The Historical Record

If this country survives and its history written in the decades and centuries to come,

I suspect that the current era will be denominated “The Age of Unreason”. It will be recorded
that a nation founded by immigrants and populated by their descendants closed its doors to those seeking asylum and a better life.
That its youth emulated the salutes and symbols and adopted the hatred and vitriol of those whom their grandfathers had fought to the death to defeat. Historians will express befuddlement
that a man with no historical knowledge or interest, no sense of mission save self-adulation, no
moral fiber and possessing acute criminal instincts, was elevated to leadership of what was then labeled the “Free World”.
Chroniclers will wonder how men and women of high elective office, fully aware of the destructive and disruptive nature of their leader, chose to ignore the chaos and conflict reigning about them in their pursuit of self promotion. Historians likely will question how a Supreme Court dominated by originalists and professing aversion to activist judging could bend the constitution to justify a private right to bear arms and a corporate right to use wealth to dominate the electoral process; the same court that pronounced itself powerless to remedy patent deprivation of voting rights by ultra-partisan electoral mapping.
Finally, much will be written about a nation once united in common purpose that was splintered
into tribal cohorts exuding venom for one another and a congress paralyzed and cowered into inaction, fearful of retribution by an egomaniacal ignoramus and his blindly devoted base.
Then, hopefully, it will document how the darkness receded, the nation found its way and the grand experiment that is American democracy was saved.  

U.S. Investigates Emissions Pledge

If anyone needed more proof that William Barr acts as the personal attorney of President Trump, his "Roy Cohen", rather than as  an independent Attorney General, look no further. After wrongly absolving Mr. Trump of obstruction of justice, notwithstanding the factual findings of Special Counsel Mueller, and by commencing investigations of those who probed or "spied on" the president, Mr. Barr's Justice Department has now opened an antitrust investigation of the automakers who struck a deal with California to reduce tailpipe emissions beyond the limits preferred by Mr. Trump. The Department has also sent an intimidating warning letter to California officials. 

Never mind that this latest investigation turns antitrust law on its head (there is no violation absent collusion between the companies), Mr. Barr is sending a clear signal that anyone who defies the wishes of his client, in this case Mr. Trump's desire to enrich Big Oil and undo anything put in place by President Obama, will be subjected to massive scrutiny and legal harassment. 

U.S. to Challenge California's Right to Set Pollution Rules

The Trump-directed EPA has indicated it is considering revoking California's legal authority to set tailpipe pollutions standards that are stricter than federal regulations. (NYT, 9/6, P.B4) This action is being taken despite the fact that 13 other states have adopted California's forward-looking effort to curtail global warming and air pollution and that major auto makers have announced their approval of and commitment to the higher standards.

In contemplating this environmentally destructive retreat from sensible measures to combat the life-threatening menace of increasing greenhouse gases in our atmosphere, the EPA must heed the caution voiced by Sen. James Imhofe of Oklahoma, who happens to be a global-warming denier and apologist for Big Oil. At a hearing of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, held in July, 2007, Sen. Barbara Boxer, the committee chair, berated the EPA for unduly delaying action on California's request for a waiver allowing the state to set its own standards. In defending EPA's inaction, Sen. Imhofe stated:

" In making a decision of this magnitude, it would be improper for the EPA not to involve the public and formally solicit notice and comment". The Senator added that the EPA needed time to read, assess and compare the comments and to thoroughly investigate the issues raised by California, analyze each and every document, examine every argument raised in opposition and determine the ramifications of a decision. He concluded, " then, and only then, EPA needs to make a decision... rushing this process is unacceptable. In fact, it would be arbitrary and capricious in law and in fact. "

Amen.