[Maybe The Prosperos should try this. I volunteer to be one of the 3-member Shadow Executive Council – Mike Zonta, BB editor]

Democrats need to show what they would do if they returned to power. A new program resembling the U.K.’s Shadow Cabinet system may help.

April 8, 2025 (MSNBC.com)

By Hayes Brown, MSNBC Opinion Writer/Editor

Newly elected Democratic National Committee chair Ken Martin announced Friday that the DNC will launch the “People’s Cabinet.” In spirt at least, it’s a kind of American version of Britain’s “Shadow Cabinet,” which gives a minority party a platform for its ideas. With Republicans holding Congress and the White House, Democrats find themselves completely blocked from Washington’s levers of power, but if executed correctly, the DNC’s “People’s Cabinet” could be a worthy response to frustrated Democrats demanding that their leaders do more to oppose President Donald Trump’s agenda.

In announcing the People’s Cabinet, the DNC contrasted Trump’s largely unqualified panel of advisers that’s chock-full of billionaires and the “experts on the economy, health care, working families and communities, public safety, national security, and foreign policy” it will put forth. Martin said he’s tapping people who “will equip communities with the reliable, accurate information they need to fight back against the worst of the Trump and Republican agenda.” They’ll be putting out social media content, holding media briefings and headlining town halls in GOP-held House districts that critique — and, ideally, offer alternatives to — Trump’s agenda.

Democrats’ plan to present their own leaders and experts to focus on specific policy areas closely tracks with the United Kingdom’s Shadow Cabinet.

Democrats’ plan to present their own leaders and experts to focus on specific policy areas closely tracks with the United Kingdom’s Shadow Cabinet. The leader of the party with the second-most seats in the House of Commons serves as shadow prime minister and appoints members who “shadow” their assigned Cabinet members and tell the public how their party would run things if returned to power. It’s a relatively recent development in the British system that gives the minority party the ability to plan for a return to governing.

On this side of the Atlantic, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, both New York Democrats, have been more focused on serving as legislative leaders than offering a political alternative to Trump. While a Monday event by Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., spotlighting alleged abuses at the Justice Department is an example of “shadow hearings” Democrats have held, because they’re not official, party leaders have to rely instead on the willing participation of those called to testify.

There’s likewise nobody, then, with the authority to set the party’s agenda as an opposition force and name, for example, a shadow defense secretary to challenge and contradict Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Our political parties generally use the presidential primary system to determine their directions and follow the lead of whichever candidate manages to win the nominations. That means there’s little hope of a united message from the opposition party until the primary field has been cleared.

There’s likewise nobody, then, with the authority to set the party’s agenda as an opposition force

Trump’s grasp on the Republican Party was uncertain after he was voted out of office in 2020, but he quickly refilled the power vacuum by making Mar-a-Lago an unofficial hub for party strategy. Various think tanks and members of Congress, as well as the Republican National Committee, in turn became an extension of Trump’s political operation. In contrast, the Democratic Party has been relatively aimless following Vice President Kamala Harris’ loss. It lacks a similar guiding star.

The People’s Cabinet could fill some of that yawning void. There are still plenty of details left to fill in, though, and the structure is much looser than the U.K.’s formal Shadow Cabinet’s assignments. Rather than tapping specific shadow secretaries to serve throughout Trump’s term and potentially fill those roles in the next Democratic administration, a more ad-hoc system appears to be planned.

For example, in the face of the latest jobs report and Trump’s disastrous tariffs, former Labor Secretary Robert Reich and former acting Labor Secretary Julie Su joined a media call Friday to hammer out Trump’s economic agenda. But there’s no telling who might be speaking on that front next month. The question of who is setting the Democratic Party’s economic policy moving forward is still left unanswered. Likewise, the only unifying vision that the party has collectively agreed to remains the platform Harris and President Joe Biden helped craft ahead of last year’s loss to Trump.

