Top Stories
Thursday, October 22, 2026
Wednesday, October 21, 2026
How to Buy a Trump Pardon
Ray Blanton, a Democrat, was Tennessee’s governor from 1975 to 1979. He became infamous for a “cash‑for‑clemency” scandal in which pardons and commutations were sold, ultimately leading to his early removal from office.
His scheme of selling pardons came to light when Marie Ragghianti, chair of the Board of Pardons and Paroles, was fired in 1977 after refusing to release prisoners who had bribed officials. The 1985 film Marie is a biographical drama starring Sissy Spacek that tells this story and is worth watching.
Marie, after being removed from her position, sued the State and won a legal judgment. In December 1978, the FBI raided the state capitol and seized the office of Blanton’s legal advisor, securing evidence of the scheme. It was revealed that in 1979, Blanton issued 52 pardons and commutations, including 20 convicted murderers and individuals tied to political allies
Due to concern that Blanton planned to issue many more pardons before he left office, legislative leaders used constitutional ambiguity to swear in Governor‑elect Lamar Alexander three days early, effectively removing Blanton from power. Although Blanton was never charged directly for selling pardons, several aides were convicted, and Blanton himself was later convicted of mail fraud, conspiracy, and extortion for selling liquor licenses and served 22 months in federal prison.
Compared to Donald Trump, Ray Blanton was minor league. Of all of the outrageous and despicable things Trump has done, one that gets scant attention is his selling of pardons. The article below from today's New York Times tells the story of how one such deal worked.
When Democrats retake the House, I hope there is a serious investigation of the pardon scandal. When Ray Blanton was selling pardons, Tennessee Democrats joined Republicans in condemning the action, investigating the scandal, seeking justice, and preventing even more of the same. Republicans in the Trump era seem uninterested in Trump corruption of any kind. This includes not only members of Congress but everyday Trump supporters, including people I know and family. Republicans have lost their moral compass.
A Billionaire Wanted a Trump Pardon. His Family Gave Alina Habba a $50 Million Deal.
By Tyler Pager, New York Times, Oct. 21, 2026- Julio Herrera Velutini really wanted a pardon.
A billionaire banker from a prominent Venezuelan family, Mr. Herrera faced felony bribery charges in the United States and struck an unusually lenient plea deal in August 2025 for a misdemeanor campaign finance violation. But he felt that reduced charge was still a stain on his record.
So Mr. Herrera deployed his lawyer, Christopher M. Kise, the former Florida solicitor general who was on President Trump’s personal legal team, to help with a plea for clemency. ....
... In Mr. Trump’s second term, a pardon industry has sprouted up, with wealthy criminals paying well-connected lawyers, fixers and lobbyists to appeal to the administration and its allies in an effort to secure pardons. Many pardon seekers have come to the conclusion that supporting Mr. Trump and his political agenda is the fastest way to secure clemency.
Some people looking for pardons have reported paying hundreds of thousands of dollars or even $1 million to hire people promising access to the president or influence over the pardon process. (read it all)
Top Stories
Monday, October 19, 2026
Should Christa Pike Live?
by Rod Williams, Oct. 19, 2026- What should happen to Crista Pike now that the State has tried to execute her twice and failed?
The article below, in The Dispatch, examines what should happen now. The article summarizes the horrendous crime that led to Christa Pike's death sentence and examines the failed execution attempts and then looks at the law and the ethics.
Would putting Christa Pike to death violate the Constitution's prohibition of "cruel and unusual punishment?" The article looks at a similar case and compares and contrasts these cases. It concludes that, "the state has already inflicted a cruel and unusual punishment on Christa, and to attempt to do so again would appear to violate the Fifth Amendment’s double jeopardy clause and the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. "
The article also looks at the bloodlust for execution and the ethical considerations. I am also appalled by those who enthusiastically want this execution to occur. It seems to be similar to those who wanted to livestream the firing squad execution of Nidal Hasan, the ex-Army major convicted of killing 13 people at Fort Hood in 2009.
