570 Comments
User's avatar
Christopher Larson's avatar

Is “he said, Xi said” your coinage? If so, second Nobel!

Expand full comment
The Coke Brothers's avatar

I think it was coined by The Economist and I recall seeing it on BBC a couple of years ago. No matter. Dr K made perfect use of it

Expand full comment
Richard Bullington's avatar

It sounds like The Economist. They LOVES them a good wordplay.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 28Edited
Comment removed
Expand full comment
blow@highdoh's avatar

That took way too long to get to the point

Expand full comment
Karen Rile's avatar

I came here to say that!

Expand full comment
Diane D’Angelo's avatar

Me too!

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

Me too was so yesterday:-) Xi said.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 27Edited
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

GET LOST SPAMMER!

Expand full comment
Sadie Crandle's avatar

Same!

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 27Edited
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Lois Henry's avatar
User was temporarily suspended for this comment. Show
Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 27
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Marliss Desens's avatar

There seem to be repeated SPAM attacks on Krugman's substack. I report every one that I see and encourage others to do the same.

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

The Report button doesn’t work on the iPhone web version. You press it and it does nothing. The cancel button doesn’t work either. You have to refresh the screen.

Expand full comment
Rick Smith's avatar

gom away!!

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

There’s a new one and I can’t report it because the report button doesn’t on the iPhone web version.

Expand full comment
Lesley's avatar

Me, too!🤣

Expand full comment
Jim Schaefer's avatar

Puns on Xi are legion, don't try to copyright them. My favourite is "Xi who must be obeyed" a takeoff on Rumpole of the Bailey's wife

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

"She who must be obeyed" comes from the novel "She", by H. Ryder Haggard. Published in 1887. It is frequently used by men to refer to their wives.

Expand full comment
Michiel Horn's avatar

This reminds me of the piece of doggerel that ends with the couplet: “When the Rudyards cease their kipling / And the Haggards ryde no more.”

Expand full comment
Michiel Horn's avatar

The lines are from a short poem, “To R.K.” by James Kenneth Stephen.

Expand full comment
Rena's avatar

LOL, but it's definitely Rumpole's wife.

Expand full comment
Keith O'Malley's avatar

Which was derived from the novel “She” by H. Rider Haggard

Expand full comment
Dan Boss's avatar

Excellent!

Expand full comment
Doug Tarnopol's avatar

A good writer takes every opportunity to add homonym.

Expand full comment
ira lechner's avatar

Instead of talking Trump endlessly, let’s talk about a positive future, shall we? We can only succeed in recovering a very significant part of our government if we elect Democratic majorities in both Houses! Right? And in 18 months from now! Please believe me when I say that there are at the most 25 “truly competitive” Congressional Districts” (CDs)! Each of those 25 seats were either won or lost by less than 20,000 votes!! So doesn’t it make sense that pouring hundreds of your dollars into CDs that were won or lost by Dems in 2024 and 2022 by MORE than 20,000 votes each year is pretty much a lost cause despite the enthusiasm of our candidates right now? Then, how do we add 4,000 or even 5,000 reasonably progressive college educated students (or HS seniors about to go to college) to each of those “truly competitive” 25 CDs in 2026? These new young voters (or 75% of them) would be the margin of victory of victory in at least 15 or more of those CDs! Makes sense? Then please go today to read what these brilliant Harvard students say at www.TurnUp.US and contribute generously (it’s tax deductible as a independent issue oriented 501c3 focused on protecting abortion, enacting strong gun safety legislation and battling climate change— all issues very important to college educated 18 to 29 yr olds), BUT even more importantly, pass your message on to your email friends & family! If we do this, we will win the House and 4 or 5 Senate seats from Rs! Thank you!

Expand full comment
Martha Ture's avatar

What leads you to think that the United States and the planet can survive 1,300 more days of this administration?

Expand full comment
ira lechner's avatar

Can’t project that far so let’s concentrate on next 18 months! Winning the House and Senate sets up an entirely different political environment, blocks most if not all executive orders and even creates a possible impeachment result! In any event, we have to deal with this threat realistically rather than with emails and that can only mean total control of both the House and Senate! Don’t you agree?

Expand full comment
Barbara's avatar

I do agree. At the same time, I believe that impeaching Trump so that we end up with Vance is not very helpful. Perhaps they should both be impeached. But it will take 2/3 of the Senate to convict, so Democrats would have to hold around 70 seats to be reasonably certain of victory. Not impossible, but a big ask.

Expand full comment
ira lechner's avatar

Agree but I think we will reach an existential crisis which will force at least a third of R safe Senators to support or not oppose impeachment; this nation and its economy will be at a breaking point!

Expand full comment
ira lechner's avatar

And impeach them both!

Expand full comment
Barbara's avatar

Frankly, I hope we get to impeachment conviction before we reach a breaking point, but perhaps that's pie-in-the-sky thinking.

Expand full comment
SunnySideUp's avatar

It's only 13 more 100 days.

Although it's ongoing, the trend is that he is getting restrained by the courts as he overreaches.

He will try to flip the scenario towards employment and growth as the mid terms approach next year and Republican representatives in moderate districts get nervous. That may make some of those 100 days more tolerable than the last. If the economy is stuck in the toilet and voters smell it, the second term will have Democratic majority in the house. Also, there are more Republican Senate seats than Democratic ones in 2026. There will be investigations.

When the USA and the World recover from this, they will be stronger. Hopefully we don't go full Argentina. Anyone shelling out for favors should be careful because reputational damage can be long-lasting.

