Progressive Thinking

Were they too lazy to use secure channels? Too arrogant to think rules applied to them? Or just too plain ignorant to understand the basics of cyber security?

LAKE GENEVA, WI - You would think that people entrusted with the most sensitive information in the world might—bare minimum—understand the importance of keeping their mouths shut and their messages secure. But apparently, that’s asking too much from the Trump administration. In what has to be one of the dumbest national security blunders since Watergate, we now know that several former officials in Trump’s orbit were discussing classified and confidential matters in group chats. GROUP CHATS. Like middle schoolers planning a pizza party.

This isn’t just careless. It’s criminally stupid.

Let me be blunt: anyone who has ever had to set up two-factor authentication for their bank app knows that digital communication is vulnerable. Hackers, foreign adversaries, tech companies, even bored teenagers with a laptop and free time—there’s no shortage of people who can access unsecured messages. So what in the holy hell were these people thinking?

Were they too lazy to use secure channels? Too arrogant to think rules applied to them? Or just too plain ignorant to understand the basics of cyber security? Honestly, it might be all three. And that’s what makes it even more infuriating.

These aren’t random nobodies. These are (or were) the supposed “best people” Trump swore he surrounded himself with. National Security Advisors. Cabinet members. White House aides. People with access to intelligence briefings, military operations, and diplomatic negotiations—chatting it up in iMessage like they were gossiping about “The Bachelor.”

Even worse, they weren’t just tossing around policy opinions. Some of the content reportedly involved sensitive government business, possible legal strategies, and discussions tied to investigations. If you’re dumb enough to put that in writing in a group chat, you have no business being anywhere near public service, much less the highest levels of government.

Imagine if Barack Obama’s people had done this. Fox News would still be foaming at the mouth in a 24/7 rage spiral. But Trump’s team? The same people who screeched about Hillary Clinton’s emails for five straight years? They’re now shrugging and pretending this isn’t a big deal.

The hypocrisy is almost as outrageous as the incompetence.

This isn’t just an embarrassing little oopsie. It’s a flashing red warning sign about what happens when you put unserious people in serious positions. National security isn’t a joke. It’s not a “vibe.” It’s not something you casually hash out in a thread between memes and lunch plans.

And let’s be real—this is just one more example of how reckless, arrogant, and utterly unqualified so many people in Trump’s orbit truly were. They treated government like a reality show, their positions like status symbols, and their responsibilities like an inconvenience. And now we’re left to pick up the pieces of their idiotic choices.

So to the Trump cronies who thought a group chat was a good idea: congratulations. You’ve set a new bar for stupidity. And in an administration already full of grifters, liars, and chaos agents, that’s saying something.

Trump's strategy is to flood the zone with so much misinformation, distraction, and shameless blame-shifting that people give up trying to separate fact from fiction, and it seems to be working for Brad Schimel.

LAKE GENEVA, WI - Donald Trump won the 2024 election—and no, it wasn’t because he had the best ideas, the strongest policies, or even a coherent platform. He won by doing what Republicans have now perfected: flooding the zone with so much misinformation, distraction, and shameless blame-shifting that people gave up trying to separate fact from fiction.

It wasn’t a campaign. It was a smokescreen.

This is the Republican playbook now. Bury the truth under a pile of half-truths, whataboutisms, and flat-out lies. When someone accuses them of corruption, they just point the finger right back and say, “No, YOU are!” When held accountable for real failures, they deflect with phony scandals and conspiracy theories. It’s like watching a political magic show—Look over here, not over there!—and far too many voters fall for it.

I watched it happen at the national level. But now, I’m watching it creep right into my backyard—in Wisconsin.

Take the upcoming Wisconsin Supreme Court race. Brad Schimel, the Republican candidate, is already leaning into the same garbage playbook that helped Trump win. He’s spinning lies, twisting Susan Crawford’s record, and playing the same game of turning legitimate concerns into counterattacks. When Crawford calls him out for his deep ties to partisan politics and anti-abortion extremism, his campaign just echoes back, claiming she’s the one who's too political. It's the same trick—mirror the accusation so it loses its sting. Confuse people. Make them doubt their own instincts.

And make no mistake—this race matters. The Wisconsin Supreme Court could decide the fate of gerrymandering, abortion rights, voting access, and more. But instead of having an honest debate about those issues, we’re watching the same dirty tactics used in Trump’s campaign trickle down into our state elections.

It’s not subtle. It’s not clever. It’s calculated.

Trump didn’t win because he had the support of a majority of Americans. He won because he and his party threw so much crap at the wall that people stopped looking for the truth altogether. And now that same toxic strategy is being used at every level—from Congress all the way down to local judges.