There is a fairly prominent MAGA activist here in Nashville by the name of Dan Meridith who recently rhetorically asked if, by not wanting to finish the job of executing Crista Pike, we believe we were more compassionate than God? He quotes an Old Testament Bible verse that calls for "all the men of the city" to stone people to death. I do not want to return to public stoning, so I guess I am more compassionate than God.
The Bible also calls for stoning to death of children who are stubborn and rebellious: “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear." (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)
I'm glad we no longer stone to death stubborn and rebellious children. Something has changed in the last few years to where people are either more cruel and have a greater bloodlust, or they are no longer hiding it.
The article in The Dispatch ends with this conclusion:
The courts will probably rule that an additional attempt at executing Pike would be unconstitutional. But legality aside, commuting her sentence to life in prison is probably the right thing to do. Justice would still be served since most people convicted of murder in the U.S. serve a term (not life) in prison. What’s more, we routinely commute sentences for good behavior. If the testimonies of her fellow inmates have any veracity at all, Pike, despite her horrible crime and profound brokenness, is a person changed, even if just a little bit, for the better.
The article is worth reading in full:
A second execution attempt strains legal and ethical standards.
by Lydia Dugdale, The Dispatch, Oct. 19, 2026 - Christa Pike’s botched execution in Tennessee last week raises a host of questions about what comes next, what Gov. Bill Lee should do, and what is meant by “cruel and unusual.” These are legal questions, but they are also ethical and political questions, and they demand our consideration. .... (link)
It is my hope that Gov. Lee will commute Christa Pike's sentence to life imprisonment.
Top Stories
Friday, October 16, 2026
What Should Dems do When They Take Control of the House
 |
| W. H. Bernstein |
So what should Democrats do in control of the House? They have limited power: the budget and investigations are mainly it. There are legitimate investigations they need to have. But since this administration is a target-rich environment of sleaze and corruption they could easily become overwhelmed with investigations.
My suggestion, like any Democrat has ever asked my opinion, is they should focus on the most serious areas of actual crime and Constitutional abuse. Those would include:
The bombing of boats in the Atlantic. The entire rational and intelligence of this operation is still not clear. What intelligence did they have as to who and what was on those boats? Who made the decision to destroy them, rather than simply interdicting them, as normal drug enforcement operation would suggest? Why were two of the survivors whisked back to their home countries instead of standing trial for drug trafficking, as you might expect? Who authorized any of this, and why? What legal foundation was there here?
- The killing of Renee Good and others by ICE. What orders were agents given? Why were agents involved transferred to other posts, some overseas, or otherwise made unavailable? What evidence was gathered at the scenes? Who made the decision to shut down investigations, and why?
- ICE conduct. What were ICE's orders regarding protestors? Did ICE compile a database of people protesting peacefully and use it to harass them or target them?
- Trump's pardons. What process existed for getting a pardon under Trump? Who bypassed the existing structure and protocols for pardons? How were pardon decisions made?
- Entanglements with family businesses. How were contracts awarded to businesses with Trump family ties? Was there a bidding process? How involved were family members in these awards? How or did family members benefit specifically?
- Insider trading. Did Trump or members of his administration trade on insider information, using futures markets or betting markets like Kalshi?
- High-profile prosecutions. Who made the decisions to prosecute people commonly taken to be Trump's enemies? What legal basis was there for these prosecutions? This includes Lisa Cook, Jerome Powell, and John Bolton.
I've probably missed a number of items, but these alone would keep committees occupied for the next two years. What I don't want to see is multiple investigations that look politically motivated, with numerous impeachment votes. Dems don't have the Senate votes to remove Trump, so impeachment would just underscore a desire for clownish political points.
Bill Bernstein, formerly of Nashville where he was owner of Eastside Gun Shop, now lives in Sumter, South Carolina. He is a scholar with a BA degree from Vanderbilt University and degrees in Classics from Corpus Christi College, Oxford, UNC-Chapel Hill, and University of Pennsylvania.