Expand full comment
Judith Green's avatar

Not investing in currently likely winnable seats is what got us here--we need to be everywhere to counter the narrative that Dems are only interested in urban and coastal areas.

Expand full comment
Judith Green's avatar

My error: i meant UNwinnable: the red places where Dems have shown up for protests and town halls, feeling newly visible and needed

Expand full comment
ira lechner's avatar

We must invest in retaining the few Ds who won by only by a few votes such as both Adam Gray and Derrick Tran in CA who both won by less than 500 votes and there are about 10 other Dems won won or lost by less than 5,000 or 10,000 or a few who won by 16,000 such as Mike Levin in CA 49 AND to beat 13 Rs who won by less than 2,000, or about 10,000 or less! But contributing hundred’s of dollars to Dems who won by 50,000 or 100,000 is ????— you fill in the blank?

Expand full comment
ira lechner's avatar

If I may, the best possible “investment” politically is to contribute to www.TurnUp.US which is also tax deductible! PLEASE check it out and contribute today!

Expand full comment
Kim Slocum's avatar

Trump needs to be gone sooner than that or there won’t be much a country left. The damage already to our institutions, alliances, economy, and standing in the world might already be irreparable. This is literally the “slow motion autocracy” that Dr. Krugman discussed with his Hungary expert a couple of months ago.

The only peaceful way I know of to do that is with our own “color revolution.” It’s happened with some regularity abroad. However, the US political system (until now) has never gotten so seriously out of whack that we needed to even contemplate such a thing.

The “3.5% Rule from Harvard suggests that around 11 million Americans would need to engage in active protests/acts of civil disobedience to get the ball rolling. We’ve seen good turnout for the “Hands Off”/“Indivisible” protests so far. May 1st will be the next test of how many more people are willing to be public and vocal in their resistance to our slide into authoritarianism. Sitting at home and cursing the TV (or whatever screen you’re watching) isn’t going to get it done.

Expand full comment
Sharon's avatar

Some places the Democratic brand is so tarnished by decades of propaganda and Democratic intransigence on ideology and terminology, that it's impossible to see them go Democrat. In those places we need to support Independents or competent old fashioned Republicans who are conservative but not totally corrupted. We need to push for open primaries.

There is no way a Democrat will win in my area. But there is a battle being fought in the local Republican Party between totally incompetent, corrupt MAGA who have captured the local apparatus and more moderate Republicans who want functioning governance rather than cronyism.

Expand full comment
ira lechner's avatar

Please tell us what CD this is? I seriously doubt that moderate old fashioned R candidates have a chance in the congressional primary vs maga incumbent in a solid R CD?

Expand full comment
Sharon's avatar

It depends on how badly the congressional district is effected by the Trump policies. A lot of these rural districts are going to be hit hard and fast. I can see them giving the representative six months, but not years. When Dollar General's shelves are bare and employers start laying off people and health care is cut. Meals on Wheels who took care of Aunt Betty and Uncle Bob can't get an appointment at the VA...

The hard core MAGA in my county are making a total mess of things because they are as incompetent and self-dealing as they are at the national level.

Expand full comment
DrBDH's avatar

Seats not contested allow Republicans to save campaign dollars and use them against Democrats. Make Republicans defend every seat. Even Musk can’t buy them all.

Expand full comment
Mark Mabro's avatar

Jimmy Kimmel has previously said something similar in his monologue.

Expand full comment
Keith Wheelock's avatar

Christopher Do you think Krugman will win a second Nobel prize before Trump win a Noble peace prize?

Expand full comment
Carolina Perez Sanz's avatar

I second your seconding!

Expand full comment
DB's avatar

More likely a Pulitzer

Expand full comment
Jonathan W. King's avatar

I was more thinking “nation-wide TRO” but then I realized he has self-deported to Europe somewhere.

Expand full comment
DK Brooklyn's avatar

What do we do? In this New Yorker article on successful resistance movements my take away is that we build communities with people around this….freedom, in all its manifestations, is what we have in common. …

We can all be effective messengers in our real and online relationships…https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-weekend-essay/so-you-want-to-be-a-dissident

Expand full comment
ira lechner's avatar

Contribute to www.TurnUp.US and ask your friends and relatives to do the same..VR and turnout is the only key for the next 18 months and it’s all on the line then—our entire democracy!! So let’s get to work to win winnable seats and reelect Ds in marginally competitive CDs! Makes sense?

Expand full comment
DK Brooklyn's avatar

I checked out the link and suggest you all do too. Younger voters, it’s up to you. The ball’s in your court.

Expand full comment
ira lechner's avatar

Thanks Brooklyn! I was at old Ebbetts in the centerfield bleachers the day Jackie Robinson made his debut but I was rooting for my Yankees and got a lots of ribbing from the local crowd! We’re on the right side together now so let’s all work to win in 18 months and start today by connecting with a truly effective strategy by contributing to www.TurnUp.US (and it’s really tax deductible as a c3)!! Please check it out today and then send the link to your great family and friends?Thanks and because Brooklyn also endorses it!

Expand full comment
DK Brooklyn's avatar

Not sarcastic. Okay Boomer.!!! Let’s do it. Support the young activists. B

Expand full comment
Jeff's avatar

I don't think it's even the first time Krugman has used that.

Expand full comment
Deborah Bennett's avatar

That was my reaction, too. But then -this is Paul K. here. It was almost too easy. 👍

Expand full comment
Carll Tucker's avatar

I echo Larson -- wish I'd said that. You're my favorite professor, sir -- clear, concise, passionate, funny. Thank you for your service in this dire hour.