Without a bright outline for the course the party is taking, there’s a chance the People’s Cabinet comes across as more smoke than fire and fails to reignite the base. But the potential is there for Martin and the DNC to craft a winning platform years before the next presidential election — and before next year’s midterms. It’s an opportunity that the Democrats would be wise not to squander.

Hayes Brown

Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for MSNBC Daily, where he helps frame the news of the day for readers. He was previously at BuzzFeed News and holds a degree in international relations from Michigan State University.

Wendy Cicchetti

How to Use the Full Moon in Libra to Your Advantage

1. Reflect on Relationships
Libra is centered around partnerships—romantic, platonic, and professional. This Full Moon is ideal for evaluating your connections. Ask yourself where things feel balanced and where they may not. Are you giving too much or too little? Is it time to heal, forgive, or possibly release a relationship that no longer supports your growth? Journaling or writing letters (even if you don’t send them) can help process these emotions.

2. Seek Harmony and Closure
Libra energy supports resolution and diplomacy. If you’ve experienced tension in your relationships, this is a great time to open a heart-centered conversation. Focus on listening, understanding, and restoring peace. Libra thrives when both sides feel heard and valued.

3. Beautify Your Space or Yourself
Ruled by Venus, Libra is drawn to aesthetics and comfort. Use this Full Moon to bring more beauty into your environment or self-care routine. Refresh your living space, indulge in skincare, or wear something that makes you feel good. Libra energy reminds us that beauty isn’t frivolous—it’s healing.

4. Full Moon Ritual Ideas
Build a ritual around themes of love, balance, and release. Light a pink or white candle to symbolize harmony. Write down what is creating imbalance in your life—whether it’s thought patterns, relationships, or habits—and burn or bury the list as a form of release. Charge calming crystals like rose quartz, moonstone, or selenite. You can also recite affirmations such as: “I welcome balance and peace in all areas of my life.”

5. Align Your Inner Scales
Take time to slow down and reconnect with yourself. Libra is an air sign, and its energy can stir up overthinking. Practices like meditation, deep breathing, or listening to soothing music can help quiet the mind and restore your inner balance.

How the Full Moon in Libra Impacts Each Zodiac Sign

Aries: This Full Moon highlights your relationship zone. It’s time to evaluate your one-on-one connections—romantic, professional, or personal. Are things balanced? You may feel called to deepen or release a partnership.

Taurus: Focus shifts to your daily routines, health, and work-life balance. Consider letting go of habits or commitments that throw you off. It’s a great time to create more peace and structure in your day-to-day.

Gemini: Creativity, romance, and joy take center stage. Reconnect with what brings you pleasure. If something—or someone—has been dulling your shine, this Full Moon invites you to let it go and prioritize your happiness.

Cancer: Your home, family, and emotional security are in focus. It’s a powerful time to set boundaries, heal family dynamics, or beautify your personal space. Emotional harmony begins with nurturing your inner world.

Leo: Communication, mindset, and your immediate environment are activated. Speak your truth with grace. Release toxic thoughts, gossip, or miscommunications. Clarity and calm conversations can bring balance.

Virgo: This moon spotlights your money, values, and self-worth. Time to review spending, earning, and what you truly value. Let go of scarcity thinking and realign with what supports your financial and emotional security.

Libra: This is your Full Moon, landing in your first house of self and identity. You’re stepping into a new version of yourself. It’s a powerful time to shed outdated labels and honor who you are becoming—especially in relation to others.

Scorpio: The focus is on your subconscious, solitude, and spiritual healing. Old emotions may surface, inviting deep reflection. Rest and release are your allies. Pay attention to dreams and intuitive nudges.

Sagittarius: Community, friendships, and social networks are highlighted. Consider who uplifts you and who drains you. You may be ready to walk away from certain group dynamics or strengthen ties with your soul tribe.

Capricorn: Your career, goals, and public image come into focus. It’s time to assess what success really means to you. If something feels out of alignment professionally, this moon helps you make adjustments with grace.

Aquarius: Beliefs, education, and expansion are the themes. Release outdated thinking or dogma that limits your growth. You might feel inspired to study, travel, or connect with broader perspectives.

