GUEST POST BY DAVE MILLER

Where's Your Outrage Now? 

Where are you, Ms. Z? Where are you, Mustang? Where are you Sam Huntington, -FJ, Baysider, Jess, Jeffery, and the rest of you living souls who are part of the group of bloggers that frequents Geeez? Are any of you awake? 

For years you’ve decried the Democrats for trying to bribe voters with low-cost medical care, welfare for poor people, and loads of other “free stuff.” All of you have prattled on for years about how “buying votes” with giveaways would be the death of America. 

For years you’ve called the American people stupid for falling for such craven bribery, and you’ve gone on and on about low-IQ voters falling for such chicanery. “How can we afford such giveaways?” you always asked. Well, where are you now? Never in the history of our republic has a president of the United States been so brazen as to openly promise Americans cash if his party wins an election. Until now. 

Here’s what our president, the man you all helped put in office, had to say: “If Republicans win the House of Representatives and the Senate in the 2026 Midterm Elections, I’m going to give all adult citizens in the United States of America, $5,000! Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I look forward to signing those checks!” And it’s not the first time he’s said it, so let’s be honest. 

He means it. 

Because in September, he said essentially the same thing. Back then, we could have dismissed it as another off-the-cuff Trump promise. But now he’s repeated it. So let me ask you: Is President Trump selling America down the river by saddling us with more than $1 trillion in additional spending just to buy an election? Are Republicans so stupid, as you’ve all called Democrats over the years, that they’ll vote for the GOP in November just to get their checks? 

Where’s your outrage now? Where’s your disgust? Where are your furious blog posts, angry with a president and political party that care more about winning than America? 

Patriotic America lovers. That’s how you all portray yourselves. Well, here’s your chance to prove it. Here’s your chance to show us all that your values and your words are not simply tied to a party or favored candidate. 

This election, here’s what America needs you to do: Skip voting in the House and Senate races. Go ahead and vote Republican in all your local races, but skip the House and Senate races. If your words over the years have meant anything, if you meant it when you said bribing Americans to get their votes was an assault on the freedoms of America, you simply cannot vote for the GOP in the House and Senate races. Because every vote for a Republican House or Senate candidate is a vote to enable more than $1 trillion in additional federal spending for the USA. 

Each vote for a House or Senate GOP candidate says you are, in fact, okay with buying votes. And it says you are not the patriots and America lovers you’ve always called yourselves. In fact, it says you are nothing more than craven partisans, willing to sacrifice your long-held values just to win an election and hopefully get a $5,000 check. 

 ****************************

I agree with Dave on this, and, in fact, I add this to his post:

Every time Trump promises to send Americans money in exchange for their votes, we have to do the math, because that is where the promise immediately falls apart. 

There are roughly 245 million adults in this country. That is $1.20 trillion. The president does not have the authority to just send out checks on a whim, and he certainly can’t spend more than a trillion dollars without approval. That is not even taking into account the practical side of things, like where the money would come from. 

Donald Trump also promised $2,000 tariff dividend checks. Those never came, and these never will either. He knows that, and he also knows that there is almost no realistic path for Republicans to hold both chambers of Congress. So the excuse and the scapegoat are already built in for when the checks are never sent. He will blame the Democrats. He will say he wanted to send the checks, but the radical left “Dumocrats” blocked him from sending them. 

He will use this as another reason to further divide us.

YOUR SUNDAY MOMENT OF ZEN

 

“If someone is able to show me that what I think or do is not right, I will happily change, for I seek the truth, by which no one was ever truly harmed. It is the person who continues in his self-deception and ignorance who is harmed.” ― Marcus Aurelius, Meditation

Well, there it is.

 

President Donald Trump stated in an interview with TIME published on October 1, 2026, that he has not ruled out declaring a national emergency or invoking the Insurrection Act around the November midterm elections.[1]

When asked by TIME reporters about the limits of his presidential power regarding the upcoming midterms, Trump declined to set boundaries, stating: [1]

“I'm not committing to anything.”
“We're going to see how it plays out in court.”
“I don't rule anything out or in. We'll see. You mean the Insurrection Act? No, I've never used it. I could use it. A lot of people think I should use it sometimes.”

****************************

No American president has ever invoked the Insurrection Act during a mid-term election.  

What possible reason could Trump have for even suggesting the use of the Insurrection Act? 

According to a TIME Magazine interview published on October 1, 2026, President Donald Trump’s statements regarding the potential use of the Insurrection Act of 1807 around the 2026 mid-term elections are tied to a combination of political anxieties, escalating pressure from his supporters, and ongoing rhetoric regarding civil unrest. 

Reporting from various media outlets details the primary motivations and arguments surrounding his refusal to rule out invoking the act.

It appears there is no legitimate reason to Trump's idea of invoking the Insurrection Act, except to disrupt the election that he and his administration believe they're going to lose badly. This would be the sort of thing a corrupt president would do, and in historical cases, it is what authoritarians and dictators do.

Dictators and authoritarian leaders frequently interfere with and disrupt their countries' elections by employing a mix of technical, legal, and physical tactics designed to maintain their grip on power. Modern authoritarians often rely on a "digital authoritarianism" playbook, using infrastructure control to tilt the playing field while maintaining a façade of legitimacy. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Data from organizations like Freedom House indicates that election-related digital interference occurs globally, with dozens of countries executing deliberate internet or social media outages specifically timed around electoral cycles to control information and hobble opposition groups. [1, 2, 3]

What are the chances that Trump will attempt this? He's corrupt, dangerous, and stupid. We can only guess what the malignant narcissist will do. 