Expand full comment
Michael Mundorff's avatar

I’m sending that to Frank Bruni for his “For the Love of Sentences” section in his NYT newsletter.

Expand full comment
Ed Reno's avatar

It may be Leibnitz v. Newton all over again. But Oliver Knox, in US News, posted on April 25 at 4:30 PM has the same witticism.

Expand full comment
LJudith's avatar

The R senators are completely to blame for this situation. The madness can stop at any time with four R senators and 4 R reps to find their backbone and stand up to the lunacy, incompetence, grift, and abuse of power.

Expand full comment
Ff's avatar

If the US Senate has to ratify treaties how come they are not required to ratify their tearing up as with NAFTA?

Expand full comment
Derelict's avatar

Because that bit of the Constitution that states explicitly that duly ratified treaties shall be treated as the law of the land is actually written in invisible ink or something.

Expand full comment
Kathleen Weber's avatar

There are other congressional laws that allow Trump to modify tariffs for the sake of national security, and that is the congressional authority that he is using.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Except that what he's doing doesn't really have anything to do with national security or anything like that. But, like with everything Chump, all he has to do is think it and it's so. Such God like powers - or so his MAGAnut base believes.

Expand full comment
NubbyShober's avatar

This is an example of the GOP Congress wimping out by NOT asserting their constitutional right to restrict Trump's tariff mania to national security items. If the GOP had even the semblance of a backbone, they could've nipped most of this trade war craziness in the bud weeks ago.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Absolutely. They're pandering to the MAGAnut base - or cowering from it. Take your pick.

Expand full comment
Bonny Becker's avatar

Yes, we need to stop just shrugging at the GOP Congress. They can stop this at any time and that needs to be emphasized instead of just accepting their complicity. Trump is not going to change. He needs to be impeached and the GOP, it wouldn't take that many, are the only ones who can truly stop this.

Expand full comment
Chris Martin's avatar

Lisa Murkowski made a very good point not too long ago. Republicans are * afraid* of Trump's (and ultimately their) voters. I don't mean electorally afraid, I mean legitimately afraid for their safety and the safety of their families.

We recently saw a deranged right winger torch Gov. Shapiro's home, and his stated intent was to assassinate him if he'd seen him. Senators and Representatives *don't* get Secret Service protection unless there is a specific, known threat. These people were willing to kill not just Democrats, but Trump's own VP and other Republicans. The GOP isn't a political party anymore, it's Trump's own cult of personality.

Trump also has the ability to strip Secret Service protection away from any government official other than the VP, Speaker, and Majority and Minority leaders. This is to say nothing of the fact that DOGE's "Dunning-Kruger Kids" may have already taken a wrecking ball to the Secret Service (or could do so at Trump's direction) and make it difficult for the service to protect a significant number of people at once.

If you're a sitting member of Congress and oppose Trump, you're now going to financially be on the hook for not only your own security in DC, but that of your family back home, especially if you're in a deep red state. Gen. Milley has had to go so far as to pay for construction and new security for his home!

Yes, this is a problem of the GOP's own making, but it's real and their concerns are legitimate. Also, don't forget about the fact Trump's Red Army is willing to also go after Democrats like we saw in Pennsylvania. We haven't seen widespread, coordinated political violence yet, but the threat is very real and we all know Trump wouldn't do a thing to stop it.

Oh, and conviction and removal requires a 2/3 vote. So yes, we are talking about a significant number of Senators "flipping" on Trump to get rid of him. That's why what the GOP was willing to do to Nixon is so significant.

Expand full comment
Carolyn Meinel's avatar

And get President JD Vance?

Expand full comment
Greg Estey's avatar

Check out the constitutional line of succession. It’s nincompoops, nut jobs and the neutered all the way down the line. #5 Scott Bessent might be best of the top 18, but really we have a better shot at Congress reclaiming authority.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

Or all of it by impeachment removal the first time.

Expand full comment
NubbyShober's avatar

With tariffs, the GOP Congress have surrendered one of their constitutional rights to the Executive. Just like the House has with DOGE cutting specific funding grants and programs they themselves voted on--usurping the Power of the Purse.

While Mitch M may forever regret spiking the GOP votes for impeaching DJT--as he roasts for all eternity in the fires of hell--at least he and his fellow jellyfish exercised their duty to vote.

Expand full comment
Kathleen Weber's avatar

When has accuracy in following the law had anything to do with Trump's behavior? National security justifies ANYTHING.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Well, yes that's true. That's why I was "admiring" his "God like powers".

Expand full comment
Kathleen Weber's avatar

If there is any human being on the planet with Godlike powers, it is the president of the United States. On a single day, he can wreck world trade, or blow up the ten largest cities on the planet. The latest poll revealed that a majority of Americans think Trump is “scary.”

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 27
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Kathleen Weber's avatar

There are currently 49 national emergencies in existence in our country, declared by various presidents. These emergencies can be terminated by Congress, but we have a Congress that has a hard time agreeing about anything. situations.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_in_the_United_States

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 27
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Kathleen Weber's avatar

Hope so but I don't think so. The law works on precedent. The law very clearly assigns the role of terminating an emergency to the president or the Congress, and the judiciary would be breaking the law if they took that job on themselves.

Expand full comment
KEN's avatar
Apr 27Edited

NAFTA was replaced by USMCA, which was ratified by Congress in December of 2019. I got that from a Google search that took 15 seconds.