Pisces: Intimacy, shared resources, and transformation are highlighted. Let go of emotional or financial entanglements that create imbalance. Deep healing is possible now—especially when you open up to trust and vulnerability.

Reign of Terror: How the 9/11 Era Destabilized America and Produced Trump

Spencer Ackerman

A New York Times Critics’ Top Book of 2021

“An impressive combination of diligence and verve, deploying Ackerman’s deep stores of knowledge as a national security journalist to full effect. The result is a narrative of the last 20 years that is upsetting, discerning and brilliantly argued.” — The New York Times

“One of the most illuminating books to come out of the Trump era.” — New York Magazine

An examination of the profound impact that the War on Terror had in pushing American politics and society in an authoritarian direction

For an entire generation, at home and abroad, the United States has waged an endless conflict known as the War on Terror. In addition to multiple ground wars, the era pioneered drone strikes and industrial-scale digital surveillance; weakened the rule of law through indefinite detentions; sanctioned torture; and manipulated the truth about it all. These conflicts have yielded neither peace nor victory, but they have transformed America. What began as the persecution of Muslims and immigrants has become a normalized feature of American politics and national security, expanding the possibilities for applying similar or worse measures against other targets at home, as the summer of 2020 showed. A politically divided and economically destabilized country turned the War on Terror into a cultural—and then a tribal—struggle. It began on the ideological frontiers of the Republican Party before expanding to conquer the GOP, often with the acquiescence of the Democratic Party. Today’s nativist resurgence walked through a door opened by the 9/11 era. And that door remains open.

Reign of Terror shows how these developments created an opportunity for American authoritarianism and gave rise to Donald Trump. It shows that Barack Obama squandered an opportunity to dismantle the War on Terror after killing Osama bin Laden. By the end of his tenure, the war had metastasized into a bitter, broader cultural struggle in search of a demagogue like Trump to lead it.

Reign of Terror is a pathbreaking and definitive union of journalism and intellectual history with the power to transform how America understands its national security policies and their catastrophic impact on civic life.

(Goodreads.com)

Rename Earth To Planet Trump
byu/Dear_Job_1156 inQuiverQuantitative

(Contributed by Gwyllm Llwydd)

Rabet • Apr 8, 2025 • Gaza’s children aren’t dying — they’re being killed. Mohammad, 5 years old, survived the Israeli bombs that massacred his family. He still searches the rubble for his mother’s body. This is not a tragedy — it’s a system of erasure. But survival in Gaza is resistance. Co-produced by Rabet and   / wizard_bisan1  

New Thinking Allowed with Jeffrey Mishlove • Apr 11, 2025 • Archival Video RecordingsThis video is a special release from the original Thinking Allowed series that ran on public television from 1986 until 2002. It was recorded in about 1993. It will remain public for only one week. Robert Jay Lifton is an American psychiatrist and author, chiefly known for his studies of the psychological causes and effects of wars and political violence, and for his theory of thought reform. He was an early proponent of the techniques of psychohistory. His books include The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide, Witness to an Extreme Century: A Memoir, Losing Reality: On Cults, Cultism, and the Mindset of Political and Religious Zealotry, and The Protean Self: Human Resilience in an Age of Fragmentation. Now you can watch all of the programs from the original Thinking Allowed Video Collection, hosted by Jeffrey Mishlove. Subscribe to the new Streaming Channel (https://thinkingallowed.vhx.tv/) and watch more than 350 programs now, with more, previously unreleased titles added weekly. Free month of the classic Thinking Allowed streaming channel for New Thinking Allowed subscribers only. Use code THINKFREELY.

”Proteanism,” or the protean self, describes a psychological phenomenon integral to our times. We live in a world marked by breathtaking historical change and instantaneous global communication. Our lives seem utterly unpredictable: there are few absolutes. Rather than collapsing under these threats and pulls, Robert Jay Lifton tells us, the self turns out to be remarkably resilient. Like the Greek god Proteaus, who was able to change shape in response to crisis, we create new psychological combinations, immersing ourselves in fresh and surprising endeavors over our lifetimes.