Top Stories
Treasury Confirms $2 Trillion Deficit for Fiscal Year 2026
The following is a statement from Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget:
And there you have it: at an astonishing $2 trillion in borrowing, Fiscal Year 2026 had the largest deficit in our history outside of a war or recession.
Today’s deficit figures cap off a remarkably dismal year for our fiscal health. In the same span over which we accumulated $2 trillion in borrowing, we also reached $40 trillion in gross national debt; watched debt held by the public grow to be as large as our entire economic output; spent more than $1 trillion on interest costs, more than our national defense; and all the while let another year lapse instead of addressing our trust funds as they march another year toward insolvency.
America’s fiscal health is failing, and we need to take action to address it. In the year ahead, our leaders should avoid adding any new borrowing - on top of what we are already projected to – and commit to finding twice as many savings for every new must-have cost incurred.
We also need a real fiscal goal beyond the promises of balancing the budget or the outlandish idea of fully paying off the debt. Fiscal discipline requires finding something both achievable and aggressive, and bringing deficits down to 3% of GDP – half their current level – fits that bill and would stabilize debt as a share of the economy. Tough choices will be needed to get there, and we’re running out of time to make them.
Rod's Comment: Remember when the Republican Party was the party of fiscal discipline?
Top Stories
Thursday, October 15, 2026
Why I Oppose Closed Primaries in Tennessee
by Rod Williams, Oct. 15, 2026 - I oppose closed primaries for the reasons expressed below by my friends Mark Rogers and Bill Bernstein in this email exchange.
Nashville is a one-party town. Thankfully, the contest for mayor and Metro council members is non-partisan, but I also care who is elected sheriff, county clerk, public defender, and who our judges are. Republicans do not even run for these offices. The Democrat primary is tantamount to the election. While a Democrat will hold these offices, there are sane, moderate, competent Democrats, and then there are woke progressive ideologue Democrats. I care who wins these seats.
I have never bought the argument that a person votes in the opposing party's primary to select the most beatable candidate to be the standard bearer for the party they hope to defeat in the general election.
Top Stories
Wednesday, October 14, 2026
I’ve Seen What Measles Does to Children. America Should Heed the Warning.
 |
| Then-Second Lady Dr. Jill Biden and former Sen. Bill Frist visit with two recently arrived refugee families at the Dagahaley refugee camp, in Dadaab, Kenya, Aug. 8, 2011. (Official White House Photo by David Lienemann) |
In 2011, at the Dadaab refugee camp near the Kenya–Somalia border, I witnessed a measles outbreak that sickened thousands. Three-quarters were children under five. Once the outbreak began, vaccination efforts could barely keep up. It took months to get even the hospitalized children vaccinated.
That experience was on my mind in February 2015, when 102 Americans had contracted measles and I wrote about it in Forbes. I warned that we were courting an outbreak here at home, and that we didn’t have to.
As of October 8, the CDC has confirmed 4,080 U.S. cases. The country that declared measles eliminated in 2000 is now at real risk of losing that status.
We have the tools to protect children. The measles vaccine is 93% effective after one dose and 97% after two. Vaccination helped us achieve elimination. That progress is something we should defend.
Eleven years later, I stand behind what I wrote. Today, I’m republishing that Forbes piece on Substack, with a new note on where we are now.
Read the piece, linked in the comments, and share it. The science hasn’t changed. Our commitment to it shouldn’t either.
I’ve Seen What Measles Does to Children. America Should Heed the Warning.
By Bill Frist, MD | Feb 11, 2015 | Forbes - In the United States, before 1963, there were 400,000 cases of measles per year. One thousand of those children developed measles encephalitis, a serious brain infection, and often subsequent permanent disability. An estimated 400-500 of those children died, and many who lived were plagued with permanent disabilities including deafness.