Expand full comment
Daniel Hardwick's avatar

Yes, and Trump dose in 2019, when he was President, NAFTA was the worse deal. Now he says USAMCA is the worse deal and ridicules the intelligence of whoever made it- Trump himself wrote that one up. He and his supporters are so detached from reality they don’t realize when he strongly insults his own intelligence

Expand full comment
KEN's avatar

All of that is demonstrably false The Trump administration is after those items (as regards Canada) which were not dealt with in USMCA to the satisfaction of the American side. Lumber, dairy, automobiles, banking, telecommunications. Plus the tariffs on Canada are designed in no small measure to change the status quo on border security, drug production and smuggling, money laundering, infiltration of public and private affairs by the CCP and a lack of action on military commitments. Ditto on Mexico.

They have a point.

Expand full comment
Roman Goz's avatar

If you believe in what you just wrote here and not just trolling then you’re completely ignorant of numbers and statistics regarding Canada part in American addictions problem that MAGA refuses to acknowledge because it points the blame where it should—the insatiable appetite for drugs in our country and if have ever heard about supply and demand then you should know that until we are treating addiction as a disease and start rehabilitation for people (rfk could be a point “man” on this) we will not stop flow of drugs! If you can make $100K in under 10 minutes selling couple of kilos of coke or even more w heroin it will find its way here! As to the treaty, this is not how you make deals or deal with your closest allies and neighbors and if you can’t grasp that much then this conversation especially my part of it was just a waste! Cult and reason can’t coexist!!!

Expand full comment
Jan Steinman's avatar

Boy, you've swallowed the entire line, hook, and sinker!

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

Yes, well Cheatolini never misses a chance to grift.

Expand full comment
Erica Smith's avatar

2029?

Expand full comment
Peter Liepmann's avatar

AI-assisted search!

Expand full comment
KEN's avatar

Clumsy fingers. Thanks for the heads up

Expand full comment
Jenn Borgesen's avatar

We have 554 days till the midterms. Our goal is to flip at least four seats in both houses of Congress and put an end to this nonsense.

Then perhaps Congress will one again become the legislative body it was meant to be.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

This is a great reminder of the imperative that we continue to Rise! Resist! ✊✊✊

May Day is the next nationwide rally, be there or be square!

Expand full comment
Eric G's avatar

Seems to be a lot of wishful thinking around the mid-terms. The D’s have no platform other than we are not R’s. No leader, not very inspiring . AND very reall threat to a just and fair election

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

The polling so far suggests that the Democrats are in decent shape to retake at least the House. As the out-of-power party, it strikes me as asking too much at this early date for an overall national "leader," which we won't really have until the presidential nomination process is over. What will most matter in 2026 is the quality of individual congressional and senate candidates.

By the same token, it strikes me as premature for the Democrats to roll out an overall platform that goes beyond fighting the specific battles in front of them over the next year. By the 2026 elections the political environment could look meaningfully different than it does now.

This doesn't stop aspiring candidates from presenting their own policy agendas, which will presumably be tailored to their specific electorate. What works in a deep blue district may look different than a purple swing district. The Democrats are a broad coalition rather than a top-down cult, so we're going to see a variety of approaches used -- some of which may not appeal to our personal political sensibilities.

It seems to me that the best way to help ensure that we have free and fair elections in 2026 is to get involved in politics rather than sitting on the sidelines waiting to be inspired.

Expand full comment
Marliss Desens's avatar

I agree with all you say here. Right now, we need many leaders stepping up, but we also need all of us stepping up, even when leaders have not done so. We will not be saved by one person; we will be saved by all of us doing what we can to defend democracy. Be open to opportunities or to making opportunities, then act.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

It's not wishful thinking. It's the propagation of a blue tsunami. No leaders? Well, let's see now, in the House, Jamie Raskin, Al Green, Jasmine Crockett, AOC, etc., etc. In the Senate, Bernie, Chris Murphy, Cory, Tammy Duckworth, Adam Schiff, Elizabeth Warren, etc., etc.

Yes, the threat to a just and fair election is certainly salient, but that doesn't mean we can't win. It won't be easy, but it's not impossible either.

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

But those Democrats are already there. Eric seems to be saying that the Democratic party doesn't appear to have candidates that will be capable of kicking Republicans out of their seats.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

The midterms are over a year and a half away. Give it time, leaders will emerge.

Expand full comment
Donald's avatar

That would be a thin start. When he continues to ignore Congress and govern by executive fiat it will only slow his court appointments. He wont get his unqualified misfit choices confirmed for the cabinet; but he wouldn’t care, leaving them as acting gives him a bit more leverage anyway. I do hope if the R members from swing districts see him melt away in the polls they might find a trace of courage to stand up. Though, i realize I have a rich fantasy life.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

They'll find a spine when they become more fearful of their pissed off constituents than they are of being primaried.

Expand full comment
Lois Henry's avatar

And less fearful of MAGA. Our senators and representatives (and judges) physical safety and that of their families are threatened every day - sometimes the threats have become reality.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

I believe that's already happening. Their own constituents, some of whom are now Ex-MAGAnuts, are becoming more of a threat to them.

Expand full comment
Stuart's avatar

Don't forget to factor in Musk's bucks. He's already promised to finance primary challenges to some GOP congresscritters he doesn't like.

Expand full comment
Marliss Desens's avatar

Fortunately, Musk is widely disliked, and Wisconsin showed that money cannot buy everything.

Expand full comment
Joanna Weinberger's avatar

Controlling both chambers of Congress would allow Democrats to pass actual legislation.

