The National Security Breach: Worse than I Thought

A week ago, news broke that a serious security breach of U.S. intelligence had taken place. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth had disclosed war plans in a group chat to 18 senior members of the Trump administration. This took place on SIGNAL, a commercial app platform. Participating in that chat were Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Vice President JD Vance, the National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, the head of the CIA John Ratcliffe, and other senior officials. The information contained “operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing”. Part of the breach happened because Waltz had inadvertently added a journalist, Jeffrey Goldberg, to the chat list. Of course, Goldberg, a private citizen, did not have security clearance.

The fallout has been striking. Recent polls indicate that 74-76% of American citizens believe this breach was “serious”, including 60% of all Republicans. The daily drip, drip, drip of mistakes are contributing to the growing lack of public trust. Faced with this problem, the White House wants the issue to disappear, and hopes the public just “forgets” the breach. On the other hand, Democrats want a thorough investigation to take place and necessary consequences to be applied. The following is my attempt to summarize the facts as we know them so that my readers can make up their own minds.

SIGNAL

SIGNAL is a commercial app. It is portrayed as a fairly safe platform because messages are encrypted from the source phone, and then kept encrypted throughout the transmission until they reach the receiving phone. Many people who work in the federal government, both Republicans and Democrats, utilize SIGNAL for ordinary transmissions.

The government has issued many warnings against using SIGNAL for sending sensitive, classified information for the following reasons:

The transmission is encrypted and, therefore, fairly secure. Nevertheless, the source phone and the receiving phones are vulnerable to attack and hacking. These phones must also meet high security criteria.
Federal security laws require that sensitive, high-level communication be retained for posterity. SIGNAL is programed to erase the contents shortly after the chat conversation has ended. This means that SIGNAL must not be used for the transmission of classified intelligence. All senior officials are made aware of this restriction.
Each person on a chat must be aware of the identity of all the other participants on the chat in order to fulfill security requirements. If there is any breach, participants should immediately raise an alarm and communicate the breach to the person who organized the chat.

THE BREACH

Everyone knew that SIGNAL should not be used to transmit sensitive, classified information.

National Security Adviser Michael Waltz made a big mistake of adding journalist Jeffrey Goldberg to the list of recipients, thereby violating security criteria. Waltz has appropriately admitted that he was responsible for the mistake.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth introduced the highly sensitive “operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing”. According to the Department of Defense’s own definitions, intelligence on imminent military strikes is designated “Top Secret”. Hegseth clearly violated security norms.
It appears that some of the participants were using their personal phones for the chat. These phones are susceptible to hacking and their use is a clear violation of the security guidelines. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff was in Russia during the chat. There is concern that the phone he was using was vulnerable to Russian surveillance.

THE RESPONSE

Last Monday Journalist Jeffrey Goldberg published brief segments of the chat text in the Atlantic. These did not compromise sensitive intelligence, but were sufficiently explicit to demonstrate that he had mistakenly been admitted to the chat. At first, the White House accused him of lying. Hegseth accused him of being a deceitful “so called journalist” who peddles lies. Trump called him a “sleazebag”. Goldberg responded that his integrity (and the integrity of the Atlantic) were on the line and that he felt goaded to publish the entire transcript. He made the appropriate agencies aware of his plans (the White House, the CIA, the DOD, etc) in order not to put U.S. military personnel in danger. The CIA made a request to omit an identification and Goldberg complied with their wish. The text was then published in the Atlantic and is now available for everyone to study. The text shows that in addition to military plans, sensitive derogatory comments were made about our European allies, and a disagreement between Vance and Trump was made public.
After the incendiary White House attack on Goldberg as a liar backfired, the official line has been to deny, deny, deny. They have minimized the seriousness of the breach: as if no classified intelligence had been communicated. A few voices were raised in protest. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called the breach a “big mistake”. Republican Senator Roger Wicker, chair of the Armed Services Committee, was even more explicit. He signed onto a letter to the acting inspector general at the Department of Defense for an inquiry into the potential “use of unclassified networks to discuss sensitive and classified information, as well as the sharing of such information with those who do not have proper clearance and need to know.” I invite my readers to study the entire transcript and decide for themselves whether the contents should have been designated as “Top Secret” or not.
Our relationship with allies has been damaged. Israel provided much of the intelligence information that Hegseth shared on a non-classified platform. They and our European allies have stated they will re-evaluate what kind of intelligence they will share with us in the future. Are we a trustworthy ally?
The Wall Street Journal reported that “Waltz has created and hosted multiple other sensitive national security conversations on Signal with cabinet members, including separate threads on how to broker peace between Russia and Ukraine as well as military operations.”

