It's a wake-up call in more ways than one.
Time for some sh** you need to know.
Lot going on and a lot of it involves Jamie's favorite subject to rail against gerrymandering Yesterday in a side note yesterday marked the 72nd anniversary of the US Supreme Court decision on Brown versus Board of Education of Topeka Which led that which held rather that racially segregated public schools were inherently unequal and therefore Unconstitutional which was a great ruling
Now fast forward 72 years and we seem to be going backwards because on Friday the Supreme Court rejected Virginia's bid to restore a congressional map that would have given Democrats a chance to pick up four seats in the closely divided House of Representatives.
The court's order issued without any noted dissent is in the is the latest twist in the nation's mid decade redistricting competition.
It's kicked off.
It was kicked off by Donald Trump urging Republican control.
states to redraw their lines and was supercharged by a recent Supreme Court ruling severely weakening the Voting Rights Act that opened up even more winnable seats for the GOP because why let people of color vote they don't know what they're doing so we're going to go back to the Confederacy.
In recent days the justices have sided with Republicans in Alabama and Louisiana who hope to redo their congressional maps.
to produce more GOP-leaning seats, but the Virginia situation was different.
It stemmed from a 4-3 ruling by the Virginia Supreme Court that struck down a constitutional amendment that voters passed just last month.
Now, they say narrowly passed, but passed is passed.
So the voters said yes.
The state court found that the Democratic control legislature improperly began the process of placing the amendment of the ballot on the ballot
after early voting had begun in Virginia's general election last fall.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, Jamie.
In Louisiana, voting had already begun and
suspended that election altogether.
All right.
Just checking.
Yeah.
Supreme Court typically doesn't intervene in state court proceedings unless it's against Donald Trump.
Unless they present an issue of federal law.
So, Virginia Democrats had hoped to persuade the justices of the Virginia court misread federal law and Supreme Court precedent that hold that even if early voting is underway, an election does not happen until Election Day itself.
And in Georgia last week, Governor Brian Kemp said he wasn't going to call for new maps before the midterms.
Turns out he's going to.
He's now asked the state legislators to start drawing up those new maps.
And this is what happens.
This is what happens when the Supreme Court rules in the way that they did.
And this is why this ruling is so
dangerous for democracy.
It's literally a danger to democracy with with what they did and it is going to have a ripple effect because now blue states are trying to counteract and this is this is why I get on my gerrymandering soapbox because this is bad for all voters.
And again there is there has been a bill in the US Congress for years that would put a stop to this but as we've seen that one party
And it either starts with an R or a D, but I think it starts with an R. I don't know for sure.
They're afraid that they will lose their power.
And so they have done everything they can to block that bill.
But let's move on.
There is some other stuff
know.
I want to talk to you about
Very much.
So we're going to bring this story closer to home because UW-Madison is closing a pair of libraries this summer as a result of a campus-wide budget cuts.
Friday was the last day students, faculty, staff, and the public could visit the Geology and Geophysics Library, and the Social Work Library closes on August 14th.
Now, the former chancellor of UW-Madison announced in June
that the university departments would need to cut their budgets by 2026 by 5% or 7% for the next school year.
She also went on to say at a February UW Board of Regents meeting that the cost-cutting measures yielded $64 million in savings for UW-Madison.
Now the budget cuts accelerated a planned consolidation of UW-Madison's libraries outlined in a 2017 report.
UW-Madison Libraries Associate Dean for Learning and Engagement
Kerry Cruz said that nearly a decade-long library plan aims to create larger libraries serving the whole campus rather than smaller ones scattered in academic buildings.
Now UW-Madison closed the Astronomy, Mathematics, and Physics Library in August.
In the fall, the Rebecca M. Blank Student Commons, the library and study space named after the late Chancellor, opened in the new Morgan, Morebridge Hall.
Library collections are being transferred to other locations and will remain available.
Students and the campus community checked out their last books this week at the geology library on the fourth floor of Weeks Hall.
Its collections are moving to Steenbach library or the university's shelving facility in Verona.
The campus can request all of the materials in the catalog for delivery to another library for checkout.
The UW libraries will catalog the social work library
materials for at least six months after it closes in August.
So, I mean, you're still going to be able to check these books out, so I guess that's good, and they can still be requested.
I don't know.
Anytime I get it, I get budgets, but anytime I see a library close, it always makes my heart a little sad, because I am a box person.
Yeah,
and these programs are important for
students and a lot of faculty and staff, but...
They'll find, pardon me, they will find a way.
All right, this one, normally on, when we're talking about the S, you need to know, we don't invite you to jump in, but you can jump in on this one if you want.