US needs a law which says US citizenship is limited to human beings; non-humans are not eligible for US citizenship. This is the highest legislative priority.

Other important legislative needs include tax reform (and restoring IRS functionality); raising federal minimum wages; addressing voter’s rights; restoring programs which encourage maternal, infant, and child health; funding astronomy and possibly nationalizing the US energy corporation which plans to build an electric generating plant near the world’s most important observatories on the Atacama in Chile .

Expand full comment
Donald's avatar

I would expect Trump to veto any and every bill that was not an essential appropriation. And unless the D’s could get up to 60 Sen. It would be hard to get the parliamentarian to accept most of their agenda items on a reconciliation budget bill.

Expand full comment
Somewhere, Somehow's avatar

I hope it will be far more than 4-5, it needs to be 15-20. I’m almost beginning to think it might be possible but then I thought no way would people put him back in office.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

We can't be complacent. We have to be vigilant. We have to fight tooth and nail every step of the way. The Dem party is finally starting to get the message, and they do seem to be acting on it. I think it's doable.

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

There are 53 rethuglicans in the Senate...

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Not for long!

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

Unless Dear Leader declares Martial Law and cancels the mid terms.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

There was some chatter about the possibility that he would do that this past Sunday, April 20. Didn't happen.

I suspect even his most devoted sycophants warned him it's a bad idea. Just look at the masses that have already taken to the streets. If he declared martial law, those numbers would swell in multiples.

Also, the military isn't by any means guaranteed to go along with it. I'd say fairly half could be counted on to take the opposite position to defend the Constitution and We The People.

For every Michael Flynn there's at least one Mark Milley.

Expand full comment
John Gregory's avatar

though about all the military commissaries play Fox 'news' all day long ... so who knows what the ranks of the military actually know for a fact.

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

We will only know when we get to November 3, 2026. He has been known to act precipitously before.

Expand full comment
Henry Kramer's avatar

Yes, and let the hearings begins starting with Musk!

Expand full comment
Roman Goz's avatar

Congress will not reverse its course and “becomes the legislative body it once was”! This is over because one party in the Congress is not an American lawful party! They broke the oath to protect the constitution and Amendments to it and they broke the covenant with the people and so as long as MAGA members are in government it is not a legitimate democracy and it is not a legitimate party and therefore Congress and i have no idea how we will get around all of what has happened when gop changed into MAGA but i believe that GOP is no longer a party and i don’t understand why the few remaining GOP members don’t stand up for the rights to their name!

And this is not an argument with what you said and I wish it was that easy, but I can’t believe that we can simply go back to good old days and “we are all Americans but we have different ideas”— not so if you want to have a king, or dictatorship/oligarchy one party rule then we are not all Americans because being an American means living by the law and the Constitution. Period!

And maybe they’re better off by themselves and maybe they would like to take their toys and go play in their own country — why we don’t have this conversation I don’t know but it’s one of those things that should be discussed!!!

Expand full comment
ellie Johnson's avatar

With everything that Trump is doing to try to create Havoc around voting will our votes do anything?

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

It would take a vote of 67 senators to convict and remove. That would entail 14 rethugs voting with the Democrats. I am having trouble figuring what events would cause that many to turn coat...

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

The only thing I can think of that answers that question is replacing them in the midterms. There's a reason they're avoiding town halls with their GOP constituents.

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

It is going to be 19 long months.

Expand full comment
Jenn Borgesen's avatar

I'm trying to take it in small bites, 79 weeks. What can I do each week to further the cause?

Half of those I throw a few bucks I'm no longer spending at Starbucks to ACLU. That leaves me with 40 weeks of activity to fill. Postcards, protest and other Good Trouble ahead.

Courage is Contagious. Reclaim the Dream.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

That's for sure.

It's another great reminder of the imperative that we continue to Rise! Resist! ✊✊✊

May Day is the next nationwide rally, be there or be square!

Expand full comment
Kathleen Weber's avatar

Only the complete collapse of Social Security (no checks for millions) and empty store shelves. But I think it's clear that Trump will back off enough that the store shelves will not be empty.

Expand full comment
Somewhere, Somehow's avatar

I had a procedure done a week ago with requires replacement of bandages every day after cleaning and will need to do so for a month or so. I bought a number of boxes (7 per box) of a certain size and went back a few days later to get more. No bandages, they are made in China.

Expand full comment
Kathleen Weber's avatar

I'm aware that a lot of our medical supplies do come from China. Hope you find a substitute that works. Whether Isolated shortages will turn into widespread shortages noticed by everyone is a very critical question.

I had a wound in 2016 that took 20 months to heal, and I'm glad there was absolutely no shortages of supplies back then. I pray your healing process is quick and complete! As a person who faced a similar situation, I suggest you go online with the exact name of the product you are using and buy big if you can find it online.

Expand full comment
Somewhere, Somehow's avatar

Thank you. I had two small skin cancers removed and am determined to follow the Dr’s recommendation to gently clean and replace the bandages every day. I’m ok for another week or so but in light of things, not confident I will find the product I need.

Expand full comment
Kathleen Weber's avatar

Your Doc may be able to suggest alternatives. Get right on it!

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

Maybe could find them on the Canadian Amazon site. But the border people might charge duty.

Expand full comment
Tyler P. Harwell's avatar

I think it is too late for that. West Coast ship scheduled arrivals have plummeted. Ships are turning around. Empty shelves we will have.

Expand full comment
Paula B.'s avatar

Yes. There are lead times. You can't just flip a switch and fix everything.

