Two good reasons to rationally distrust Trump and MAGA elites in power

Another federal agency rendered incompetent

by MAGA loyalists, Trump’s “best people”

Context

A Scientific American article, Why the FDA rejected a ‘breakthrough’ melanoma drug, provides an excellent example of why distrust in anything even a little unusual from MAGA-corrupted federal agencies is warranted and rational. The facts are that the FDA has twice rejected marketing approval for an experimental drug for advanced melanoma drug. Data from clinical trials indicate that the drug, RP1, works very well. The FDA isn’t answering questions about why the drug is blocked. Outside experts are baffled as to (1) what is going on and why the FDA has shut down on this, and (2) what the implications for other drug approvals might be.

One expert commented: “There’s really no second-line treatments. This is a population that has been left behind. This is where I had hoped RP1 would come in.”

Another expert commented on the FDA’s baffling behavior: “This is all unexpected. It’s been a very disturbing situation…, just the shifting goalposts of FDA regulations and requirements.”

Related context is that Trump and MAGA elites have corrupted all or nearly all federal agencies. The primary goal is stripping average citizens, consumers and workers of their rights, protections and wealth while further empowering, increasing and protecting allied elites and their wealth and powers.

Two bases for rational distrust

Two highly plausible explanations for the FDA’s inexplicable behavior are (1) incompetence of the MAGA loyalists Trump put in charge, and (2) Trump’s pay-to-play politics that requires parties doing business with the federal government to bribe Trump to get service.

On the incompetence rationale, the MAGA idiots running the FDA changed regulatory requirements for marketing approval. At present, it’s impossible to get marketing approval for certain new drugs like RP1. That is because the new MAGA clinical trial requirement requires a treatment protocol that is highly unethical, making the clinical trial basically impossible to conduct. That puts the kibosh on drugs that fall in this stupid regulatory scheme. Link, link

At least equally likely is the increasingly popular “Trump is corrupt as hell rationale”. By now, Trump’s corruption and pay-to-play demands for money are well-documented. There’s no rational dispute about that any more. Of course, there’s plenty of irrational denials and disputes from morally rotted Trump and his MAGAland demagogues and liars.

The chronic liar-in-chief’s track record of lying

Pardon the crooks: A glaring example of Trump corruption is his criminal pardons for profit business. As discussed before, Trump pardons criminals like murderers, drug dealers and tax cheats in return for a bribe estimated at about $1 to $2 million per pardon. His pardons have shafted victims of pardoned criminals or the US Treasury to the tune of about $2 billion by his forgiveness of victim restitution payments and government fines. Trump’s contempt for the rule of law and his callous indifference to the suffering of crime victims are blatant and world-famous. Link, link, link

So, given his pay-to-play track record of governing, one can reasonably believe that unless the company trying to get RP1 approved by the FDA bribes Trump, their drug is never going to be approved. Melanoma patients will die and Trump will not care.

Q1: Absent unusually strong, transparent, and independent (not MAGA-corrupted) evidence, is it reasonable and rational to regard corruption with MAGA as the de facto gatekeeper for what used to be normal government functions like life‑and‑death regulatory decisions? Or, is MAGA incompetence the only factor at play here?

Q2: In view of the track record of Trump and his loyal and usually incompetent MAGA elite allies in power, is it reasonable and rational to distrust most or nearly all of what the federal government now tells us? If not, why not? What is the evidence of their honesty?

Christian nationalist theocracy further limits abortion access

Context

In the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, the USSC overturned Roe v. Wade. Under Roe, there was a nationwide right to an abortion in the first two trimesters. The legality of abortions in the 3rd trimester was left to the states. Roe was the law for about 49 years. During that time, Roe did not force not a single girl or woman to give birth. Not a single one.

In the almost 4 years since Dobbs became national law, state anti-abortion laws have forced tens of thousands of girls and women (about 30,000 by a conservative estimate) to give birth against their will. As one would predict, those laws have led to more unwanted and unsafe pregnancies carried to term. Both live births and infant deaths increased. Link, link, link, link

Polls indicate that most Americans continue to support a right to an abortion all or most cases. To no one’s surprise, there is a major partisan difference in the level of abortion support. Link, link

