The Dictatorship
Trump’s push to make Canada the 51st state could backfire on Republicans
This is an adapted excerpt from the Feb. 9 episode of “Velshi.”
Since entering office, President Donald Trump has been ambitious about territorial expansion. Sounding more like Donald the Conqueror, he’s insisted the United States take ownership of the Gaza Strip and the Panama Canal, he’s proposed buying Greenland from Denmark and he’s pitched Canada on joining our union as the 51st state. At his inauguration, Trump took America’s original expansionist slogan and blasted it skyward, “We will pursue our manifest destiny into the stars, launching American astronauts to plant the Stars and Stripes on the planet Mars.”
If Canada were to become part of America, some changes would be in order.
American history has seen the country grow in size and Betsy Ross’ flag grow in stars but Trump’s ideas ebb between delusions of grandeur and old-fashioned gunboat diplomacy.
There was Trump’s announcement that the United States would “own” Gaza, sending Palestinians to neighboring countries and establishing a “Middle East riviera.” With literally zero specifics laid out by the White House as to how exactly this would happen, this idea has received bipartisan and international condemnation as logistically impossible.
Trump has also set his sights on “seizing back” the Panama Canal, which was signed over to Panama by the late President Jimmy Carter in 1977. Trump has erroneously claimed that China is running the canal, which is actually operated by an independent authority in Panama. A subsidiary of a Hong Kong company runs two of the canal’s ports but doesn’t control access to the canal.
Trump has also floated the idea of purchasing Greenland from Denmark, a concept that, while not new in the grand scheme of American history, stands firmly against the interests of the people of Greenland, whose prime minister has said bluntly, “We want to be Greenlanders.”
Then there’s Canada, the second-largest country by land mass on the planet. It’s also my home country. While I can’t speak for Panamanians or Greenlanders, I do have a suggestion for my fellow Canucks on this:
Trump has offered Canada the chance to become the 51st state, but I say, why stop there? Canada has 41 million people, spread throughout 10 provinces and three territories. So, if Canada were to become part of America, some changes would be in order.
First of all, Congress would have to grow. That would mean Canada, as part of the new America, would net at least 54 seats in the House. For context, the 20 states with the smallest populations have just 46 House seats among them all.
But here’s problem No. 1: This little thing called the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929. That act mandates that the House is no bigger than 435 members. So, if you did the math, combining Canada’s population with America’s and dividing it by 435, Canada would net 47 seats. Those seats would be taken away from states all over the country. Who’s going to tell voters that Trump gave their congressional representation to a guy in Saskatchewan?
That’s just the House of Representatives. What about the Senate? Trump is only offering for Canada to become one state with two senators. But Canadian provinces, like American states, compete with one another. They aren’t going to be interested in all snuggling up into one state.
Each province would have to be its own U.S. state. So Canada wouldn’t be the 51st state; it would be states 51 through 60, at the very least, meaning Canada would have 20 senators. It would be the largest reorientation of political power in America since women were given the right to vote in 1920.
Trump is specifically asking Canada to join as just one state for that reason. Statehood for Canada would likely swing power away from Republicans. That’s one of the reasons most Republicans have long opposed statehood for Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C. They assume both would become Democratic strongholds, increasing the Democrats’ control in Congress.
If the thought of a couple of senators from Puerto Rico representing people who are already American citizens scares Republicans, I wonder how 20 from the land of maple syrup, Mounties and “Anne of Green Gables” would go over?
Statehood for Canada would likely swing power away from Republicans.
While it’s difficult to compare American and Canadian politics directly, we have some sense of how Canadians, or what might come to be known as “Camericans,” might vote:
Canada has a multiparty parliamentary system but in 2003, the conservative parties united under one banner.Since then, the conservatives have received, on average, about 35% of the popular vote in each election. On average, the left-of-conservative parties have received a combined 63% of the popular vote.
Expansion from Canada to the Gulf of America might be a fun idea for Trump … until our nice neighbors up north kick his party oot of office and install a liberal supermajority. And we haven’t even talked about what this would do to the Supreme Court.
Of course, in typical Canadian politeness, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said there’s “not a snowball’s chance in hell” that Canada joins America. But, Canada, if I were you, maybe the chance to take over your noisy neighbor from the inside isn’t the worst idea in the world.
Armand Manoukian and Allison Detzel contributed.

Ali Velshi is the host of “Velshi,” which airs Saturdays and Sundays on BLN. He has been awarded the National Headliner Award for Business & Consumer Reporting for “How the Wheels Came Off,” a special on the near collapse of the American auto industry. His work on disabled workers and Chicago’s red-light camera scandal in 2016 earned him two News and Documentary Emmy Award nominations, adding to a nomination in 2010 for his terrorism coverage.