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

Given that an overwhelming majority of Americans believe the breach to be serious, I agree with Senator Wicker that, at the very least, the Department of Defense Inspector General conduct a thorough investigation of the breach. They should also assign penalties if warranted. I would prefer a bipartisan investigation by the Senate Armed Services Committee, which would probably be more balanced and just. May the truth win out!

The Trump Administration’s Denial of the National Security Breach: How Stupid Do They Think We Are?

Over the weekend, news broke that a serious security breach of U.S. intelligence had taken place on March 15. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth disclosed war plans in an encrypted group chat to a group of senior members of the Trump administration. Participating in the chat were Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Vice President JD Vance, the National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, the head of the CIA John Ratcliffe, and other senior officials. The information contained “operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing”. There were numerous anomalies including the following:

The conversation took place outside the secure government channels that would normally be used for classified and highly sensitive war planning.
The highly respected editor in chief of The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, affirmed in an article that he published on Monday that he was mistakenly added to the text chat on the commercial messaging app Signal by Michael Waltz.
Goldberg was most cautious. He did not reveal the most sensitive information in his article, but he disclosed enough (portions of the chat text itself, including emojis) to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that he had been included in the text chat.
Several Defense Department officials expressed shock that Mr. Hegseth had put American war plans into a commercial chat group. They affirmed that having this type of conversation in a Signal chat group itself could be a violation of the Espionage Act, a law covering the handling of sensitive information. The revelation of operational war plans before the planned strikes had occurred could also put American troops directly into harm’s way.
In the conversation, Ratcliffe mentioned the name of an active undercover CIA officer.

Yesterday there was a Senate hearing that dealt with the presentation of the major threats in the world, according to senior U.S. intelligence officials including Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratcliffe. This hearing is an annual event, but there was something different this time. Democratic senators (Warner, Bennet, Ossoff, Kelly) took advantage of the hearing to grill Gabbard and Ratcliffe about the security breach. They repeatedly answered that the conversation in the group chat did take place but that the information provided was not “classified”. How stupid do they think we are? Detailed, sensitive information about imminent strikes on Yemen, and information regarding targets, U.S. weapons and attack sequencing should not be considered “classified”? The Dems continued the pressure. They used Gabbard’s own words against her, by quoting back her own descriptions of what information should be identified as “classified”. She and Ratcliffe were frequently asked about the weapons and targets mentioned in the conversation. And they frequently (and conveniently) answered, “I can’t remember” and “I can’t recall”.

In a press conference later in the day, President Trump repeated the official line that “this information was not classified” because if it were classified, he and his senior staff would appear to be seriously incompetent. The official party line is “Deny, Deny, Deny!”: deny that the information was classified, deny that the breach was serious, or deny that lives were put at risk.

Sooner or later, the administration will have to admit the information was (and should have been) considered “classified” OR that it was not classified and now should be made public. Either way, the administration should admit its serious mistake. Truth will win out in the end. We, the people, deserve the truth. We also deserve public officials who are mature enough to admit their errors and improve our government. We deserve accountability. In my blog postings earlier this year, I questioned the inferior qualifications of many of the Cabinet nominees. Sadly, many of these “leaders” have demonstrated their incompetence. At the very minimum, Hegseth and Waltz should be fired.

Mr. President, When the Courts Rule Against You, Do Not Throw a Temper Tantrum. File Your Appeals, Then Trust and Obey.