At present, white support for Christian nationalism is a strong predictor of support for criminalizing abortion and using state power to enforce a theological social order. Christian nationalism and white nationalism are among the strongest predictors of support for arresting women who obtain abortions. That data is evidence of a coercive theocratic ideology, not just “pro‑life” concern. Theocratic Christian nationalist religious dogma is working to establish fetal “personhood” in the law. That, along with bans on abortion drugs, and criminalization of abortion is part of a long‑term Christian nationalist theocratic wealth and power movement to reshape US law into a theocracy. Link, link

Christian nationalism expands its theocratic attack on abortions

The theocratic federal 5th circuit is TX, LA and MS

The Christian nationalist 5th circuit federal court of appeals issued a nationwide injunction against sending the anti-abortion drug mifepristone by mail. Despite 25+ years of safe use and extensive data supporting mail and dispensing the drug by telehealth, the Christian theocrat judges shut down sending the drug via telehealth and mail. Medical abortion with mifepristone plus misoprostol is highly effective (about 98% success by 6–7 weeks). There are extremely low rates of serious complications, transfusion, or hospitalization. The judges’ restriction will lead to no significant or even measurable safety benefit. Link, link

Despite proven safety, the 5th circuit judges alleged safety problems. There is no significant safety problem with the drug. This is the face of a corrupted rule of law imposed on everyone by cynical, lying MAGA judges. They are forcing Christian theocracy down everyone’s throat, whether they like it or not. The theocrats’ injunction is obviously medically irrational. It substitutes hostility of Christian dogma to abortion, while denying well-established drug‑safety science. The injunction is aligned with MAGA’s virulent anti-abortion ideology as explicitly laid out in Project 2025.[1] Link, link, link

Footnote:

1. Project 2025 calls for the FDA to reverse approval of mifepristone and misoprostol, effectively ending most medication abortions, and for aggressive enforcement of ancient federal statutes like the Comstock Act to criminalize mailing abortion drugs or devices. It also calls for sweeping federal bans or defunding of abortion in veterans’ care and other federal health programs.

USSC guts the 1965 Voting Rights Act

Yesterday, in the case Louisiana v. Callais, the USSC pretty much finished killing off the rest what was left from what it had not already killed off in the 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA). Now, states are free to weaken racial minority votes by gerrymandering them as much as possible. Gerrymandering voting districts to empower minorities is now officially unconstitutional. States legislatures can now reduce the number of minority politicians in their state as much as they possibly can with no regard for charges of racism. Instead, the USSC tells us that gerrymandering is not a matter of unconstitutional racial bias or racism. Instead, it’s just a matter of good faith partisanship. Link, link

That major piece of civil rights laws from the 1960’s is now dead and buried. For America’s radical right authoritarians, bigots and racists, this decision has been a long time in coming. Gutting the VRA was a key goal of America’s radical right authoritarian wealth and power movement ever since it was signed into law in 1965.

Packing, cracking, and stacking

After Callais, partisan gerrymandering that reduces the power of racial and ethnic minorities is legal. This is the new normal. The main ways to reduce the power of a group of voters are called packing, cracking, and stacking. Link, link, link

Packing puts a group of voters together in a single voting district to limit the group’s representation to 1 person. The packed group usually elects its preferred candidate in those districts by overwhelming margins. However, as intended, that wastes the group’s total voting strength, everywhere else. That group of voters is limited representation by 1 or a small number of seats even though its population would justify more.

Cracking splits the group up to dilute their votes to as few representatives as possible, preferably none at all. Here, the crackers spread a geographically concentrated group across multiple voting districts so that they are a minority in each. That usually prevents the targeted group from forming a majority and electing candidates of their choice anywhere. People in power to draw voting districts tend to pack disfavored voters into a few “sink” districts, and crack the rest across surrounding districts. That maximizes the power of whoever draws voting districts.

Stacking is the tactic of combining a minority community with a larger, higher‑turnout majority community. In those districts, the majority reliably controls the district despite voter diversity.

The upshot

With the Callais decision now being the law of the land, the brutal reality is that the 6 MAGA judges who dominate the USSC have now blessed “partisan” packing, cracking and stacking of minority voters as long as states can point to it being a matter of partisanship, not racial bias or racism. In a nutshell, it’s white power legalized. Obviously, white power will be most effective in most or all red states. Most of those states have chafed under and hated the VRA ever since 1965.

The USSC deals with the issue of white racism by saying that state legislators who are mostly white are operating in good faith. Thus they are not biased, or racists, but just good people trying to do their very best for everyone. So, when allegations of racial bias or racism are made as criticisms on those state officials’ honor, the USSC rejects that and says that “partisan” motives, not bias or racism, is a complete answer, even when packed, cracked or stacked Black or other minority voters lose their power.