---

In this unique and timely volume Robert Jay Lifton, the National Book Award–winning psychiatrist, historian, and public intellectual proposes a radical idea: that the psychological relationship between extremist political movements and fanatical religious cults may be much closer than anyone thought. Exploring the most extreme manifestations of human zealotry, Lifton highlights an array of leaders who have sought the control of human minds and the ownership of reality.

---

Wondrous Healing traces the human capacity for religious belief to the success of ancient healing rituals, such as chanting to calm women in childbirth or rhythmic dancing to reduce trauma from wounds. Those who accepted these hypnotic suggestions were far more likely to receive positive benefits from the “healing.” The apparent success of such rituals, McClenon argues, led to the development of shamanism, humankind’s first religion.

---

Driscoll draws on his critical acumen and scholarly knowledge of Renaissance literature to shed new light on Jung’s psychology of religion. The Unfolding God of Jung and Milton illumines Jung’s heterodox notion of Godhead as a quarternity rather than a trinity, his revolutionary concept of a divine individuation process, his radical solution to the problem of evil, and his wrestling with the feminine in Godhead. The book’s glossary of Jungian terms, written for literary critics and theologians rather than clinicians, is exceptionally detailed and insightful.

Published: March 1, 2000 (TheOnion.com)

FLAGSTAFF, AZ–”Mommy, Woofers is lonely out there in the doghouse! He wants to come in and play!” says attention-starved Billy Tobin, 10.

“That dog doesn’t care about being in this house! He just wants to run around,” counters mother Janet Tobin, 44, an unhappily married homemaker.

“Will you two be quiet? All that poor dog wants is to be left alone!” says Bob Tobin, 50, world-weary father and unfaithful husband to Janet.

So goes a typical exchange with the Tobins, a dysfunctional Flagstaff family whose members possess an uncanny ability to project all of their various neuroses onto the innocent psyche of Woofers, the family dog.

“It is not unusual for a neurotic personality to project unresolved issues onto an infant, pet, house, or other neutral entity that is incapable of expressing its own opinions and feelings,” said University of Arizona psychology professor Dr. Jonah Douglas. “But while such projection is far from uncommon, the fact that this family has managed to project every last one of its problems onto a single being, Woofers the dog, is truly exceptional.”

The use of Woofers as a third-party neurosis receptacle is a daily occurrence within the Tobin household, with unspoken dissatisfaction, pain, and anger constantly displaced from its true source and transferred to the tabula rasa that is, for them, the dog’s psyche.

Said Douglas: “Thanks to Woofers, the Tobins need never directly confront any of their longstanding personal and interpersonal issues, enabling them to perpetuate their self-defeating behaviors in an endless cycle of collective denial. He is the emotional glue that keeps this horribly maladjusted clan from tearing itself apart.”

Grandmother Ellen Tobin, 78, who lives in constant fear that she will be put away in a rest home, tells fellow family members that “Woofers is never coming back” every time the dog is not in the same room as her.

“Where’s Woofers? Where’s Woofers?” Ellen shouted at daughter Janet recently. “You sent him to the pound, didn’t you? Didn’t you?”

Similarly, 14-year-old Renee Tobin constantly berates the animal for being “smelly, mangy, and ugly”–not realizing that she is actually expressing deep-seated insecurities about her own changing body and budding sexuality. “Can’t somebody ever give that dog a bath? It’s gross!”

Another telling incident occurs when Billy returns home from elementary school, where he is unpopular and alienated, to a home where he receives little affirmation and approval. He passionately hugs Woofers, mistakenly believing that the dog is sad and lonely without him.

“You just need some love,” says Billy, offering Woofers a treat as he gazes at the dog’s blank, uncomprehending face. “You’re by yourself all day long, and you must’ve really missed me, huh, Woofers? Isn’t that right? Yes, it is. Yes, it is.”

When Woofers responds enthusiastically, jumping up and down in response to the attention and food he receives during this daily greeting ritual, Billy erroneously interprets this as a sign of the dog’s agreement with what he is saying.