Expand full comment
Skybo's avatar

Keep watching the activity in the ports on west coast! https://signal.portoptimizer.com

I think bare shelves in the US would be striking. We didnt see in the pandemic, because everyone was staying home. This will be different.

Expand full comment
Kathleen Weber's avatar

I noticed bare shelves in Houston TX. During COVID. The shelves do go bare, because Trump deserves to lose his unearned reputation.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

That might do the trick - if it inspires the pitchforks and tiki torches to come out.

Expand full comment
DeFitz's avatar

It may already be too late to avoid empty store shelves, at least some of things, because ship traffic has already slowed to a crawl at west coast ports. Even if normal imports resume (which seems highly unlikely) the lag time to get merch back on the shelves will be long.

Expand full comment
Bruce Olsen's avatar

It's already too late; the containers that aren't steaming across the Pacific are already delivering empty shelves to us.

Expand full comment
stuart burstin's avatar

They would not be turn coats, but people of conscience doing their sworn constitutional duty

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

I agree with you but that is not how Glorious Leader and the other rethugs would see it and propagandize it.

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

I hadn't had my coffee yet: There are 45 Dems and 2 Independents who caucus with the Dems. So it would take 20 rethugs to vote with the Dems... I doubt even more it will happen.

Expand full comment
Jenn Borgesen's avatar

Mid Term elections

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Ah, you beat me to it!

Expand full comment
fiber fanatic's avatar

I wish they would. However, their complicity has been going on too long and now they are all guilty and they are afraid of being held to account.

Expand full comment
Shawn M Ryan's avatar

100% true. But this has been the case dating back to his first term. If GOP members of congress had a true “America First” mentality , Cheeto Jesus would have been successfully impeached and all of the chaos and dysfunction of the last ten years would have been avoided.

Expand full comment
Roman Goz's avatar

Agreed and this is mostly Mitch McConnell doing and now being in the doghouse and knowing that he helped destroy our country he is doing pathetic gestures to oppose the monster he created and who dislikes him with passion! He started it all with playing by no rules by not letting President Obama SCOTUS nominee get his vote and from that moment on SCOTUS was compromised—it is stacked to make it easier to have a one man rule!! I hope he lives long ugly life and suffers a lot of indignities from MAGA!

Expand full comment
teri Gray's avatar

Don’t forget the Supreme Court.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

They're the new masters of capitulation. The whole "gang of six", especially the two senior members.

Expand full comment
Robin Sesko's avatar

The R's are too afraid to oppose him. Won't happen.

Expand full comment
The NLRG's avatar

The Senate voted to end his national emergency declaration; the problem appears to be the House, specifically

Expand full comment
Bob Sinnamon's avatar

I think the R see an easier path to election by supporting the Orange. They are almost guaranteed 30-35% of the vite at primary time. They only need to work for another 15-20%. Easy math. Bad democracy.

Expand full comment
sharon f's avatar

Not even 8 elected Reps. care about liberty and justice- hard to process.

Expand full comment
Jeff Luth's avatar

Thanks again Mr Krugman. Have a nice bike ride!

Expand full comment
Larry's avatar

A month ago, my faith in humanity made me think (hope) that there would be at least those 8 Rs who would say "Enough is enough!" They could show the courage that Liz Cheny and Adam Kinzinger did.

Where are they?

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

The honorable ones retired.

Expand full comment
Lois Henry's avatar

January 6th terrified them leaving deep scars and a permanent loss of their sense of security.

Expand full comment
Marliss Desens's avatar

Well, what about the deep scars that January 6 and permanent loss of security that January 6 had on the rest of us? I have no sympathy for Republican enablers.

Expand full comment
Daniel Hardwick's avatar

Your math isn’t right in senate where filibuster exists

Expand full comment
DK Brooklyn's avatar

Exactly. The most important issue and the most likely to get Rs on board is national security. MAKE AMERICA SECURE

This is the issue where the opportunity for bipartisanship is greatest.

Expand full comment
Sbk's avatar

Exactly.

Expand full comment
Robert Labinson's avatar

I feel getting back the Venezuelans would be another big blow to Trump. A group of senators should attempt to meet with Bukele. Trump won’t be there forever. Bukele should be reminded of another Central American dictator who broke American laws, Manual Noriega. He died in an American prison in 2017

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

True, but Noriega crossed the ex-CIA chief Herbert Walker III. The Klown in Chief >likes< what Bukele is doing - indeed, he's paying him for it, with our tax dollars of course.

Expand full comment
Hugh Jenkins's avatar

And how does he get to do that? Or did Musk write a check?

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

That's a really good question. IDK how he did it, most likely went through one agency or another. Probably ICE. Remember, Trumpkopf is an expert at money laundering. He's been doing it for decades.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

👆🎯

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

The Founding Fathers were men who stepped up and put their lives and fortunes on the line to create the USA. tRump is just an idiot psychopath. They never imagined such a one being in the Presidency. They created what they thought was a rational and thoughtful method for removing a president, but again they never imagined a crazy cabal holding the Senate. The whole Constitution is predicated on leaders being honorable and following the norms. tRump's enablers figured out all the places in the Constitution where having a petulant 3 year old in the Presidency can break the whole system down so they can work their grifts and treasons. It is going to take mass protests on a scale never seen before in this country to coerce the Senate into doing its job. The impeachment needs to be the whole regime. After that a whole raft of Constitutional Amendments.