One week ago, three airplanes, supposedly containing immigrants belonging to Venezuelan gangs, took off from U.S. territory and flew to El Salvador where the passengers were placed in a huge, infamous prison in that country. These deportations took place under the alleged authorization of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act (which has only been invoked during wartime). Federal Judge James Boasberg, concerned that due process had not taken place, ordered that the planes not take off, or if already in the air, that they turn around and come back with their passengers to the U.S.

Mr. President, you threw a temper tantrum, more like a spoiled three-year old brat than someone who aspires to be a “great president”. Rather than dealing with the evidence, you labeled Boasberg as an “extreme leftist lunatic” (even though he was first appointed by Republican President Bush). You called him a “rogue” who should be impeached (although as you know an impeachment needs 67 votes in the Senate).

For your information, our government has three co-equal branches: the Legislative, which makes the laws and has the power of the purse; the Executive, which executes the legislation (here, “executes” means “implements”, not “kills”); and the Judiciary, which interprets the law and applies the penalties when violations take place. The Judiciary is like the umpire who calls “balls and strikes”. The courts don’t always get it right, but the beauty and wisdom of our government is that citizens can appeal the decisions they don’t like and take them to an Appellate Court, or all the way to the Supreme Court.

To be honest, your administration has not complied with Judge Boasberg’s orders. The judge has demonstrated great patience by extending additional time to your staff to provide the basic information regarding when the planes took off and landed, and when your administration became aware of the orders. Your administration is stalling and defying the court. Then yesterday, you came out and said you never signed the document invoking the Alien Enemies Act. Who forged your signature?

Mr. Trump, you swore to defend the Constitution. Do not, by your actions, allow our country to fall into a constitutional crisis. File your appeals if you wish. Trust the process. Obey the court orders.

The War in Ukraine: A Bit of Hope, but is Trump Getting “Played” by Putin?

Yesterday, U.S. President Trump and Russian “President” Putin had a lengthy (roughly two hours) phone conversation with the goal of ending the war in Ukraine. I do not fault Trump with reaching out to an authoritarian world leader who is guilty of war crimes (according to the International Criminal Court). I do raise concerns about Russia taking advantage of Trump’s lack of leverage in these negotiations. These conversations already have a history, including Trump’s meeting with Ukrainian President Zelensky in the White House and talks between Russian and U.S. envoys. In these preliminaries, Trump has made several unnecessary and unhelpful concessions to Putin:

Trump falsely accused Zelensky of starting the war and Trump defended Putin against charges of being the aggressor (in the UN vote)
Trump affirmed that Russia would be awarded some land in eastern Ukraine
Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO

By giving up these concessions up front, the United States has lost its leverage in these talks.

The Good News: Yesterday, Putin agreed to a 30-day limited cease-fire in which Russia would stop strikes on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure as long as Ukraine did the same. Putin also agreed to a significant prisoner exchange for later this month.

The Bad News: Putin did NOT agree to a complete 30-day cease-fire. To advance the negotiations, the U.S. cannot provide additional military assistance or intelligence information to Ukraine. Ukraine cannot send more troops to the front. These and other demands are totally unacceptable to Ukraine (and to our European allies).

The Results: Putin gives the impression that he is open and eager to end the war. In fact, he is stalling. Every day the war continues, Russia takes more territory. Trump’s peace initiatives will not be successful, because Putin is not acting in good faith. It sure looks like Trump, the author of “The Art of the Deal”, is getting “played” by Putin.

What can Trump do? He must regain leverage over Putin. He should impose new financial sanctions on Russia. These sanctions can be used as “bargaining chips” which can later be withdrawn if Putin removes his unreasonable demands.

The War in Ukraine: A Bit of Hope, but is Trump Getting “Played” by Putin?

Trump falsely accused Zelensky of starting the war and Trump defended Putin against charges of being the aggressor (by siding with Russian, North Korea, etc. in the UN vote)
Trump affirmed that Russia would be awarded some land in eastern Ukraine
Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO

By giving these concessions up front, the United States has lost its leverage in these talks.

