If you watched my “Random Thoughts” drop yesterday, you already know where my head is.
There is so much happening at once that it is almost impossible to keep up. And maybe that is part of the problem.
A new outrage arrives before we have finished processing the last one. A lawsuit is filed. A judge issues an order. Another investigation begins. Another billion-dollar project appears. Another public institution becomes the subject of a political fight.
I don’t want us to move on.
So today, I want to talk about the things we cannot afford to forget.
WE ARE STILL IN A TRADE WAR WITH CANADA
Our neighbor. Our ally. One of our largest trading partners.
The U.S.-Canada trade fight is not some old story that quietly resolved itself. New U.S. tariffs are hitting billions of dollars of Canadian goods, and Canada is preparing retaliation. Canadian businesses are warning about lost sales and jobs, while American communities that depend on Canadian visitors are trying to lure them back.
This is what a trade war looks like in the real world.
It isn't presidents trading insults on television.
It is businesses wondering whether customers will disappear. It is workers wondering whether their jobs are next. It is families eventually discovering that political decisions made in Washington have followed them right to the cash register.
So, yes: we are still at economic war with Canada.
Don't forget about it just because another headline came along.
MORE THAN 60 TREES ARE GONE
Now let's head to Washington, D.C.
President Trump has promised a major overhaul of the historic East Potomac Golf Links.
But according to The Washington Post, an informal count found that more than 60 trees appeared to have already been removed in recent weeks — even though the administration's promised overhaul had not officially begun.
Among the removals was a cherry tree near the Blue Course's 14th green. Large sycamores were also removed.
The Interior Department says this is routine maintenance involving hazardous, invasive, declining or dying trees.
But here's where this gets interesting.
The administration still had not publicly released a final design, construction schedule or estimated cost for Trump's proposed overhaul. The Park Service also still had environmental, historic-preservation and planning requirements to complete before a redesign could begin.
And there is already litigation over the project.
So my question is simple:
Why are we cutting first and explaining later?
This isn't Donald Trump's private golf club.
And when public land is being dramatically changed, the public deserves to know exactly what is happening before the chainsaws arrive.
AND THE BALLROOM KEEPS GOING UP
Remember the White House ballroom?
Don't lose track of that one either.
Two lower federal courts concluded that above-ground construction could not simply proceed without congressional authorization. The D.C. Circuit wrote that decisions involving federal property belong to Congress rather than unilateral presidential action.
Trump took the fight to the Supreme Court.
Chief Justice John Roberts subsequently allowed construction to continue temporarily while the Court considers the administration's request.
Meanwhile, construction continues.
The administration has argued that this isn't merely a ballroom but a highly secured facility incorporating national-security infrastructure.
Then Congress and the American people deserve transparency about exactly what is being built, what it costs, who is paying for it, and what authority allows the president to build it.
Those are not partisan questions.
Those are basic oversight questions.
Or, as Trump himself once called him, Ron DeSanctimonious.
A Florida state grand jury concluded that the DeSantis administration “misappropriated” $10 million in taxpayer money connected to a Medicaid settlement.
According to the grand jury report obtained by CBS News Miami, the money was routed through the Hope Florida Foundation and other organizations before millions reached political committees and the Republican Party of Florida and were used in the campaign against Florida's 2024 marijuana legalization initiative.
The grand jury described what happened as part of a “sophisticated scheme to fund political activities.”
But there is an important part of this story that shouldn't be skipped: the grand jury also concluded there was insufficient evidence to criminally charge anyone.
DeSantis has rejected the report and called the controversy a “hoax.”
Those facts belong together.
But so does this question:
How does $10 million connected to a taxpayer settlement wind up helping finance partisan political activity without anybody being able to clearly identify who made the decision?
NOW THEY'RE LOOKING AT YOSEMITE
This one should make every American pay attention regardless of political party.
Yosemite National Park belongs to us.