In other words for the USSC, there is no such thing as racial bias or racism. State legislators are all just jolly good fellows packing, cracking and stacking in good faith partisanship, not racial animosity.

Q1: If gerrymandering for partisan purposes is just good faith politics, does that morally justify doing it?

Q2: Are elections stolen for voters who are disempowered by gerrymandering for either good faith partisan reasons, (at least implicitly) bad faith racist reasons, or a mix of both? Or, can an election only be stolen by widespread voter fraud or vote counting fraud?

Q3: Is the USSC’s unspoken belief in “colorblindness”, which ideologically sweeps away the idea that some legislators actually are racially biased or racists, a sincere belief by the 6 MAGA radicals on the USSC, or are five of them* actually white racists or bigots?

* Clarence Thomas is Black. His mind very likely justifies this differently from how the 5 white MAGA judges claim to justify it. Thomas may actually believe in MAGA’s colorblindness myth. But that story is too complicated to pack into a single blog post. 

Trump continues to obliterate public interest science research

Polluting for profit is profitable

As we all know by now, MAGA politics hates climate science research, and climate laws and regulations. As part of their anti-public interest holy war, Trump and MAGA elites have almost completely destroyed the EPA and other pro-public interest federal research programs.

A few weeks ago, Trump proposed a 52% budget cut for the EPA’s climate and public health research. He cynically smeared EPA research as “Green New Scam spending”. a prestigious scientific arm of the federal government did groundbreaking research aimed at saving American lives. It studied fertility, asthma, wildfires, drinking water, climate change and myriad other health threats. In just 15 months, Trump has almost completely dismantled EPA research. About 1,500 biologists, chemists and other experts at the EPA’s Office of Research and Development have been laid off, reassigned or pressured to retire. Only 124 researchers remain, and those are under pressure to go away. 

Experts point out that Trump’s wrecking ball to dismantle EPA research seriously weakens the government’s ability to protect public health. But that is the point. So for Trump, MAGA elites and businesses that pollute for profit, the death of EPA research is a huge MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!! moment. For the public interest and public health, it’s a huge kick in the pants.

In other dismal anti-public interest science news, Trump's FY2027 budget proposes 54% cuts to NSF, 47% to NASA Science, 28% to NIST, 13% to DOE Office of Science, 10% to NIH, and eliminating NOAA research funding. In essence, MAGA extremism isn obliterating all federal research. The damage to America’s science infrastructure is catastrophic. Assuming the federal government ever returns to pro-science policy, the damage will take years to repair, assuming American science can be returned to something at least fairly close to MAGA’s anti-science mindset. Link, link, link 

On top of budget cuts and getting rid of experts, Trump and MAGA elites have shut down enforcement of environmental laws and regulations. The goal is to free violators to expand pollution without much or any concern for public health. For example in Jan. 2025, Trump froze all existing environmental litigation and settlement negotiations. He reassigned senior Dept. of Justice environmental enforcement chiefs to immigration work, gutting the federal enforcement effort. Last March, he also sent EPA enforcement employees memo (1) requiring political appointee (Trump sycophants) approval for cases against major polluters, and (2) completely barring enforcement actions from interfering with any phase of energy production. Link, link

In addition, Trump's April 2025 executive order directed the US Attorney General to take all appropriate action to stop the enforcement of state climate laws, specifically targeting California, New York, and Vermont cap-and-trade programs, carbon taxes, and lawsuits against oil companies. Trump also eliminated supplemental environmental projects from pollution settlements, barring EPA from including cleanup projects in agreements with polluters. DOJ terminated environmental justice investigations and settlement agreements in April 2025. An April 2025 executive order directed EPA to revise environmental regulations to automatically terminate by October 2026. Link, link, link

Big oil 💓 Trump!

Public opinion 

Gallup's March 2-18, 2026 Environment poll found Americans’ environmental assessments at their bleakest levels: only 35% rated environmental quality as excellent or good (a record low), while a near-record high 66% said the environment’s quality is worsening. A record-low 63% believe the government is not doing enough to protect the environment. Despite Trump's rollbacks, majorities prioritize environmental quality over economic growth (58%) and energy development (57%). Over 60% of voters believe clean energy development should be a high or very high priority for the President and Congress. Finally, a December 2025 poll indicated that 66% of registered voters favor transitioning the US economy completely from fossil fuels to clean energy by 2050. Link, link, link