Is there any answer to the obvious corruption that is happening in this administration?
855-75CIVIC, 855-7524842.
I have been apoplectic about this since I heard about it over the weekend, and I'm surprised it's not a bigger thing.
But, you know, we'll make it a bigger thing.
The Department of Justice is finalizing a deal to launch a so-called Truth and Justice Commission, but that is not the full name.
It is the Donald J. Trump Truth and Justice Commission, and establish a compensation fund of $1,776 million.
To pay claims made by alleged victims of government weaponization in exchange for President Trump dropping his ongoing lawsuit against the IRS.
Now that's according to sources and ABC News.
They said that the proposed deal, which is likely to face legal hurdles and has already been criticized by Democrats as a slush fund for Trump's allies, arose after months of deliberation between the White House and DOJ officials who originally attempted to craft a legal justification for the settlement to compensate Trump directly.
Now, the lawsuit is because somebody leaked his tax returns.
The weirdness and you should be able to see this is Donald Trump run is in charge.
He's he's the president all these all these departments are under him, but That's all right He's gonna sue them anyway, but this is this is a slush fund.
That's all it is I'll give you I'll give you a few more facts.
So they're using a centuries old legal practice known as the rule of necessity
DOJ lawyers have argued that no alternative existed other than letting the lawsuit proceed with Trump acting as the plaintiff while being directly in charge of the defendants, the IRS and the Treasury.
So they're saying he's a private citizen as well as the president, which I don't really buy.
In the court filing this week, the attorneys identified serious issues with the lawsuit.
This is
the people on the sensible side, arguing that Trump has extraordinary control over the defendants in the case and that the circumstances raise the specter that defendants and their attorneys may instead be operating at the president's direction.
You think?
Additionally, since taking office, President Trump has significantly expanded the president's oversight and control of the attorney general and the DOJ, including the way in ways that blur the line.
So he would be eligible.
Trump would not be eligible for payment himself, but entities that he controls or that benefit him would be eligible for the funds.
They'd also it also would give settlements to 1600 people who were convicted after the insurrection.
Trump would have the ability to fire some of the people on this commission if they weren't.
giving the money to who he thought was going to be.
This is one more step of this president enriching himself at our expense.
He is suing you for this money.
Don't be mistaken.
This has nothing to do with the IRS.
This has nothing to do with anything.
It's about him getting richer and you're paying for it.
So if that's cool with you, it's not cool with me.
a billion seven hundred and 76 million.
1776, get it?
Yeah.
What I think is fascinating about this is the fact that you're right, we haven't heard a lot about it, but this is a president who has used this office to enrich himself and his inner circle through both versions of the presidency, right?
And
I think
it's been more outright in the second version.
But there's so many things that are wrong with this, right?
First, let's talk about the, I mean, where do you start?
So let's start first.
You see that's just it.
Where do you start?
First of all, the fact that it's even a possibility.
we start there?
That shows, again, Congress has no spine.
So we're paying for this.
So first, where's the accountability?
because this proposal would allow this commission to distribute the funds but without any sort of transparency about how those decisions are made.
Second, there's precedent here.
If a government can actually create a fund like this that's tied to political claims,
what stops future administrations, Republican or Democrat, from doing the exact same thing.
Third, I think there's also a trust issue here because there are already concerns about politicization with this administration.
And now we're talking about benefiting allies or specific groups that are tied specifically to the president.
And so when those government actions are tied to politics,
it erodes trust in our institutions.
And so for me, I guess, so many things, again, wrong with this, but those would be the three that would stick out as far as the first three that I would start picking at along with the taxpayer money.
Lynn Texan from Golden Valley, she says, maybe Dems should start campaigning on clawing back funds dispersed under the Trump administration.
I like that idea, Lynn.
It's my
The main thing I keep coming back to before I start breaking it all down is why is nobody stopping this?
It's corruption out in the open.
It used to be if you were corrupt, you kind of had a little shame.
You kept it in the dark.
They're doing it right out in the open and basically begging us to stop them.
and nobody is stopping them.
When you're proposing setting up this slush fund, and that's what I'm going to call it because that's what it is, that's money that is not going to be appropriated by Congress, that's going to be decided by the five commissioners, four of whom were appointed by the Attorney General, who we already know is Trump's first former personal lawyer,
and then the fifth one by the president who has complete power over the commissioners to get rid of them.
If you have any doubt what's happening here, you need to wipe the dew off your eyes and see what's up because this is just the latest.
If this were the only thing it would be, oh wow, how is this happening?
It's just another brick.
in the chain of corruption that's going on.
The enrichment of this president.