According to reporting from NOTUS, National Park Service officials have been working on a potential land exchange involving roughly a quarter-mile strip inside Yosemite National Park and interests connected with Kingsbarn Realty Capital.
The developer owns approximately 83 acres outside Yosemite and wants a shorter road connecting that property to one of the park's main roads.
The Park Service says no final decision has been made and that any proposal would have to comply with applicable federal law, environmental review and public-notification requirements.
That distinction matters: Yosemite has not simply been handed over to a developer.
But the proposal itself deserves enormous public scrutiny.
The previous owner of the neighboring property fought for years for similar access and lost in federal court.
National parks are not presidential real-estate portfolios.
They aren't Republican property.
They aren't Democratic property.
They belong to the American people.
And once we establish that pieces of national parks can be carved up to make neighboring private development more valuable, Americans ought to think very carefully about the precedent being created.
AND YES, WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT HAKEEM JEFFRIES
Democrats don't get a free pass in this column.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries recently met privately with Jared Kushner.
Kushner requested the meeting, and Jeffries says they discussed America's affordability crisis.
But even some Democrats reportedly wondered why their leader was privately meeting with a member of Trump's family who holds no official government position.
That's a legitimate question.
And Democrats should be able to ask it without being accused of disloyalty.
What exactly is the plan if Democrats win the House?
Jeffries has begun talking publicly about a Day One agenda centered on affordability and accountability. That's important.
But voters deserve specifics.
What legislation gets introduced?
What gets voted on during the first 100 days?
What investigations begin?
What subpoenas are issued?
What happens with allegations involving executive spending and congressional authority?
What happens with oversight of this administration?
Winning an election is not the finish line.
It is permission to govern.
If Jeffries becomes Speaker, Democrats should expect him to fight for their legislative agenda and exercise Congress' constitutional oversight authority.
Call your representatives and ask them what their expectations are.
Don't just ask whether Democrats can win the House.
What are you going to DO with it?
WE HAVEN'T FORGOTTEN EPSTEIN EITHER
And while all these other stories pile up, Americans should continue demanding lawful transparency regarding the Epstein records.
There are court fights, disclosure battles and arguments over what material can legally be released.
We should be careful here because allegations are not evidence, names appearing in documents do not automatically establish wrongdoing, and victims' identities and private information must be protected.
But legitimate questions about government records do not disappear because the news cycle changes.
Transparency and due process can exist at the same time.
This may be one of the most disturbing stories of the week.
Associated Press reported that ICE awarded a $16.7 million no-bid contract for 6,000 pairs of gloves capable of delivering electrical shocks.
ICE argues the technology could reduce the need for more serious uses of force and says officers will be trained and governed by agency policy.
Civil-rights advocates and lawmakers are raising serious questions about oversight, training and potential misuse.
Congress should demand to know exactly what safeguards govern any new use-of-force technology purchased with taxpayer dollars.
Here's what connects these stories for me.
Power. Public money. Public property. Transparency. Accountability.
Trees disappearing from public parkland while a controversial redevelopment remains under review.
A massive White House construction project proceeding while courts fight over presidential and congressional authority.
Taxpayer money in Florida being routed into organizations and ultimately political activity.
A potential Yosemite land exchange that could benefit private development.
A congressional leader holding a meeting that members of his own party want explained.
ICE spending millions on controversial new equipment.
And a trade war with Canada that continues while Americans become distracted by everything else.
Each story has different facts, different laws and different people involved.
But citizens should be asking the same questions every single time:
Who is watching the people making these decisions?
And maybe most importantly:
What happens if nobody stops them?
Because this is how accountability disappears — not necessarily in one dramatic moment, but through exhaustion.
There are so many scandals, controversies, lawsuits and investigations that eventually people throw their hands up and say, I can't keep track anymore.
Ask your representatives questions.
And when November arrives, remember what happened before the campaign commercials told you what they wanted you to remember.
And after the election, regardless of who controls Congress, we should demand something very simple from the people we send there:
