The Morning Sixpack - April 1, 2025

You're no fool. I won't be punking you today. However, tomorrow is a different story!

BREAKING: Senator Cory Booker is still going!

You can find the podcast here.

White House Tries to Slam Door on Explosive Signal Leak — But Fallout Lingers

The Trump White House is scrambling to shut down the political wildfire sparked by a leaked Signal group chat that revealed plans for a secret U.S. bombing campaign in Yemen.

Despite bipartisan outrage and internal divisions, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Monday, “This case has been closed here at the White House as far as we are concerned.”

The administration is backing embattled National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, even after he reportedly added The Atlantic’s editor to the encrypted thread—an eyebrow-raising move that aired classified laundry in public.

Here Are the Attack Plans That Trump’s Advisers Shared on Signal (gift article)

The situation blew up after Jeffrey Goldberg, The Atlantic's editor-in-chief, publicly disclosed his accidental front-row seat to war planning via Signal. The group chat included Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Vice President JD Vance, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, DNI Tulsi Gabbard—and, awkwardly, Goldberg himself. The incident not only embarrassed the administration but also drew the attention of Congress, with Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee now demanding an independent probe and Senate Armed Services leaders pushing the Pentagon for answers.

Waltz is reportedly hanging onto his job—barely. “There have been steps made to ensure that something like that can obviously never happen again,” Leavitt insisted, without offering any details. Yet sources say Trump was privately furious, even if his press team is publicly projecting calm. The administration’s attempt to move on feels more like slamming the lid on a boiling pot.

Source: Reuters

More: Humiliated Karoline Leavitt abruptly cuts short press conference and runs away

Trump Floats Third Term—Because Apparently the Constitution Is Just a Suggestion Now

In case you missed it, Donald Trump says he’s not joking about a third term. That sound you hear? It's the 22nd Amendment rolling over in its grave. While most Americans assumed "two terms and you’re out" was a done deal, Trump told NBC News there are “methods” that could put him back in the Oval Office again—like a political Houdini act nobody asked for.

Constitutional scholars are blinking rapidly, and even Republicans are pretending they didn’t hear him. But hey, it wouldn’t be Trump without testing how far the rules bend before they break.

The 22nd Amendment clearly states, “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.” Sounds airtight, right? Not so fast. Trump’s team is apparently noodling a VP switcheroo: Swap the ticket, make JD Vance president, and then—voilà—Vance resigns and Trump magically slides back into the big chair.

Legal experts aren’t buying it.

“If the whole time it was meant to just set up some kind of game that could be outmaneuvered through tricky lawyering, that to me is not a legitimate or ethical position,” said Kimberly Wehle, a constitutional law professor and buzzkill for autocrats everywhere.

To be clear, changing the Constitution isn’t just a matter of vibes and campaign rallies. It takes two-thirds of Congress and three-quarters of the states. You know—math that doesn’t favor fantasy. But the real kicker? If Trump does try to get on the ballot again in any position, legal challenges are all but guaranteed. As one expert put it, the 22nd Amendment has “a significant bite”—and Trump might finally find out what happens when you poke a sleeping Constitution one too many times.

Source: Axios

Occam’s Razor says, essentially, that the most obvious answer is the right one. In this case, Trump won’t bother trying to put himself on the ballots of all 50 states. He will just declare elections temporarily (meaning, “fovever”) postponed due to some [insert a really big lie here].

Washington School Board to State Ed Chief: Follow Trump’s Order—or Face the Feds

Things are getting spicy in deep-blue Washington State, where a pair of Kennewick school board officials are publicly clashing with the state’s top education boss over transgender athletes in girls’ sports. The beef? Superintendent Chris Reykdal refuses to enforce President Trump’s executive order banning biological males from competing in women’s athletics.

So the school board filed a federal Title IX complaint, basically asking the Department of Education to bring the hammer down.

“It’s an absolute joke,” said Kennewick School Board Vice President Micah Valentine on Fox & Friends First. “He has been promoting his radical leftist ideology since we’ve been on the board… Grades are dropping under his watch. Meanwhile, he’s promoting LGBTQIA+ things…”

Superintendent Reykdal isn’t backing down, defending his stance in a speech last month: “It’s inaccurate to say biologically there are only two genders… There’s a continuum. There’s a science to this.” He argues the state’s civil rights laws allow students to participate in sports according to their gender identity—and that federal orders don’t override that.

Remember States’ rights? Oh, yeah…

The board is worried about fairness, locker room safety, and the potential loss of federal funding. “There’s boys in girls’ sports. There’s boys in girls’ locker rooms. It’s unfair. It’s not safe,” said board president Gabe Galbraith.

Reykdal clapped back, calling Trump’s order an overreach: “An executive order is not law… OSPI will enforce our current laws as we are required to do in a constitutional democracy.”

One thing’s clear: The clash between state and federal directives is setting up a major showdown—and students are caught in the crossfire.

Source: MDGN

These fools know that the Department of Education will cease to exist soon, right?

Do these fools KNOW that an executive order is NOT law and that the head of the state board of education is legally required to follow both state and federal laws?

As I’ve said numerous times before, don’t like a law? Change it. That’s how democracy works.

Secret Flights, Shackled Men, and Legal Firestorms: Trump’s Deportation Plan to El Salvador Under Fire

The Trump administration is doubling down on its controversial deportation strategy—flying alleged gang members to El Salvador’s infamously brutal mega-prison, even as legal alarms blare.

Over the weekend, a military plane quietly dropped off 17 men—some Venezuelan, some Salvadoran—accused of gang affiliations, including MS-13 and Tren de Aragua. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called it a “counterterrorism operation,” but critics see it as a lawless transfer of detainees with shaky records into a black hole of due process.

The administration insists all the men are “confirmed murderers and high-profile offenders,” with President Bukele gleefully sharing footage of their dramatic arrival: heads shaved, crouched in submission, herded into CECOT—El Salvador’s notorious prison where 70 inmates can share a single cell, with zero legal access.

Yet, advocates and lawyers are calling BS. Many detainees have no U.S. criminal records, and some families say their loved ones simply disappeared from ICE’s system.

“There is no way to excuse the human rights violation of deporting Venezuelans to El Salvador,” said Denise Gilman, an immigration law expert. A federal judge recently blocked further removals without due process, but the administration’s compliance remains murky at best.

Critics also question the military’s role in a mission that looks more law enforcement than warfare. Flight data shows gaps in the C-17’s tracking, raising red flags about secrecy. Meanwhile, one deportee—Maiker Espinoza Escalona—was a plaintiff in a suit against DHS.

The administration now claims he’s a gang recruiter, but his attorneys call it a convenient, last-minute accusation. As Trump tries to fulfill his promise to purge “millions” of migrants, this El Salvador pipeline is shaping up to be one of the most aggressive—and legally perilous—immigration moves yet.

Source: WaPo

IF democracy holds, AND we (the collective we) uphold actual “law & order,” this is going to be the biggest black eye Trump will ever receive. But I’m not holding my breath.

Musk Drops Millions, Trump Tests MAGA Mojo in High-Stakes Wisconsin Court Race

In what’s shaping up to be MAGA’s first major post-reelection test, Wisconsin voters head to the polls today in the most expensive judicial election in U.S. history—one that’s now doubling as a cash-fueled circus.

The stakes? Control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court and a potential conservative flip of the current 4-3 liberal majority. But the real headline-grabber? Elon Musk is literally paying people to vote—cutting million-dollar checks at rallies and dangling cash for selfies with thumbs-up photos of the Trump-backed candidate, Brad Schimel. Because apparently, democracy now comes with a signing bonus.

Trump and Musk are all-in on Schimel, a Waukesha County judge and former GOP attorney general, who’s facing off against liberal Dane County Judge Susan Crawford, backed by Obama and a pile of left-leaning billionaire bucks.

Musk has dwarfed them all, pouring over $20 million into the race and handing out money like candy at a political pep rally.

“In appreciation for you taking the time to vote,” Musk posted on X—before backpedaling and claiming the checks were just for petition signatures. Wisconsin’s Attorney General called it bribery and filed a lawsuit. Courts so far have shrugged.

The election is more than a state Supreme Court scuffle—it’s a bellwether for Trump’s second-term muscle. Musk claims he's defending “the destiny of humanity,” fearing the liberals on the court might redraw congressional maps.

Democrats warn the right-wing ticket could roll back abortion rights and democratic reforms.

With early voting surging and lawsuits looming, the outcome could reverberate far beyond Wisconsin.

As Eric Holder put it, “If Schimel wins... you could see a reversal of what I think was a really good opinion by the Wisconsin Supreme Court and put at risk the democracy — pro-democracy — efforts that were done.”

Grab popcorn—and maybe a check from Elon.

Source: WaPo

Trump’s Voter Proof Push Sparks Legal Showdown with Top Democrats

President Trump’s latest executive order demanding proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections has Democrats fuming—and lawyering up. In a legal barrage filed in D.C. federal court, top Democratic leaders, including the DNC and both congressional caucuses, are calling the order a brazen power grab designed to “disenfranchise lawful voters.”

The lawsuits argue the move is unconstitutional, illegal, and—just in case that wasn’t enough—massively disruptive to how elections are run. “The Executive Order seeks to impose radical changes on how Americans register to vote, cast a ballot, and participate in our democracy—all of which threaten to disenfranchise lawful voters and none of which is legal,” the lawsuit declares.

Trump, naturally, sees it differently. “We believe that this Executive Order is the farthest-reaching executive action taken in the history of the republic to Secure our Elections,” he boasted on Truth Social.

May I remind you… Executive orders are not laws.

His order forces federal agencies to share citizenship data with states and imposes a slew of new rules on voter registration deadlines and ballot handling—none of which the president clearly has the authority to enforce, according to legal experts.

The plan even tries to boss around the independent U.S. Election Assistance Commission, which doesn’t report to him.

But hey, separation of powers is just a "deep state concept" now, right?

Critics warn the proof-of-citizenship requirement could block millions of eligible Americans—especially those without ready access to documentation—from voting.

Case in point: Kansas tried it, and 30,000 eligible voters were knocked off the rolls before the courts smacked it down.

Democrats also flagged privacy concerns over the executive order’s data-sharing directive, run through Trump’s favorite bureaucratic wrecking ball, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). If the courts let it stand, the fallout could leave election officials scrambling and voters confused. And with Trump eyeing a third term, the timing isn’t exactly subtle.

Source: MDGN

Oh, one more thing. Under Trump’s EO, birth certificates are not considered proof of citizenship. Far as I can tell, only passports can prove citizenship.

The order allows voters to use passports or certain driver’s licenses to prove citizenship, but not birth certificates.

—Washington Post