Via AI Overview:

"The Insurrection Act of 1807 has been officially invoked over 30 times by 15 different U.S. presidents, but historically, it has never been used for the purpose of altering, monitoring, or interfering with an election. 

Legal and historical records from organizations like the Brennan Center for Justice outline that its historical uses have been strictly limited to situations such as suppressing domestic rebellions, enforcing civil rights laws (like school desegregation), and quelling civil unrest or labor violence. Brennan Center for Justice."

The law was last invoked over three decades ago by President George H.W. Bush in May 1992 to restore order during the Los Angeles riots.   

 Legal scholars and constitutional experts note that the Insurrection Act grants the executive branch no authority over election dates, voter eligibility, or election administration, which remain under the purview of states and Congress. Furthermore, defense officials have publicly reinforced that the military has no role to play in administering mid-term elections

JACK SMITH IS AN AMERICAN HERO.

 

We knew, of course, why Trump had to win a second term in office:

 

"Jack Smith testified that Trump committed serious crimes against the nation. 

Former Special Counsel Jack Smith testified under oath that the investigative evidence revealed that Donald Trump committed serious crimes against the nation."

(That's not hard to believe about a man who's a convicted felon and adjudicated SA/rapist who's cheated, lied, and committed fraud all through his miserable life.)

********************************

Barry Abrams:

First, from former Special Counsel, Jack Smith, dragged back in front of a wholly supine Senate committee once again to explain how he dared investigate obvious, outrageous criminality by the most unequivocally corrupt president in American history, Smith had none of it.

The high farce of the hearing was when Republicans Eric Schmitt of Missouri and John Kennedy of Louisiana (every reporter’s cornpone savant) tried to land a grand, “gotcha” moment that backfired spectacularly. It’s already playing in heavy rotation on news outlets intermittently banned from the White House.

The assertion by the two Senators, one of whom repeatedly called Smith “a dirtbag” — and considering who they regularly caucus with, Schmitt and Kennedy know a thing or two about dirtbags — was that Smith, then investigating Trump for — well, what do you want to start with? — met up with Atlanta DA Fani Willis while in Georgia for an Atlanta Hawks NBA game.

Their only problem? The team Smith went to see was the Iowa Hawk … eyes. A college team. And in a totally different place. In Maryland. Not Atlanta. Which is 650 miles south. And as a kicker, it was a women’s game … featuring Caitlin Clark specifically … not 10 great big (and scary) black men.

Like almost everything about the Republican party today, it was a farce. Or “La farsa delle farse” as the Italians would say. Maybe not a full on sick farce like so much else in the MAGA hollers, but as down home stupid as it gets outside Loooosiana and the ‘Zarks.

***********************************

During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Republican Senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri attempted to trap former special counsel Jack Smith in a perjury accusation, only to embarrassingly fail by confusing the professional NBA team the Atlanta Hawks with the women's college basketball team the Iowa Hawkeyes.

Who's the dirtbag now, Senator Schmitt???

"They were so arrogant. They thought they busted Jack Smith perjuring himself. 

Senator Eric Schmitt accused Jack of traveling to Atlanta in 2024 to collude with Fani Willis, and his "proof" that he held up for about three seconds showed text messages that he was in Atlanta at a Hawks game. It turns out, he was in Maryland watching Caitlin Clark play. She was on the Iowa Hawkeyes. 

Schmitt, who may actually be dumber than Tommy Tuberville, got the teams wrong! This is always how it plays out. 

This isn't Twitter, it's court. 

This is where evidence comes out. Notice that the GOP has targeted all of Trump's enemies and none of them have been prosecuted. All they have is accusations. They know these people aren't guilty and they go through all this for political theater. 

That's why Biden, Obama, the SLPC, Dr Fauci, Willis, Hillary, Leticia James, and Jack Smith are all still walking free. 

If you ever feel like a failure, just take a look at the GOP and you'll feel better about yourself."

This is an actual screenshot of Sen. Schmitt’s staff the moment they realized their massive mistake.

He did what?

 

President Trump has asked Xi Jinping, the leader of China, whether he would like to buy American weapons, David Perdue, the American ambassador to China, said in a television interview on Sunday.

“President Trump continues to say, ‘Hey, we sell arms to other people around the world,’” Mr. Perdue said on “Fox News Sunday” while discussing the state visit by Mr. Xi to Washington last week. “He actually asked President Xi would he like to buy some at one point.”

Mr. Perdue did not give further details and did not reveal Mr. Xi’s reply.

China’s support for Russia and Iran in their respective wars relies on a delicate balance of "pro-neutrality" diplomacy masking deep covert economic and material assistance. Officially, Beijing presents itself as a neutral mediator calling for peace and ceasefires, but Western intelligence and trade data show that China acts as a primary lifeline enabling both nations to continue fighting. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]

China benefits from these drawn-out conflicts because they successfully divert U.S. and Western military assets, attention, and financial resources away from East Asia and the Indo-Pacific. By providing just enough covert assistance to prevent Russia and Iran from losing, Beijing keeps the conflicts bubbling along while positioning itself to look like the responsible, rule-abiding superpower advocating for global peace on the world stage