The Dictatorship
Justice Jackson chides ‘oblivious’ Supreme Court conservatives…
WASHINGTON (AP) — Supreme CourtJustice Ketanji Brown Jackson has delivered a sustained attack on her conservative colleagues’ use of emergency orders to benefit the Trump administration, calling the orders “scratch-paper musings” that can “seem oblivious and thus ring hollow.”
The court’s newest justice, Jackson delivered a lengthy assessment of roughly two dozen court orders issued last year that allowed President Donald Trump to put in place controversial policies on immigration, steep federal funding cuts and other topics, after lower courts found they were likely illegal.
While designed to be short-term, those orders have largely allowed Trump to move ahead — for now — with key parts of his sweeping agenda.
Jackson spoke for nearly an hour on Monday at Yale Law School, which posted a video of the event on Wednesday.
Last week, Justice Sonia Sotomayor similarly talked about emergency orders in an event Tuesday at the University of Alabama that also took issue with the conservatives’ approach.
Jackson has previously criticized the emergency orders both in dissenting opinions and in an unusual appearance with Justice Brett Kavanaugh last month. But her talk at Yale, addressing the public rather than the other eight justices, was notable.
She referred to orders, which often are issued with little or no explanation as “back-of-the-envelope, first-blush impressions of the merits of the legal issue.”
Worse still, she said, was that the court then insists that “those scratch-paper musings” be applied by lower courts in other cases.
The orders suffer from an additional problem, she said, a failure to acknowledge that real people are involved, making them “seem oblivious and thus ring hollow.”
She also pushed back on the court’s assessment that preventing the president from putting his policy in place also is a harm that often outweighs what the challengers to a policy might face.
“The president of the United States, though he may be harmed in an abstract way, he certainly isn’t harmed if what he wants to do is illegal,” Jackson said during a question-and-answer session with law school dean Cristina Rodriguez.
The court used to be reluctant to step into cases early in the legal process, she said. “There is value in avoiding having the court continually touching the third rail of every divisive policy issue in American life,” Jackson said.
While she said she couldn’t explain the change, “in recent years, the Supreme Court has taken a decidedly different approach to addressing emergency stay applications. It has been noticeably less restrained, especially with respect to pending cases that involve controversial matters.”
Sign up for Morning Wire: Our flagship newsletter breaks down the biggest headlines of the day.
Jackson, often joined by Sotomayor and Justice Elena Kagan, has frequently dissented.
There have been conversations about emergency orders among the justices, Jackson said, but she decided to speak publicly with the goal of being “a catalyst for change.”
Also on Wednesday, Sotomayor issued a rare public apology to another justice, Kavanaugh, for what she termed “hurtful comments” she made last week during an appearance at the University of Kansas law school.
Referencing an opinion Kavanaugh wrote in an immigration case where the court granted an emergency order sought by the administration, Sotomayor said her colleague “probably doesn’t really know any person who works by the hour.” Her remarks were reported by Bloomberg Law.
The Dictatorship
Trump threatens to fire Powell if the Fed Chair remains with central bank after his term ends
WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal prosecutors made an unannounced visit this week to a construction site at Federal Reserve headquarters that is the focus of an investigation into a $2.5 billion renovation projectaccording to two people familiar with the visit.
Two prosecutors and an investigator from U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office were turned away on Tuesday by a building contractor and referred to Fed attorneys, one of the people said. The two people familiar with the visit spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to publicly discuss an ongoing investigation.
The visit underscores that the Trump administration is not backing down from its investigation of the Fed and its chair, Jerome Powell, even though the probe has delayed the confirmation of a new chair nominated by President Donald Trump. The investigation is focused on cost overruns and brief testimony about the project last summer by Powell. Trump confirmed in an interview that aired Wednesday on Fox Business that he wants to continue the probe.
Last month, during a closed-door hearing before a federal judge, a top deputy from Pirro’s office conceded that they hadn’t found any evidence of a crime in their investigation of the headquarters project.
Robert Hur, an attorney for the Federal Reserve board of governors, sent an email to Pirro’s prosecutors about their visit and their request for a “tour” to “check on progress” at the construction site. Hur’s email, which The Associated Press has viewed, noted that U.S. District Judge James Boasberg concluded that their interest in the Federal Reserve’s renovation project was “pretextual.”
AP AUDIO: Prosecutors sought access to Federal Reserve building as Trump threatens to fire Powell
AP Washington correspondent Sagar Meghani reports on more drama surrounding a federal probe of a massive construction project at the Federal Reserve’s headquarters.
“Should you wish to challenge that finding, the courts provide an avenue for you; it is not appropriate for you to try to circumvent it,” Hur wrote.