Trump’s Plan to End the War in Ukraine: Concessions and Non-negotiables

On the campaign trail, Trump promised that he would end the war in Ukraine BEFORE he took office on January 20. Of course, no sane person believed that promise and of course, Trump did not fulfill his pledge. Nevertheless, Trump does deserve some credit for attempting to end the war. Last night, Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff met with Russian “president” Putin in a preliminary meeting to suggest a temporary ceasefire. It is in everyone’s interest (Ukraine, Russia, United States, Europe) for this war to end and a “just peace” to emerge in which both Ukraine and Russia are in agreement with the terms.

This will not be easy. A poll came out overnight in which 59% of Americans believe that a just peace is unlikely or very doubtful. Both countries have non-negotiables and both sides will have to make significant concessions. Here are the most important issues.

Territory integrity – I believe Ukraine is right in demanding territory integrity, that is, the boundaries be the same as prior to the war: Russian occupied lands in eastern Ukraine should be returned. Although Ukraine would also like Crimea to be returned, this wish list item might need to be sacrificed. One option is for the United Nations to study and vote on the status of Crimea some time in the intermediate future.

Membership in NATO – Ukraine wants to join NATO for its future security. Of course, Russia does not want an additional large, NATO member as its next-door neighbor for its own security reasons. Although desiring to join NATO is a legitimate goal, I would be willing to see this deferred for 5-10 years in order for a peace agreement to take place.

Putin’s Responsibility – It is obviously clear to sane people that Putin started this war. He was the aggressor. His reckless invasion has caused the deaths of many thousands of Ukrainian and Russian soldiers and civilians. Justice requires that Putin make some financial remuneration for the deaths that he caused and for the rebuilding of Ukraine. It is doubtful that Putin would admit any guilt. Tyrants seldom acknowledge any mistakes. (Trump knows this all too well.) My suggestion is that Europe and the United States magnanimously and jointly offer to pay for much of the rebuilding of Ukraine. This would be a more economical option than continuing to finance an unnecessary war.

Trump has chosen a difficult challenge: Bringing about a just peace. I hope he can achieve the “art of the deal”.

Trump’s State of the Union Address: Some Good Points, but his Lies should Worry all Americans

In Donald Trump’s State of the Union Address on Tuesday evening, he was preaching to the choir. His MAGA base loved it. Republican leaders who were present got plenty of exercise as they stood up and applauded dozens of times during his 99 minute speech. He was disciplined in sticking to his text instead of his more typical going off script. He highlighted his “successes” and generally omitted his failed promises. Nevertheless, he made many claims that were totally false. I lay out some of the evidence below. I ask my readers, especially MAGA folk, to pursue the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. If the following information is inaccurate in any detail, please let me know. If Trump communicated false information, please speak truth to power.

Trump – “The presidential election of November 5th was a mandate like has not been seen in many decades…. We won the popular vote by big numbers.”

The Truth – Trump truly won the election, but it was not a mandate. He did not even receive a majority of the popular vote, just 49.8% of those who voted. In fact, it was the smallest margin of victory since the year 2000.

Trump – “Now, for the first time in modern history, more Americans believe that our country is headed in the right direction than the wrong direction — in fact it’s an astonishing record, 27-point swing — the most ever.”

The Truth – “Thirty-four percent of Americans say that the country is headed in the right direction, compared to 49% who say it is off on the wrong track. When it comes to several specific issues, Americans are more likely to say things are off on the wrong track than going in the right direction: cost of living (22% right direction / 60% wrong track), the national economy (31% right direction / 51% wrong track), national politics (33% right direction / 50% wrong track), American foreign policy (33% right direction / 49% wrong track), and employment and jobs (33% right direction / 47% wrong track). Immigration policy is the only specific issue where more Americans say it is going in the right direction (48%) than off on the wrong track (39%).” (most recent Reuters/IPSOS poll)

Trump – “It has been stated by many that the first month of our presidency, it’s our presidency, is the most successful in the history of our nation. By many. And what makes it even more impressive, is that you know who number two is? George Washington. How about that? I don’t know about that list but we’ll take it.”

The Truth – We should be cautious when politicians (or anyone else) refuse to identify their sources. Who are the “many”? Where is the list? Was Trump really ahead of George Washington? According to the FiveThirtyEight average of national polls, only 46.1% of the U.S. citizens currently approve of the job Trump is doing, a decline of over 3% in these first six weeks of his presidency. (Donald Trump : Favorability Polls | FiveThirtyEight

Trump – “The United States has spent perhaps $350 billion on supporting Ukraine’s defense.” He also claimed that Europe has only spent $100 billion in aid to Ukraine.