Expand full comment
Tyler P. Harwell's avatar

Mass protests and maybe violence is just what Trump would like to get himself out of his predicament. He will use the military to stay in power. And he will kill. He already is in indirect ways. Sending 7 y/o American with stage 4 cancer to Honduras is killing

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

I have some concerns about violence, but peaceful mass protests where tRump ordered shootings would get even Congressional rethugs to wake up. Many of them are still (vainly, I think) dreaming of reelection next year.

Expand full comment
Tyler P. Harwell's avatar

Trump will ban protests in DC. Repair 🐈‍⬛ can governors will do the same when they reach consequential proportions. Trump will step in. He will use force. If there is push back he will use more. Ultimately he will order killings. And he will recruit people willing to do what he tells them. He already has. Expect nothing out of Congress to stop him. Nor courts if this happens. It won't matter what disapproval there is. He owns Congress now. It has given him all he wants but his tax cut extension. All who oppose have already been labelled traitors terrorists or other things suggesting they have no "right to life".

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

And I will be out demonstrating on May first. I’m an old man. If you kill me, my death will still have meaning.

Expand full comment
Paul J Rossa's avatar

Let's see if I got this right. Trump claims to have signed 200 bilateral trade treaties, none of which are public and none of which have been approved by the Senate? The mere possibility of even one such treaty tells us that the GOP-controlled Senate has fully abandoned its constitutional duties.

Expand full comment
Julie Stacker's avatar

There are only 195 countries in the world.

Expand full comment
Bob Pockney's avatar

Note that Trump said "I'm dealing with all the companies..." so I don't think he differentiates between companies and countries ! But, even so...

Expand full comment
Judy the Lazy Gardener's avatar

I keep wondering if he has made deals with companies, like Apple, to lift tariffs on their products and that is what he is talking about. We will find out relatively quickly.

Expand full comment
Rainer Dynszis's avatar

Yes, but acquiring waterfront properties in Gaza while clawing back them 50 million $ condoms would surely count as TWO DEALS, no? Maybe three.

Expand full comment
Turgut Tuten's avatar

And the sale of 100 condos in Gaza would count as 100

Expand full comment
Rick Scott's avatar

Maybe negotiations with the penguins are included. We Australians need to exercise our sovereignty and pull them back into line - call themselves birds and they can’t even fly. No place negotiating their own trade deals

Expand full comment
STEPHEN A BLOCH's avatar

He didn't say "bilateral trade treaties", he said "deals". The normal interpretation of that would be "in high-level talks, we've agreed on the outlines of a trade treaty, and now it's up to our respective negotiating teams to work out the detailed language, after which it'll be submitted to the Senate for ratification."

Obviously, this is not a "normal" administration. If you read the next few sentences of the interview, it turns out Trump counts each of his unilaterally-imposed tariffs as a "deal".

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Apr 27Edited
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
FlaneurX's avatar

Actually WE pay the tariffs. They are not charged to other countries

Expand full comment
KarenO's avatar

It's like he's still doing real estate deals.

Expand full comment
STEPHEN A BLOCH's avatar

Except that a tariff isn't a price other countries pay to buy something (as the "department store" analogy suggests); it's a price importers pay when they import something from those countries.

Who actually pays it depends on the details. If the seller is highly dependent on the US market, the seller may cut prices by almost as much as the tariff in order to keep market share. A seller with other markets to sell into won't do that, so US consumers will either pay more for the same product, pay more for competing US-made products, or not get the product they want. Trump would like to believe that all sellers in the world -- particularly Chinese companies -- are so dependent on the US market that they'll swallow the entire tariff, and nobody else believes that.

Expand full comment
Paula B.'s avatar

My husband told me that there are 17,000 categories of product in the tariff list. Perhaps Trump is thinking of each one of those as a "deal." (I'm ridiculing him, in case there's any doubt.)

Expand full comment
The Coke Brothers's avatar

They have clearly abandoned their duties but this is not the indication. They cannot ratify something that has not been presented to them

Expand full comment
Margaret Stumpp's avatar

I’m reading this in Japan where the cars are…uh…wonderful. Tiny, yes. But absolutely practical on small roads and in urban environments. Not a single Toyota Land Cruiser, Tundra, or Tacoma in sight. No monster trucks here. The notion that this market discriminates against F-150’s, or Raptors is ludicrous. US manufactured vehicles simply don’t fit on the roads.

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

And they taught us how to build cars to boot.

Expand full comment
Wes Brazas's avatar

Toyota Production System

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

The discrimination is in the other direction. You can't buy those Japanese vehicles here (unless they're over 25 years old). There does seem to be a recent exemption for the tiny pickup trucks when they're used for construction work. I've seen a few around here.

Expand full comment
Margaret Stumpp's avatar

My point is that tariffs aren’t keeping US vehicles out of Japan - the market is. US vehicles are simply inappropriate here. Conversely, I suspect that there is room in the US market for the tiny vehicles seen in Japan, the EU and elsewhere - especially in US urban environments. I suspect that safety and other regulatory criteria effectively make their importation impossible. I.e., not tariff barriers. Whether US citizens are better off is possible, but debatable. I’d love to have a tiny car in my garage, but …

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

The market for small cars is here, but they've been regulated away. European cars tended to do well in the 60s, so "safety" regulations went in targeting features of these cars. The regulations changed every year, forcing the Europeans to change the cars every year (not coming out with a new model every year was giving them an "unfair advantage" over the big three here). Then the Japanese cars hit the market in the 70s.

At the time, one did well to get 100,000 miles out of a Ford engine. My then brother-in-law was amazed when his Toyota passed 130,000 without problems. And 19 mpg was considered excellent from things like the Falcon inline six.