Republican Tillis is key vote
Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who is a key member of the Senate Banking Committee, has vowed to vote against Kevin WarshTrump’s nominee to replace Powell as Fed chair, until the investigation is dropped. With the committee closely divided on partisan lines, Tillis’ opposition is enough to block Warsh from receiving the committee’s approval.
Tillis on Wednesday criticized the investigation as “bogus, ill-timed, ill-informed” and repeated that seven Republican members of the banking panel have said they do not believe Powell committed a crime when he testified last June.
Tillis also said there aren’t enough votes on the committee or in the broader Senate to do an end-run around the committee and get Warsh confirmed some other way.
“There really is no path,” he told reporters, adding that Pirro and her aides were “asleep at the switch” because the investigation has essentially delayed Powell’s departure from the Fed, despite Trump’s obsessive criticism of the Fed chair. Powell has now said he won’t leave until the investigation is resolved.
Sign up for Morning Wire: Our flagship newsletter breaks down the biggest headlines of the day.
Tillis suggested Pirro blindsided the White House with her investigation. “They should have consulted with the White House, because I’m sure if they would have, (the White House) would have said, ‘no, we can wait,’” until Powell steps down.
But Kevin Hassett, the Trump administration’s top economist, said Wednesday that the Justice Department got involved because “the president wanted to investigate the cost overrun,” Axios reported.
The Banking panel said Tuesday that it will hold a hearing on Warsh’s nomination April 21. Powell’s term as Fed chair ends May 15, but Powell said last month he would remain as chair until a replacement is named.
Powell is serving a separate term as a member of the Fed’s governing board that lasts until January 2028. Chairs typically leave the board when their terms as chair end, but they can remain on the board if they choose. Powell has said he won’t leave until the investigation is resolved. If he remains it would deny Trump the opportunity to appoint someone else to the seven-member board.
Late Tuesday Tillis posted a link on social media to The Wall Street Journal’s article on the visit below an image of the Three Stooges and wrote, “The U.S. Attorney’s Office for D.C. at the crime scene.”
Investigation centers on building renovations
The investigation centers on an appearance by Powell before the Banking Committee last June, when he was asked about cost overruns on the renovations. The most recent estimates from the Fed suggest the current estimated cost of $2.5 billion is about $600 million higher than a 2022 estimate of $1.9 billion.
“It is probably corrupt, but what it really is, is incompetent,” Trump said. “Don’t you think we have to find out what happened there?”
The president’s support for the investigation threatens a timeframe set out by Sen. Tim Scott, a South Carolina Republican who chairs the Banking Committee. Scott said Tuesday on Fox Business that he believed the investigation would be “wrapped up in the next few weeks,” allowing Warsh to be confirmed soon after.
Threat to fire Powell
News of the unannounced visit by prosecutors comes as Trump has again threatened to fire Powell, if the Federal Reserve Chair decides to stay on the central bank’s governing board after his term as chair expires next month.
“Well then I’ll have to fire him, OK?” Trump said.
Trump has for months wanted to remove Powell, saying he has been too slow in orchestrating interest rate cuts that would give the U.S. economy a quick boost. Powell has said the investigation is a pretext to undermine the Fed’s independence to set rates.
Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican, said Trump can only fire Powell “for cause,” meaning some kind of misconduct, “so that’s a pretty tall order.”
Supreme Court weighing another Trump removal
Trump’s threat to fire Powell comes as the Supreme Court is weighing the president’s effort to remove another central bank governor, Lisa Cook. Lower courts have so far allowed Cook to remain in her job while her legal challenge to the firing continues. The Supreme Court also seemed likely to keep her on the Fed when the court heard arguments in January. A decision could come any time.
The issue in Cook’s case is whether allegations of mortgage fraud, which she has denied, is a sufficient reason to fire her or a mere pretext masking Trump’s desire to exert more control over U.S. interest rate policy.
The Supreme Court has allowed the firings of the heads of other governmental agencies at the president’s discretion, with no claim that they did anything wrong, while also signaling that it is approaching the independence of the nation’s central bank more cautiouslycalling the Fed “a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity.”
___
AP Writers Seung Min Kim, Mark Sherman, Paul Wiseman, Alanna Durkin Richer, and video journalist Nathan Ellgren contributed to this report.
The Dictatorship
The Latest: US blockade of Iranian ports ‘fully implemented’ as Trump says war is near end
SnoCountry Mountain Reports
Sports Betting Line
Pacific Northwest Sportswatch Daily Listings
Gulf States Sportswatch Daily Listings
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
The Dictatorship7 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show1 year agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?