The Truth – “According to the special inspector general responsible for overseeing the spending related to the war in Ukraine, Congress has appropriated or otherwise made available $182.75 billion for the overall U.S. response to the war since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. Of that money, about $119 billion has been for the direct benefit of Ukraine, including approximately $65.9 billion in military assistance…. According to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, European countries have spent around $140 billion to back Kyiv, and pledged another roughly $120 billion to the cause.” (Shannon Kingston in Fact-checking Trump’s speech to Congress)

Trump – “Joe Biden especially let the price of eggs get out of control. The egg prices are out of control. And we are working hard to get it back down.”

The Truth – Egg prices rose under Biden. They have continued to rise sharply during Trump’s first six weeks. This is the same Trump who campaigned with the promise “I will bring down egg prices on Day One.” When I was a kid, we would hear the slogan “Boys make excuses, men make good.” I hear a lot of excuses coming out of the White House. Excuses need to be quite solid in order to justify failed promises.

Trump – “the next phase of our plan to deliver the greatest economy in history is for this Congress to pass tax cuts for everybody.”

The Truth – During his first administration, Trump amassed the largest federal debt in U.S. history, $7.8 trillion. This does not lead to “the greatest economy in history”. This debt was largely due to his tax cut that primarily benefited the very rich. It was not a tax cut “for everybody”.

Trump – Although barely mentioned in his election campaign, tariffs have played a large role in these six weeks of his presidency. He called tariffs a “beautiful word”, his “favorite word”. On Tuesday Trump proclaimed that due to tariffs, “we will take in trillions and trillions of dollars and create jobs like we have never seen before.”

The Truth – “The substantial tariffs that Mr. Trump is imposing on foreign products will raise revenue for the government. But total U.S. imports last year were about $3.3 trillion, meaning that tariffs would have to be incredibly high to generate the trillions of dollars of revenue that Mr. Trump claims.” (Fact-Checking Trump’s Address to Congress – The New York Times)

Trump – The specific special tariffs on Mexico and Canada (of 25%) were included in the written script of his address, but Trump (conveniently) skipped over these items in his oral remarks. Why?

The Truth – The conservative Wall Street Journal described these massive tariffs as the “Dumbest Trade War in History”. These tariffs took effect on Tuesday. In two days, the Dow Jones level fell some 1200 points (about 3% of its total value)! Mexico and Canada announced reciprocal, retaliatory tariffs. GOP leaders and the Big Three Automobile producers voiced their concerns to the White House. Faced with this bad news, Trump caved. On Wednesday he announced a one month “pause” on automobile tariffs with our two neighbors.

I could go on and on, but these lies are enough for now. The next big event is the budget that needs to be approved by Congress and signed into law by Trump. He says he wants a “balanced budget”. He has also promised not to touch Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. This is impossible. Republicans plan on cutting $880 billion from Medicaid which would lead to the closing of hundreds of nursing homes across the country and additional pain for millions of our citizens. Readers, what should we do with all these lies?

Woe to those who Call Evil Good and Good Evil: Putin and Trump

In the Hebrew Scriptures, the prophet Isaiah warned his people, “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” (Isaiah 5:20) He was speaking God’s truth to a people who saw a moral crisis taking place in their times. Religious and political leaders were making moral pronouncements that made a mockery of God’s universal set of ethics based upon the legal equality of every human being, because all have been created in God’s image. Isaiah rightly denounced these immoral leaders as hypocrites who distorted God’s social ethics to further their own self-centered interests.

In this post, I want to consider evil actions that Russian “president” Vladimir Putin has committed and identify some of those U.S. leaders who are now enabling him. Putin is a war criminal. His evil actions were obvious when he was a KGB operative decades ago and his actions have gone from bad to worse. In early 2014 he sent his troops to invade the Crimean Peninsula which belonged to Ukraine. Russian troops occupied the Crimean Parliament and called for a referendum for Crimea’s “independence” which they rigged to win. The international community spoke with one voice to condemn this invasion and theft. The United Nations General Assembly rejected the referendum and annexation, and officially recognized the “the territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders”. In addition, the members of the G8 kicked Putin and Russia out of this organization of world leaders.