“Get that dog off my bed right now!” yells Janet, whose repressed awareness of her husband’s longtime infidelity has led the pair to sleep in separate beds for the past six years. “Put him out in the yard where he belongs. That’s all he wants anyway–to run around, sniffing every tree and bush in the neighborhood!”

“If that dog wants to run around all night long, let him,” adds Janet, totally unaware of the transparent nature of her oft-repeated complaint. “He’s just going to be scratching at the door all night anyway if you don’t let him out. If that’s what he wants, why keep him cooped up in a place he obviously hasn’t wanted to be for a long time? Who cares what he does all night, so long as he’s not doing it here? Let him howl at the moon all night for all I care.”

“Must you snipe at him all day long?” Bob responds. “He’s had it up to here with all the shouting. Great, now he’s whining again. I hope you’re happy. He can’t take all this constant noise. Dogs have very sensitive hearing, you know. Look at his face! Can’t you see that you’re driving the poor animal crazy? No wonder he wants to get out.”

Though the Tobins are deeply troubled, they can feel confident that they will not have to confront any of their problems any time soon, thanks to the heroic, if unintentional, role that Woofers plays in their lives.

“To the best of my knowledge, in the annals of modern psychiatric science, there has never been a case of one creature serving as an essential emotional proxy to so many people,” Douglas said. “Woofers must indeed be a profoundly exceptional animal. A lesser dog would have cracked under the strain of so many mutually contradictory projections long ago.”

Trump is seeking to establish a truly chilling proposition: that no one can stop his administration from imprisoning anyone it wants… If the government can disappear any people it wishes, we all should be very, very afraid.

April 10, 2025 (portside.org)

Erwin Chemerinsky and Laurence H. Tribe  NEW YORK TIMES

Credit: Jose Cabezas/Reuters // New York Times,

Of all the lawless acts by the Trump administration in its first two and a half months, none are more frightening than its dumping of human beings who have not had their day in court into an infamous maximum-security prison in El Salvador — and then contending that no federal court has the authority to right these brazen wrongs.

In an astounding brief filed in the Supreme Court on Monday, the solicitor general of the United States argued that even when the government concedes that it has mistakenly deported someone to El Salvador and had him imprisoned there, the federal courts are powerless to do anything about it. The Supreme Court must immediately and emphatically reject this unwarranted claim of unlimited power to deprive people of their liberty without due process.

That would seem to be the obvious response. It was Thomas Jefferson who called the right of habeas corpus to protect against unlawful detention one of the “essential principles of our government.”

Jefferson’s concerns are underscored by the case of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a lawful resident of the United States, whom the federal government admits it wrongly deported to El Salvador. He has been incarcerated in El Salvador along with some 200 Venezuelan migrants deported there last month by the Trump administration, which says they were involved in criminal and gang activity.

On Friday, Judge Paula Xinis of the United States District Court in Maryland ordered Mr. Abrego Garcia’s return. In a subsequent opinion issued on Sunday, she wrote that “there were no legal grounds whatsoever for his arrest, detention or removal.” His detention, she added, “appears wholly lawless.”

One might think the Trump administration would at least try to correct its grievous mistake by attempting to secure Mr. Abrego Garcia’s release through diplomatic channels. El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, has been called “a great friend of the United States” by Marco Rubio, President Trump’s secretary of state.

But no, the Trump administration does not seem willing to lift a finger to fix the calamity it created for Mr. Abrego Garcia and his family.

Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, responded to Judge Xinis’s order by saying the judge should contact President Bukele because “we are unaware of the judge having jurisdiction or authority over the country of El Salvador.” Her suggestion that a federal judge play the role of a diplomat, rather than provide legal relief to Mr. Abrego Garcia, is unworthy of any presidential administration.

Why hasn’t the Trump administration acted to secure Mr. Abrego Garcia’s release? After all, he is there because of a government screw-up.

If you like this article, please sign up for Snapshot, Portside’s daily summary.Email

(One summary e-mail a day, you can change anytime, and Portside is always free.)

