Blue Press Journal – In a surprising turn of events, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) has found herself at odds with her own party on several key issues, leaving fellow Republicans puzzled and frustrated. Despite her insistence that she remains unchanged, Greene’s recent positions on topics such as Jeffrey Epstein and healthcare subsidies have put her on a collision course with the very party she was once a fierce defender of.
Greene’s political identity was shaped by Trump loyalism, consistently defending the former president and attacking Democrats. Recently, however, she has taken stances that contradict both the president and her party, such as signing a discharge petition to release files on sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, despite White House opposition, raising eyebrows among colleagues.
Greene’s comments onthe expiration of ObamaCare tax credits, which could double insurance premiums for millions, have put her at odds with GOP leaders. While her party focuses on shutdown messaging, she has expressed alarm at the absence of a Republican plan to address the issue. “I’m sick and tired of Republicans in Congress not doing what they promised,” she lamented.
Greene’s claim of being “100 percent the same person” as during her initial congressional run seems disingenuous due to her recent position shifts. Her earlier criticism of congressional Republicans on healthcare has turned into a rebellion against her party’s leadership. It is “ridiculous” to assert her positions haven’t isolated her within the GOP, as she suggests.
Expert analysis suggests that Greene’s actions may be a calculated attempt to rebrand herself as a champion of populist causes, rather than a loyal Republican. However, this strategy may backfire, as party leadership grows exasperated with her antics. In a post-Trump era, Greene’s unpredictability and defiance of party orthodoxy could become a liability.
Blue Press Journal – As the United States grapples with the implications of an increasingly powerful executive branch, a top aide to President Donald Trump has emerged as a key figure in the administration’s push for autocrat-like powers. Stephen Miller, a senior advisor to the President, has been making headlines with his inflammatory rhetoric and blatant misrepresentations of the law. His statements have sparked concerns about the erosion of democratic norms and the concentration of power in the hands of the President.
Miller’s recent comments have been particularly striking. He has accused federal judges, including those appointed by Republican presidents, of participating in a “judicial coup.” He has also labeled the opposition Democratic Party a “domestic extremist organization” and protesters in U.S. cities “terrorists.” These statements are not only incendiary but also demonstrate a profound disregard for the principles of democracy and the rule of law.
According to a former Heritage Foundation staffer, Miller’s comments are part of a larger plan to consolidate power and undermine checks and balances. “Project 2025 was, at its core, an aspiration to provide Trump plenary power to gut checks and balances, consolidate control over all aspects of the federal government and entrench power for the long term,” she said. “It was written on paper and Stephen Miller is saying it out loud.”
Miller’s claims about the law are often at odds with reality. For example, he has repeatedly misstated federal asylum law, claiming that asylum seekers must seek safety in the first country they visit after leaving their home country. This is not true. U.S. law permits asylum seekers to seek sanctuary upon arrival, regardless of how they arrived or the countries they passed through.
Moreover, Miller has a tendency to distort facts to suit his narrative. After the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled against Trump’s unlawful deportation of a migrant to a prison in El Salvador where torture is common, Miller claimed that the decision was actually in Trump’s favor. “That’s what the Supreme Court held, by the way,” he lied. “We won a case 9-0.” This blatant misrepresentation of the truth is a stark example of the administration’s willingness to manipulate facts to justify its actions.
Miller has also falsely claimed that Trump won the last presidential election in a “colossal landslide.” In fact, Trump failed to win a majority of the votes cast and defeated his opponent by just 1.5%, one of the smallest popular vote margins in modern times. This distortion of reality is a clear attempt to create a false narrative about the President’s mandate and popularity.
As the administration continues to push the boundaries of executive power, Miller’s comments and actions have become increasingly concerning. His rhetoric has emboldened Trump to take more aggressive actions, including summary killings of individuals in the Caribbean, which he and Miller have designated as “terrorists.”
In a democratic system, the rule of law and the separation of powers are essential checks on the abuse of power. However, with Miller by his side, Trump seems determined to undermine these principles and consolidate his power. As the former Heritage Foundation staffer noted, “It was written on paper and Stephen Miller is saying it out loud.” The implications of this are chilling, and it is essential that Americans remain vigilant and demand that their leaders respect the Constitution and the principles of democracy.
As Miller’s comments highlight, the threat to democracy involves not just Trump’s actions but also the underlying ideology and rhetoric. Inflammatory language, distorted facts, and contempt for the law indicate an authoritarian mindset. Americans must recognize this danger and demand that leaders uphold democracy and the rule of law.
Stephen Miller’s comments and actions remind us of the threat to democracy from the Trump administration. His inflammatory rhetoric and disregard for the law are part of a plan to consolidate power and undermine checks and balances. We must remain vigilant and demand respect for the Constitution and democratic principles, as the future of our democracy depends on it.
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 – 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 (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 