Main Street Media.
Blue Press Journal – President Donald Trump is set to undergo his second “routine yearly check up” at Walter Reed Medical Center in just six months. The White House announced the visit on Wednesday, fueling concerns about the president’s health and his lack of transparency regarding his medical records.
This latest development comes on the heels of a tumultuous month, during which Trump’s public appearances have been scarce, and he has been spotted with considerable bruising on his hands. Vice President JD Vance’s recent comments about being prepared to assume the presidency “if God forbid, there’s a terrible tragedy” with Trump have only added to the speculation surrounding the president’s health.
Despite promises to release his medical records during the 2024 election, Trump has failed to do so, leaving many to wonder what he may be hiding. The White House has confirmed that Trump was diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency in July, but the condition’s “benign and common” nature has done little to alleviate concerns about the president’s overall health.
Democratic opponents have been vocal about their concerns, pointing to Trump’s erratic behavior and unwieldy press conferences as evidence of potential cognitive decline. The president has repeatedly brushed off questions about his mental acuity, but the lack of transparency regarding his medical records has only served to heighten suspicions.
The fact that Trump is undergoing his second “yearly” check up in six months raises serious questions about the accuracy of the White House’s characterizations of his health. The American people have a right to know about the health and well-being of their president, and Trump’s failure to release his medical records is a clear breach of that trust.
Blue Press Journal – A growing number of Republican senators are voicing concerns over President Trump’s decision to deploy National Guard troops from other states to Portland, Oregon, and Chicago, despite opposition from the Democratic governors of those states. The move has escalated tensions between federal and state authorities, with many lawmakers warning of a dangerous precedent.
The conflict reached a boiling point over the weekend when Trump announced plans to send National Guard soldiers to Oregon and Illinois, defying the objections of Governors Tina Kotek and JB Pritzker. The decision was all the more contentious given a federal judge’s ruling on Saturday that the administration could not federalize Oregon’s National Guard to support Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in Portland.
Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) expressed his worries about the potential consequences of Trump’s actions, saying, “I worry about someday a Democrat president sending troops or National Guard from New York, California, Oregon, Washington state to North Carolina. I think it’s bad precedent.” He added that the move contradicts conservative views on states’ rights, stating, “If you look at this particular issue, I don’t see how you can argue that this comports with any sort of conservative view of states’ rights.”
Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) also voiced her concerns, stating that she is “worried about the precedent of sending National Guard members from one state to another despite the objections of those states’ governors.” She emphasized that the use of the National Guard to respond to natural disasters, when requested by a governor, is a common and acceptable practice. However, she warned that Trump’s actions are crossing a dangerous line, saying, “I am concerned, I am very apprehensive about the use of our military for policing and, more, the politicization that we’re seeing within the military.”
The growing unease among Republican senators reflects concern about the erosion of states’ rights and potential power abuses. As the situation unfolds, the resolution and its implications for federal-state relations remain uncertain. Trump’s decision to deploy National Guard troops without state governors’ consent has ignited a debate about executive power limits and the need to preserve states’ rights.
Blue Press Journal – In a shocking display of politicized justice, former FBI Director James Comey pleaded not guilty on Wednesday to charges of lying to Congress. The case against Comey, a longtime thorn in the side of President Donald Trump, is widely seen as a vindictive attempt to silence a prominent critic.
Comey’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible collusion with the Trump campaign sparked the president’s ire, making him a target of Trump’s wrath. The charges against Comey allege that he lied about authorizing a leak to news outlets, although the details of the leak and the outlets involved remain unclear. Ironically, the leak is believed to be related to the FBI probe into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server, a controversy that Trump exploited during the 2016 campaign.
The prosecution of Comey raises serious concerns about the politicization of the Justice Department and the erosion of democratic norms. The fact that U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert was forced out of his position after expressing doubts about the strength of the case against Comey suggests that the Justice Department is more interested in serving Trump’s personal interests than in upholding the law.
Furthermore, the appointment of White House adviser Lindsey Halligan, who has no prior experience as a prosecutor, to replace Siebert is a clear indication that the Trump administration is seeking to stack the deck against Comey. This blatant attempt to manipulate the justice system undermines the integrity of the legal process and threatens the independence of law enforcement.
The charges against Comey remind us of the dangers of authoritarianism and the need to protect law enforcement independence. As the case unfolds, we must remember that the rule of law is vital to democracy, and no one, not even the president, is above it. The prosecution of James Comey tests the Justice Department’s commitment to impartiality and threatens the foundations of American democracy.