The goal isn’t to win hearts. It’s to wear people down. To make voters so disillusioned that they give up on democracy itself. And if you’re wondering who that benefits, I’ll give you a hint: it’s not the folks trying to protect your rights, your vote, or your voice.

It’s disinformation as a weapon. Exhaustion as a strategy. And sadly, it’s working.

But we don’t have to accept it. We can still fight for truth—even when they try to drown it. We can still call out the bullshit—even when it’s coming at us from every direction. And we must—because once people stop believing in facts, the only thing left is power. And we’ve already seen how dangerous it is when people like Trump get their hands on too much of it.

Wisconsin deserves better. America deserves better. And dammit, the truth deserves a fighting chance.

Trump’s nostalgic obsession with coal ignores the global shift towards renewable energy sources and isolates the United States from global energy trends.

LAKE GENEVA, WI - In a recent outburst, former President Donald Trump announced his intention to revive the coal industry, authorizing his administration to “immediately begin producing energy with beautiful, clean coal.” He blamed “environmental extremists, lunatics, radicals, and thugs” for hindering America’s energy progress, alleging that countries like China have gained economic advantages by expanding their coal-fired power plants.

This declaration is not just misguided; it’s a reckless assault on environmental progress and public health.

The term “clean coal” is a deceitful oxymoron. While technologies exist to reduce certain emissions from coal combustion, they are grossly inadequate in addressing the extensive environmental and health damages caused by coal. Even with advanced pollution controls, coal-fired power plants remain significant sources of harmful pollutants, including sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter, all of which contribute to respiratory diseases and environmental degradation.

Trump’s nostalgic obsession with coal ignores the global shift towards renewable energy sources. Nations worldwide are investing in wind, solar, and hydroelectric power, recognizing both the environmental necessity and economic viability of these clean energy alternatives. Clinging to coal not only isolates the United States from global energy trends but also undermines our competitiveness in the burgeoning clean energy market.

Citing China’s expansion of coal-fired power plants as a justification for America’s regression is profoundly flawed. China’s reliance on coal has led to severe air pollution and public health crises, prompting the nation to aggressively invest in renewable energy and set ambitious targets for reducing coal consumption. Emulating China’s past mistakes is not a strategy for economic advantage; it’s a blueprint for environmental catastrophe.

Trump’s derogatory labeling of environmental advocates as “extremists” and “thugs” is a transparent attempt to delegitimize those who champion science-based policies for a sustainable future. These advocates strive to protect public health, preserve natural resources, and combat the existential threat of climate change. Vilifying them undermines democratic discourse and stalls critical progress.

The future of energy lies in embracing renewable sources that ensure environmental sustainability and economic growth. Investments in clean energy technologies create jobs, reduce healthcare costs associated with pollution, and position the United States as a leader in the global effort to combat climate change. Resurrecting the coal industry is not just anachronistic; it’s a direct threat to public health and environmental integrity.

Trump’s call to revive coal under the guise of “clean energy” is a dangerous delusion that jeopardizes decades of environmental progress. It’s imperative that we reject this regressive agenda and commit to a sustainable energy future that protects both our planet and the well-being of future generations.

Judges have courageously upheld the rule of law by blocking President Trump’s unconstitutional policies, such as attempts to ban transgender individuals from military service and to end birthright citizenship, serving as essential checks on executive overreach.

LAKE GENEVA, WI - For years, I’ve been afraid that no one was going to stop Donald Trump. I’ve watched in horror as he bulldozes through every legal and ethical norm, lying, inciting violence, and doing everything in his power to dismantle democracy. Meanwhile, Republicans—who should know better—either cower in fear or cling to him out of political necessity. They won’t act, no matter how blatant his abuses become.

But at least some federal judges can see the danger and are stepping up. I hope it will be enough.

Take U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, who blocked Trump’s executive order banning transgender individuals from military service. In her ruling, she pointed out the “cruel irony” of denying rights to the very people who have sacrificed to defend this country. Unlike Trump and his enablers, Reyes recognizes the value of service over political gamesmanship. (AP News)

Another example is Judge Theodore Chuang, who issued an injunction against Trump’s attempt to dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). His ruling emphasized that the administration’s actions likely violated the Constitution. It’s yet another example of Trump trying to reshape the government to fit his authoritarian whims—cutting off funding to programs he doesn’t like, disregarding the law, and expecting no consequences. (The Guardian)

Judge Tanya Chutkan also stood firm, rejecting Trump’s motion to dismiss an indictment related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. She made it clear: presidential immunity does not shield a former president from prosecution for actions beyond official duties. Imagine that—having to actually answer for crimes committed while in office! What a radical concept. (Wikipedia)