Three years ago, Putin’s troops launched a massive invasion of other areas of Ukraine, without provocation. Putin again committed various war crimes. He launched missile strikes on civilian populations, especially targeting schools and hospitals. His troops kidnapped Ukrainian children and deported them to Russia for “re-education”. It was for these crimes that the International Criminal Court (ICC) condemned Putin and issued a warrant for his arrest. In the United States, Republicans and Democrats spoke with one voice. They denounced Putin and they praised Ukrainian president Zelensky for his military response. Over these last three years, the U.S. Congress has sent 119 billion dollars of aid to Ukraine for its fight against the war criminal Putin. As recently as the conference in Helsinki this year, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham praised Zelensky for his heroic stand against Putin.

Putin has not had a moral conversion, but ten days ago, good became evil and evil became good. Europe brought a Resolution to the United Nations General Assembly to condemn Russia for its invasion. Like similar resolutions in the past, the world joined together to condemn Russian and its War Criminal “President”. What was different this time was that our United States Ambassador to the UN, obeying Trump’s command, voted against the resolution. We joined the “Axis of Evil” nations in defending Putin. I was not surprised by Trump’s action. Just two weeks ago, Trump lied to the US people, falsely affirming that the war had been started by Ukraine. Nevertheless, it was painful to see most Republican leaders (with a few exceptions like senators Murkowski and Lankford) do a complete about face. Perhaps out of fear of Trump’s retaliation, they supported Trump’s UN vote in defense of Putin. Speaker of the House Johnson identified the Axis of Evil countries (Russia, North Korea, Iran, etc.) but tried to avoid the obvious truth that we had joined this Axis in our UN vote. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s body language in the White House fiasco meeting on Friday tells the whole story. He hated hearing Trump’s defense of Putin and attack on Zelensky, but he had sold out his conscience to his boss.

Calling evil actions good is in itself “evil”. In this case, it is due to Republicans’ “loyalty” to Donald Trump. But giving absolute loyalty to Trump or to any other fallen human being is not good. It is idolatry. Let us heed Isaiah’s warning before it is too late.

I Applaud Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski for Her Courage in Denouncing Elon Musk’s Cruel Firings

Lisa Murkowski is a Republican. She has represented her home state of Alaska in the United States Senate since 2002. She is on the Senate Committees on Appropriations, Energy and Natural Resources, Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. She chairs the Committee on Indian Affairs. Nevertheless, her most important role (in my opinion) is that she is a major voice in the conscience of our country. She speaks her mind, and her words usually speak truth to power.

Earlier this month, she and the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee, wrote a strong letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio in which they denounced the freezing of USAID funds and the gutting of that agency that Rubio and Elon Musk had implemented. They accused Rubio and Musk of violating federal law. They demanded that Rubio go to Congress and defend his actions.

Over the last three weeks, Musk has continued his crusade to demolish federal agencies, alleging that he is eliminating “waste, corruption and fraud”. Instead of surgically cutting out just the waste, he has taken a chain saw approach that cuts out healthy programs (like Ebola prevention, protection of nuclear weapons, and actions to fight avian flu).

His actions reached a new extreme over the weekend when he launched a new policy requiring federal workers to write a weekly email report consisting of five bullet points that describe what they had accomplished in the previous week…or face dismissal. Murkowski immediately defended the federal workers and blasted Musk in a post on the X platform. She described Musk’s actions as “absurd”. She used his own language and told him to “get to know each department and agency” BEFORE he cuts federal jobs.

Murkowski then listed off the workers at the agencies that have seen cuts and defended their role in the federal government. “Our public servants work hard to ensure that our national security is protected; that planes land safely; that forest fires do not spread to our homes; that Social Security checks arrive on time; that research for the breakthroughs needed to cure diseases like cancer and ALS continues; and much more” She then concluded, “Our public workforce deserves to be treated with dignity and respect for the unheralded jobs they perform. The absurd weekend email to justify their existence wasn’t it.”