Blue Press Journal – In a scathing op-ed published on Sunday, the Wall Street Journal’s editorial boardblasted President Trump’s tariff policy, calling it a “self-destructive tariff folly” that is harming American farmers and businesses. The editorial comes on the heels of reports that the Trump administration is planning a $10 billion bailout for America’s soybean farmers, who have been severely impacted by China’s decision to stop buying American soybeans in retaliation for Trump’s tariffs.
The editorial board argued that the bailout is a clear indication that Trump’s tariff policy is not working as the president claims it is. “You knew it was coming,” the editors wrote. “As President Trump’s tariffs damage farmers and businesses across the U.S., the victims are besieging the Administration for relief. The long lines at the Commerce and Agriculture departments are the latest proof of self-destructive tariff folly.”
The editorial went on to point out that the looming bailout is a refutation of Trump’s claim that tariffs are cost-free. “They aren’t if, like soybean growers, you are the target of retaliation,” the editors wrote. “Mr. Trump likes to say that tariffs are a windfall for the Treasury, but not if much of that revenue is going back out the door in subsidies to offset the tariff harm.”
The Wall Street Journal criticized how tariffs are fostering new lobbying and special interest groups in Washington. “The farm fiasco underscores another truth about tariffs: they expand what Mr. Trump called ‘the swamp,’” the editorial stated. “Industries hit by tariffs are flocking to Washington to lobby for relief.”
The editorial emphasized that Trump’s tariff policy is detrimental to American farmers and businesses, urging the president to rethink his trade approach. With the soybean industry affected, it’s uncertain how the Trump administration will react and if it will reconsider its tariffs. One certainty is that the Wall Street Journal’s critique signals increasing opposition to Trump’s trade policies from the business community.
Blue Press Journal – The state of Illinois has filed a lawsuit to prevent President Donald Trump from deploying hundreds of federalized National Guard troops to the streets of Chicago. The lawsuit, filed on Monday, comes on the heels of a federal judge in Oregon temporarily blocking Trump’s administration from sending National Guard troops to police Portland.
The Trump administration’s decision to federalize up to 300 members of the Illinois National Guard, despite objections from Democratic Governor J.B. Pritzker, has been met with fierce resistance from state officials. The administration also plans to deploy an additional 400 troops from Texas to Chicago, sparking concerns about the potential for civil unrest and the erosion of local control.
This move reflects Trump’s pattern of deploying National Guard troops to cities like Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. He has promised to send troops to more cities, including Portland, despite local objections. This approach has faced criticism as an overreach of federal power and a threat to civil liberties.
The lawsuit filed by Illinois argues that the Trump administration’s actions are unconstitutional and violate the state’s sovereignty. Governor Pritzker has been vocal in his opposition to the deployment, stating that it is unnecessary and could lead to further instability in the city.
The situation in Chicago is tense, with protests against police brutality and systemic racism. The deployment of National Guard troops could escalate conflict. By filing this lawsuit, Illinois is taking a crucial step to protect its citizens’ rights and safety against Trump’s authoritarian tendencies.
Blue Press Journal – As the government shutdown continues, a pressing concern is being overlooked: the fate of Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits. Republicans in Congress have stubbornly refused to negotiate an extension of these crucial credits, claiming there is ample time to address the issue once the government is funded. However, this delay will have severe consequences for millions of Americans, who will soon face skyrocketing healthcare premiums.
The Clock is Ticking
With open enrollment for the ACA marketplace set to begin on November 1 in most states, premiums are being decided now. If Congress fails to act, many Americans will start feeling the pinch within weeks. In fact, some states, like Idaho, will begin their open enrollment period as early as October 15, just two weeks from now. “It’s really important to underscore that… So that’s two weeks from now,” said Devon Trolley, executive director of the Pennsylvania Health Insurance Exchange Authority.
The Human Cost
The consequences of inaction will be dire. Premiums could more than double if insurers believe the tax credits will be allowed to expire. This will disproportionately affect low- and middle-income families, who rely on these credits to afford healthcare. According to a recent analysis by the health policy nonprofit KFF, 77% of ACA market enrollees (18.7 million people) live in states won by President Trump in the 2024 election. These states have received more premium tax credits and seen more enrollment growth than others.