Then there’s Judge Leo Sorokin, who issued a nationwide injunction blocking Trump’s executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship. He rightly stated that the order “conflicts with the plain language of the 14th Amendment.” That’s not an opinion—it’s just fact. But facts have never been a strong suit for Trump and his followers. (Wikipedia)

And let’s not forget U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who put a temporary restraining order on Trump’s deportation flights under the Alien Enemies Act. Yet, the administration went ahead with deportations anyway, essentially telling the judiciary to shove it. That alone should terrify every American. A president ignoring court orders is how democracy collapses. (AP News)

Even Chief Justice John Roberts, no liberal by any stretch, rejected Trump’s call for the impeachment of a judge who ruled against his deportation scheme. Roberts reminded everyone that impeachment should not be used as a political weapon against judges who simply apply the law. This shouldn’t even be a controversial statement, but here we are. (AP News)

These judges are doing what elected Republicans refuse to do—acting as a necessary check on a man who has proven, time and again, that he has no respect for democracy, the rule of law, or even basic human decency. Their rulings are a lifeline, a sign that not every branch of gove has fallen to his corruption.

But will it be enough? That’s the question that keeps me up at night. Because as much as I admire these judges for taking a stand, Trump’s loyalists are still out there, pushing his agenda, making excuses, and setting the stage for his return to power. The courts are holding the line for now, but the real test will come in November. If Americans don’t wake up and reject him once and for all, there may not be enough judges left to stop what happens next.

The increasing hostility toward Tesla owners, driven by Elon Musk’s political alignment with Donald Trump, highlights the dangerous spillover of political polarization into everyday life, where consumer choices are becoming targets for backlash, intimidation, and potential violence.

LAKE GENEVA, WI - The intersection of politics, business, and personal identity has never been more volatile than it is today. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the rising tensions surrounding Tesla and its owners. With Elon Musk aligning himself more openly with Donald Trump and even securing a political appointment, backlash has surged against Tesla—not just as a company but also against the individuals who drive its vehicles. What was once the symbol of progressive, forward-thinking technology has now, in some eyes, become a marker of allegiance to an increasingly divisive figure.

The reaction has been swift and, in some cases, troubling. Acts of vandalism against Tesla dealerships and charging stations are on the rise. Protestors have taken to picketing in front of Tesla showrooms, and in some extreme cases, reports of arson have surfaced. While political protests and economic boycotts are an expected part of any charged political climate, the potential for these hostilities to escalate further into targeted violence is deeply concerning.

The greatest irony in all of this is that many Tesla owners purchased their vehicles long before Musk's political pivot. For years, Teslas were a symbol of environmental responsibility, technological innovation, and the transition to sustainable energy. Many of those who now find themselves scrutinized for driving a Tesla did so when Musk was still widely regarded as a Silicon Valley pioneer rather than a polarizing political figure. And yet, in the current climate, Tesla drivers are increasingly facing public hostility, unwanted stares, and even concerns for their safety on the road.

Adding to their woes, Tesla owners are also experiencing financial strain. The value of their cars has plummeted in recent months due to a combination of declining demand, increasing competition in the EV market, and the reputational damage stemming from Musk’s political entanglements. For many, selling their Tesla is no longer a viable option, leaving them with vehicles they may no longer feel comfortable driving but cannot afford to replace.

The situation is a stark reminder of how political polarization is spilling into everyday life. While people are entitled to their opinions about Musk, Trump, or any other public figure, it is unfair—and potentially dangerous—to direct that anger toward everyday individuals simply trying to get from one place to another in their chosen vehicle. If hostilities continue to escalate, there is a real risk that Tesla owners may begin to fear for their safety, choosing to leave their cars locked in garages rather than risk potential confrontations on the road.

This should not be the state of affairs in a functioning democracy. Political disagreement, no matter how passionate, should never devolve into intimidation or violence. Those who are frustrated with Musk’s political moves have every right to protest and express their dissent, but that frustration must be directed at the powerful figures responsible—not at ordinary people who happened to buy an electric car. Otherwise, we risk setting a dangerous precedent where consumer choices become battlegrounds for political warfare.

At its core, this is about more than just Tesla or Elon Musk—it is about the increasing inability of our society to separate political outrage from personal hostility. If we continue down this path, the consequences could be far-reaching, affecting not just Tesla owners but anyone whose choices, affiliations, or even purchases are deemed politically unacceptable by an opposing faction. It is time to take a step back, cool the rhetoric, and remember that in a democracy, our grievances should be settled through dialogue, not destruction.