In 2000, the U.S. had [eliminated measles]. One of the most infectious diseases was eradicated by one of the most effective vaccines we have. The measles vaccine, which is 93% effective after one dose, and 97% effective after two, decreased incidence of the measles in this country by 99%. Thanks to vaccine science, we had achieved a monumental public health milestone.
Now the measles are back, and the disease is spreading quickly. Unlike Ebola, which requires direct contact with contaminated body fluids to spread, measles is airborne and lives in droplets for hours. You can get the measles from walking into the waiting room at the doctor’s office where a measles patient has been coughing before your arrival.
However, compared to our reaction to the Ebola epidemic, the public response to this measles outbreak is perplexing. We called for a rush vaccine for Ebola, for mandatory quarantines. We were outraged at the possibility of getting on a plane and catching Ebola.
However, there were four cases of Ebola in the U.S. There have been 102 cases of the measles since January 1. And most importantly, we already have a vaccine for the measles.
Globally, we still see about 20 million cases of measles a year. In 2013 the virus was responsible for 145,700 deaths. As a physician who has worked with patients all over the world, particularly in the developing world, I am adamantly pro-vaccine.
They save lives. People who live in countries without the healthcare infrastructure to care for measles patients desperately seek a preventative vaccine instead of watching their children suffer and potentially become disabled or die.
As a Republican, I am also adamantly pro-vaccine, and this is not something I have to work hard to reconcile. As my friend and colleague [then-]Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) said: “This is far too serious an issue to be treated as a political football.”
The Republican ethic stands behind our personal rights to make private choices about our life and our health, and vaccine mandates for children attending public schools fall squarely within this ethic. Despite what some people may be postulating, they are certainly nothing new.
In 1905, the Supreme Court held in Jacobson v. Massachusetts that vaccine mandates are clearly within a state’s powers to protect the public health. The court noted that,
“the liberty secured by the Constitution of the United States to every person within its jurisdiction does not import an absolute right in each person to be, at all times and in all circumstances, wholly freed from restraint. There are manifold restraints to which every person is necessarily subject for the common good. On any other basis organized society could not exist with safety to its members.”Because all vaccination laws fall under state jurisdiction, the court was affirming a Massachusetts statute requiring vaccinations for smallpox stating it was reasonable, because it was not “arbitrary or oppressive,” had a substantial relation to the necessity of protecting the community, and was based on evidence. The court noted there needed to be exceptions for absurd consequences like serious risk of death or harm from inoculation. These are the health exceptions we have built into all vaccine laws.
Furthermore, vaccines don’t only protect the individual. Vaccinated individuals, together, create herd immunity. Exemption rates of as little as 2%-4% are sufficient to make a school more susceptible to outbreaks. Frighteningly, we are seeing non-vaccination rates as high as 10% in some counties in California.
I appreciate the need to stand up for personal freedom and defend our liberties. But in the case of a highly infectious and highly contagious disease, the “choice” we are defending is one that allows neighbor to harm neighbor.
Senator Rand Paul, M.D. this week argued that vaccines have been voluntary for “most of our history.” He’s not quite right. Mandatory vaccination law with only health and religious exemptions has been the norm for the last century, which consequently coincides with how long vaccines have existed.
The vaccines are safe. Getting the measles, on the other hand, is definitely not safe. We have the deaths and morbidity to prove it. Being the party that tries to deny these types of facts will result in accusations and extrapolations that Republicans are anti-science. And that also, is just not true.
As a lawmaker, I introduced over a dozen bills that touched on vaccines, authoring the Improved Vaccine Affordability and Availability Act of 2003 (S. 754) and successfully enacting the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, which ensured we had a sufficient vaccine stockpile to combat a biological attack or other public health emergency.
I would eagerly vote the same way again. And I will stand up now and say that children should absolutely be vaccinated if they can be. We are a fortunate country with all of the best medications and vaccinations available. We should believe the science—the facts—and avail ourselves of what the rest of the world views as a privilege.
Top Stories
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