Bipartisan Support for Tax Credit Extension
The KFF survey also found that 78% of adults believe Congress should extend the enhanced tax credits for the ACA marketplace. This includes 92% of Democrats, 82% of independents, and 59% of Republicans. The numbers are clear: there is broad support for extending these tax credits, regardless of party affiliation.
Table: ACA Market Enrollees by State
State
Number of Enrollees
Percentage of Enrollees
Alabama
140,000
73%
Arizona
230,000
81%
Florida
1,900,000
85%
Georgia
430,000
79%
Texas
1,100,000
83%
The Blame Game
Democrats maintain that Republicans will be to blame for both the shutdown and the resulting hike in premiums. “Republicans would rather shut down the government than address a health care crisis that is threatening to shut down small businesses across the country,” said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) in a briefing on Friday. “And because Republicans have refused to save the health care tax credits that millions of people rely on, health care costs are about to more than double for families across the country.”
The Real Motive
It’s clear that the Republican refusal to negotiate on the budget bill is a direct result of their desire to preserve massive tax breaks for billionaires and millionaires. By prioritizing the interests of the wealthy over those of everyday Americans, Republicans are putting millions of people at risk of losing access to affordable healthcare.
The clock is ticking, and the consequences of inaction will be severe. Republicans must set aside partisan games and work with Democrats to extend ACA tax credits. Millions of Americans depend on this. The KFF survey shows broad support for these tax credits, making it imperative for Congress to act to avoid a healthcare crisis. Will Republicans listen to the American people, or prioritize the wealthy?
Blue Press Journal – In a significant blow to the Trump administration, a federal judge in Oregon has temporarily blocked the deployment of the National Guard in Portland. The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut on Saturday, comes in response to a lawsuit brought by the state and city of Portland.
Immergut’s order argues that the relatively small protests in the city do not justify the use of federalized forces, and that allowing the deployment could harm Oregon’s state sovereignty. The judge emphasized that the country has a “longstanding and foundational tradition of resistance to government overreach, especially in the form of military intrusion into civil affairs.”
The protests in question have been centered around the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building in Portland, with typically only a couple dozen people in attendance. The Portland Police Bureau has stated that it does not participate in immigration enforcement and only intervenes in the protests if there is vandalism or criminal activity.
Immergut’s ruling criticizes the Trump administration’s decision to deploy the National Guard, stating that it was “untethered to the facts.” The judge’s order is a significant rebuke to the administration’s efforts to crack down on protests and assert federal authority.
The deployment of the National Guard was announced on September 28, and was met with widespread criticism from local officials and residents. A peaceful march earlier that day drew thousands of people to downtown Portland, with no arrests reported. In contrast, the Portland Police Bureau arrested two people on assault charges during a smaller protest later that evening.
A report by the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general found that many of the federal officers deployed to Portland lacked the necessary training and equipment for the mission. This raises serious questions about the administration’s preparedness and competence in handling such situations.
Immergut’s ruling is a victory for the people of Portland and a testament to the importance of checks on executive power. As the judge so eloquently put it, “this is a nation of Constitutional law, not martial law.” The Trump administration would do well to heed this warning and respect the rights and sovereignty of the states and their citizens.
Blue Press Journal – President Trump and his allies continue to tout a “mandate” for his far-right policies. But a closer examination of the election results and recent polling data reveals a different story. Despite winning the popular vote by a slim 1.5 percent margin, Trump’s claims of a sweeping mandate are baseless.
Polling Agency
Approval Rating
Leger
38%
YouGov
40%
Pew Research Center
40%
Marist College
41%
These weak approval ratings, averaging around 40 percent, are a far cry from the overwhelming support Trump claims to have. As Senator Bernie Sanders noted, “When you win an election by 1.5 percent, that’s not a mandate. That’s a narrow victory.” Moreover, the policies Trump is pushing, such as firing federal workers, deploying the military to cities, and slashing funding for medical research, are not supported by a majority of Americans.
In fact, a recent survey by the Pew Research Center found that 60 percent of Americans oppose reducing funding for medical research, while 55 percent oppose deploying the military to cities to address protests. These numbers suggest that Trump’s policies are out of touch with the values and priorities of the American people.
As Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez pointed out, “The idea that Trump has a mandate to push through these extreme policies is a myth. The American people did not give him a blank check to pursue his agenda.” Instead, the election results and polling data suggest that Americans are looking for bipartisan solutions and pragmatic leadership, not divisive rhetoric and radical policy shifts.