The answer can only be that it is using this case to establish a truly chilling proposition: that no one can stop the Trump administration from imprisoning any people it wants anywhere else in the world. In its brief to the Supreme Court, the administration argues that the only remedy available to a person in custody is a writ of habeas corpus, a court order that a person in custody be brought before the court to determine if the detention is lawful. But the administration also contends that federal courts have no authority to issue such a writ when the person is held in a foreign prison.

There can be no doubt about what this means.

There would be nothing to stop the government from jailing its critics in another country and then claiming, as it is now, that the courts have no jurisdiction to remedy the situation. Armed with this power, the government would know that Immigration and Customs Enforcement or the F.B.I. or any federal law enforcement agency could apprehend any people, ignore the requirements for due process and ship them to El Salvador or any country that would take them. These individuals would have no legal recourse whatsoever from any American court. The administration could create its own gulags with no more judicial review than existed when Stalin did the same thing in the Soviet Union.

Judge Xinis ordered the government to return Mr. Abrego Garcia by 11:59 p.m. on Monday. The Supreme Court paused that order on Monday to allow the justices to review the matter. But it shouldn’t take much time for the court to conclude that every minute Mr. Abrego Garcia is wrongly incarcerated is a minute too long.

The Supreme Court also handed down a ruling on Monday in a case involving the Trump administration’s mid-March decision to remove noncitizens in the United States who are members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua without any hearing at all. Five Venezuelans went to court to block the president’s plan, and a Federal District Court judge did just that. But roughly 200 Venezuelans were deported anyway. The administration has argued that, if it needed any authority to take that action beyond the power inherent in the presidency, such authority could be found in the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

But as Judge Karen Henderson of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit explained in a March 26 decision concerning the deportation of those roughly 200 Venezuelans, that 1798 law was limited to formally declared wars or imminent military invasions of the United States. Until the Trump administration, the law had been invoked only three times — during the War of 1812, World War I and World War II, when it was used to intern Americans of Japanese ancestry. That action has since been all but universally condemned as a shameful overreaction to the attack on Pearl Harbor.

By invoking the Alien Enemies Act, the government claims it can circumvent the usual procedures for deportation, including due process.

In an unsigned opinion, which the Supreme Court handed down on Monday, a 5-to-4 majority (with Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining the three liberals in the minority) said the Trump administration could continue to deport Venezuelan migrants using the 1798 law. But the court also said migrants fighting deportation in this case could challenge their detentions, though only through habeas corpus petitions, which it said needed to be filed in federal court in Texas, where they were held, not in Washington, D.C., where the government officials who made the decision on their fate are. The court said these individuals should be given notice and a hearing before being deported.

As for those who have already been deported to El Salvador and imprisoned there, it is troubling that the court did not speak to whether they can get any relief from the courts.

The justices did not answer critical questions like: Can the government use the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 in this manner? Did the lower court have the authority to issue the order to stop individuals from being taken to El Salvador? Is there any legal basis for the Trump administration to put individuals in an El Salvador prison? And, crucial to Mr. Abrego Garcia’s pending case, will the court reject the Trump administration’s claim that no federal court can hear a habeas corpus petition of someone held in a foreign country?

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a dissent, identified how much is at stake: “The implications of the government’s position” are “that not only noncitizens but also United States citizens could be taken off the streets, forced onto planes and confined to foreign prisons with no opportunity for redress if judicial review is denied unlawfully before removal. History is no stranger to such lawless regimes, but this nation’s system of laws is designed to prevent, not enable, their rise.”

If the government can disappear any people it wishes, dump them in a Salvadoran dungeon and prevent any court in this country from providing relief, we all should be very, very afraid.

[Erwin Chemerinsky is the dean of the law school at the University of California, Berkeley. Laurence H. Tribe is an emeritus university professor of constitutional law at Harvard. They have filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in the Abrego Garcia case.]

(Courtesy of Occupy Oakland)

(Courtesy of Gwyllm Llwydd)