I've since twice heard Ford spokesmen claim that American workers are too big to make small cars. This claim has been used to justify the regulations and other measures that keep the small Kei Japanese cars out.

Expand full comment
Alexander Dumas's avatar

I seriously doubt he has made a single deal. Trump is a congenital liar, born that way, constantly spinning his horeshit. I thought Nixon was bad but Trump is just plain dumb as an ass. Now he’s telling Zelensky Putin has been playing him, that Putin won’t end the war. I think Trump is playing Zelensky on this to get the latter to cave in to Russian demands. So, what’s in the bag for Trump? Nobel prize? The Swedes would have rocks in their heads if they give one to a liar, an indecent oaf and criminal. And what’s his cut for Ukraine’s critical minerals?

Expand full comment
KMD's avatar

Everything Donald Trump says is bullshit. It has always been thus. He's the king of bullshit, beginning way back when he was gadding about in Manhattan & trying to pass himself off as a playboy//successful businessman.

Expand full comment
Stuart's avatar

I often think that even where the truth would serve him just fine, Trump tells a lie. Like the famous scorpion -- "It's in his nature."

Expand full comment
Simen's avatar

The Nobel peace prize is awarded by Norway. The rest of the Nobels are awarded by Sweden.

Expand full comment
Alexander Dumas's avatar

Thanks. My mistake.

Expand full comment
Paul B's avatar

Zelensky has learned to play his role as a Trump doormat. Both Zelensky and Putin are trying to keep the war going past Trump, they both hope the end of Trump's reign is imminent.

Expand full comment
Chris Bransdon's avatar

I just came here to appreciate "he said, Xi said".

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

That's what Xi said!

Expand full comment
bob's avatar

"I’ve made 200 deals." - how isn't that dementia?

Expand full comment
Lulu Fraser's avatar

We all should use the word “trumpwashing”loudly and regularly so that it is well understood that all that he says are sickening lies. Let’s get this word used so much that even the media uses it.

Expand full comment
The Coke Brothers's avatar

It was actually 201

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

100%

Expand full comment
TomD's avatar

I trust Xi as far as I can throw him bodily, and I trust Trump far less than that. Point to Xi.

Expand full comment
Anne H's avatar

Republicans need to get rid of Trump and Navarro

Impossible to discuss anything when all facts are alternative ones

Expand full comment
Milford Sprecher's avatar

Don’t call them alternative facts. They are lies or fantasies.

Expand full comment
Peter Redward's avatar

Shortages, price increases - potentially way bigger than people expect as people bid up the prices of product that's still available - increased inequality, social tension. And if the Federal Reserve cuts rates too early and accommodates the shock, rather than see long term bond yields drop, they may rise, potentially sharply. That sends the stock market over a cliff and the housing market into the deep freeze.

The precarious nature of deficit financing, coupled with unstable inflation expectations means the Fed/Treasury may not be able to simply underwrite the economy and asset markets as they have in the past.

Expand full comment
mfwords's avatar

Yes, unfortunately all of this. Dr. K wrote about the market delusion at the moment that Trump isn’t as serious about wrecking the economy as he said he is. But the damage in trust is real; businesses, and especially foreign investors in our debt, are moving on and will continue to do so, so our “special-ness” has and will continue to evaporate. What happens along the way is that our debt is more expensive, and the Fed and Congress’s ability to buy and borrow is toast. Trump has no clue how damaging he’s already been, and once we have a recession he gets a new Fed chair and will push for rate cuts we cannot afford. That causes already expensive costs, thanks to tariffs, to explode, and triggers something closer to a depression. Who knows what other crimes Trump will have committed by then, but probably his mass deportation operation will be in full swing by then, and as much repression as he can muster as well (like this Substack and the note I’m scribbling triggers harm). And ONLY perhaps then, does Congress seek to act. Perhaps. But it’s entirely possible we’re a third-world economy by then with global enemies that used to be friends and the laughingstock of the globe on a level far worse than Brexit.

Expand full comment
Eva DD's avatar

Followed your link to the Time ‘100 days’ interview transcript. Was struck by his lack of engagement with policy details, his inability or unwillingness to go into complex topics, his erratic communication. Very painful to read. Even more, to think he is in such a position of power despite that.

Expand full comment
John's avatar

Reading transcripts of his babbling reveals much better than video the state of his cognitive decline. He really is bats**t crazy. And with a cabinet like his, the chances of invoking the 25th are nil. We’re in the hands of of a madman.

Expand full comment
Robert Jaffee's avatar

Never underestimate the stupidity of the Trump administration. It’s only a matter of time before he finds another scapegoat to shroud him from blame.

In the World According To Trump, all is well and everything is going according to plan. After all, Trump did say he would do to America, what he did to his brand and businesses.

Therefore, I have to admit; MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! He saddled us with debt, is singlehandedly destroying our economy, and he has laid waste to the US brand in record time. Bush and Cheney have nothing on this guy! IMHO…:)

Expand full comment
Karen Rile's avatar

“This is a case of he said, Xi said.” Very good!!

Expand full comment
pmsrw3's avatar

I heard on the news this morning that, after speaking with Zelenskiy at the funeral of Pope Francis, Trump began to muse that maybe Putin was just stringing him along. (Which, yeah, duh!)

This sounds a little bit encouraging, until you realize all it means is that Trump is always swayed by the last person he talked to.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

I have a sister like that. You spend the whole visit reprogramming her to reality. Then next you see her you have to do it all again.

Expand full comment