The notion of a Trump mandate is a myth that needs debunking; the numbers do not support claims of broad endorsement for his policies. We must prioritize democracy, inclusivity, and pragmatism over a partisan agenda. As Barack Obama said, “We are the change that we seek.” It’s time for Americans to unite for a more equitable future for all.
Blue Press Journal (DC) – As the government shutdown enters its latest phase, President Donald Trump’s lack of engagement has sparked widespread criticism from lawmakers and federal workers. Despite the growing concerns, Trump has been largely absent from the public eye, opting instead to communicate through juvenile internet memes and tweets.
The President’s absence has led to speculation about his health, with some noting the unusual makeup on his hands, potentially indicating an IV or other medical treatment. This has only added to the concerns about his ability to lead the country during this critical time.
Since the Monday meeting with Democratic leaders, requested by Jeffries and Schumer, Trump has made no effort to bridge the gap between Democrats and Republicans to end the impasse. In fact, his actions have been described as “unhinged and unserious” by Representative Jeffries, who told NBC News, “Donald Trump is in the presidential witness protection program. No one can find him when it comes to the government shutdown issue because he knows he’s responsible for having caused it.”
Trump’s allies have attempted to shift the blame to Democrats, falsely claiming that they shut down the government to provide healthcare to migrants in the country illegally. However, this narrative has been widely debunked.
The President’s lack of engagement is a stark contrast to the efforts of previous presidents, who have worked tirelessly to end or avert government shutdowns. Trump’s absence has only exacerbated the situation, leaving federal workers and Americans to suffer the consequences of his inaction.
As the shutdown continues, it remains to be seen if Trump will take a more active role in resolving the crisis. Until then, his silence will fuel criticism about his ability to govern effectively.
Blue Press Journal – The Trump administration is planning to use the government shutdown as an opportunity to fire thousands of federal workers, a move that would have far-reaching and devastating consequences. According to reports, the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has encouraged agencies to view the shutdown as a chance to eliminate positions that do not align with the administration’s values.
This plan has sparked outrage and a lawsuit from the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), which represents federal workers. The union argues that the administration’s actions would punish and further traumatize federal employees. The lawsuit, supported by other democracy groups and unions, highlights the administration’s attempt to exploit the shutdown to drastically shrink the federal workforce.
The Trump administration has made no secret of its intention to slash programs and departments that it deems unnecessary. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated that the administration would target agencies that do not align with its values, which it believes are a waste of taxpayer dollars. This move would not only harm federal workers but also undermine the critical services they provide to the American people.
The plan to fire thousands of federal workers is part of the administration’s broader agenda, as outlined in Project 2025, a nearly 1,000-page memo authored in part by OMB Director Russell Vought. The memo advocates for significant reductions in the federal workforce, which would have a disproportionate impact on vulnerable communities that rely on government services.
Democrats have expressed strong opposition to the administration’s plan, with Senator Gary Peters (D-MI) stating that the Trump administration is “weaponizing a temporary government shutdown” to permanently fire nonpartisan, expert employees. The administration’s actions would not only harm federal workers but also undermine the integrity of the federal government and its ability to serve the American people.
As the shutdown continues, it is essential to recognize the consequences of the Trump administration’s plan. Firing thousands of federal workers would plunge the government into uncharted legal territory, lacking a federal statutory framework. Such actions would also impact the federal workforce, undermining the trust and stability crucial for effective governance.
This plan has sparked outrage and a lawsuit from the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), representing federal workers. The union contends that the administration’s actions would punish and further traumatize employees. The lawsuit, filed alongside other democracy groups and unions, emphasizes the administration’s effort to use the shutdown to reduce the federal workforce.
The plan to fire thousands of federal workers is part of the administration’s broader agenda, as outlined in Project 2025, a nearly 1,000-page memo authored in part by OMB Director Russell Vought. The memo advocates for significant reductions in the federal workforce, which would have a disproportionate impact on vulnerable communities that rely on government services.
Democrats oppose the administration’s plan, with Senator Gary Peters (D-MI) stating that the Trump administration is “weaponizing a temporary government shutdown” to fire expert employees. This would harm federal workers and undermine the integrity of the government.
As the shutdown continues, it is essential to recognize the consequences of the Trump administration’s plan. Firing thousands of federal workers would throw the government into uncharted legal territory, lacking a supportive statutory framework. These actions would also impact the federal workforce, undermining trust and stability crucial for effective governance.
Blue Press Journal 