Murkowski’s courage might be contagious. Several of Trump’s appointed Cabinet members protested against Musk’s rash order. FBI Director Kash Patel instructed his employees to “pause” any response to Musk’s questionnaire. Other Cabinet members told their workers to “ignore” Musk’s order. Any sane observer acknowledges that Musk’s action has led to chaos in federal agencies. Up until now, Trump has backed Musk. How long will he tolerate this chaos in his own administration?

Lisa Murkowski: Because you spoke up, we the people appreciate you. Musk cancelled funding for Veteran Affairs. This affects services for veterans’ cancer care, toxin exposure assessment, and even burial services! We the people are raising our voices in protest. According to the most recent news, Musk’s VA reduction in VA funding has been reversed!

Lisa Murkowski: Thank you for your courage and conscience.

Republican Leaders (like Marco Rubio) and Putin, the War Criminal: An Unholy Alliance

Three years ago, Russian “President” Putin ordered thousands of his troops to invade their neighbor Ukraine which had done nothing to provoke Russia’s attack. This invasion is a fact. During these three years of bloody warfare, over a million soldiers from Russia and Ukraine have been killed or seriously injured. Even worse, Putin has attacked Ukraine’s civilian population causing death and destruction. Roughly a third of its 41 million population has been displaced from their homes.

Yesterday, Europe brought a Resolution to the United Nations General Assembly to condemn Russia for its invasion. Like similar resolutions in the past, the world joined together to condemn Russian and its War Criminal “President”. What was different this time was that our United States Ambassador to the UN, obeying Trump’s command, voted against the resolution. We joined the “Axis of Evil” nations in defending Putin. I was not surprised by Trump’s action. Just last week, he lied to the US people, falsely affirming that the war had been started by Ukraine.

Nevertheless, I was stunned and deeply saddened by our Republican leaders who defended Putin. For example, where is Marco Rubio? He spent his long public career denouncing the expansionist goals and war crimes of Putin and his country. Eight years ago, Senator Rubio grilled Rex Tillerson, who at that time was Trump’s nominee for Secretary of State. Rubio wanted to make sure that Tillerson would publicly denounce Putin as a war criminal for his unlawful invasion and takeover of Crimea in 2014. During these eight years, Putin has not changed. He has not had a moral conversion. Putin is far guiltier now than he was back then. It does not take much intelligence to see that Putin now has much more blood on his hands. Marco Rubio, now our Secretary of State, has changed. He has lost his conscience and sold out his soul. He has bowed the knee and kissed Trump’s presidential ring. So have most Republican leaders. It only takes an ounce of courage to speak the truth. Apparently, Republican leaders don’t have that ounce.

Good News from the Global South: The Journal of Latin American Theology

Good News! The Journal of Latin American Theology: Christian Reflections from the Latino South has just published its newest issue (19.2). Why is this good news? Two decades ago, I helped to start this journal with the purpose of making available to English reading audiences some of the best Christian reflections coming out of Latin America. The journal does not focus on esoteric religious oddities. It brings to bear the teaching of Jesus to concrete issues that affect people around our world. If it contributes to genuine communication between and among the Global South and North, it is good news. If it helps to shed the light of truth on troublesome issues, it is good news. If it applies the practice and teaching of Jesus to today’s most difficult challenges, it is good news indeed.

Here are the article titles in this most recent issue:

Christian Faith and Climate Change
The Centrality of the Cross for Socioenvironmental Justice
The End of the World and New Creation: Approaches to and from John’s Revelation
Protestantism, Public Influence and Theological Education: Perspectives from the Political Ethics of the Kingdom of God
Christian Higher Education and an Evangélico Sense of Shame: A Case Study from Brazilian Politics
Protestant Presence in the Public Sphere: A Case Study of Brazil
Three book reviews, a film review, and two poignant examples of theopoetry

Readers who would like to access these articles can do so through the ATLA Religion Database published by the American Theological Library Association. The journal can also be purchased through the Wipf and Stock Publishers website: www:wipfandstock.com

Enjoy and be challenged by your reading!