MAGAs, apparently feeling conned after believing Trump's deluge of lies on birthright citizenship, are so incensed after loss they are resorting to "crazy talk"

(AP Photo)

Members of Donald Trump's MAGA cult are on the verge of a collective crack-up after the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) rejected Trump's attempt to unilaterally revise (by executive order) the birthright citizenship provision that has been enshrined in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution since 1868. Why are MAGAs so exorcised by a ruling in Trump v. Barbara that went exactly as many legal experts had anticipated. In fact, those in the know seemed surprised only that it was a 5-4 opinion (or 6-3, depending on how you view what might be called "Brett Kavanaugh's split decision"), rather than the unanimous opinion that was widely expected? We will examine that question in an upcoming post, but for now let's look at a USA TODAY analysis of MAGA's rage, which seems to be dangerously close to going over the top. Zac Anderson reports under the headline "MAGA is outraged by birthright ruling. Are drastic steps coming?" Anderson writes:

Impeaching judges, sterilizing foreign visitors, dissolving the union – some prominent conservatives suggested extreme measures could be called for in the wake of a Supreme Court decision upholding birthright citizenship.

That sounds nutty, but the MAGA faithful -- seemingly clueless about the law (much like Trump himself) --  apparently thought SCOTUS was going to hand the White House a resounding victory, even though the chances of that were virtually zero. It turns out that MAGAs have no one but themselves to blame for expecting an outcome that seemed possible only to those who believed the deluge of lies Trump spewed about the issue. Anderson writes:

The ruling sparked widespread outrage on the right, which has rallied around President Donald Trump’s push to restrict the constitutional provision granting automatic citizenship to anyone born in the country.

Many Never Trumpers (including yours truly) likely have thought the president's most devoted followers are nothing but a band of "fruits, nuts, and flakes (as they say in California). In the wake of the Barbara ruling, MAGAs seem to be doing their best to prove critics right. Get a load of this from the USA TODAY report:

Sean Davis, the CEO and co-founder of The Federalist online magazine, wrote in a social media post that there are “several ways forward” after the ruling. Among them: Adding more justices to the Supreme Court and mandating “sterilization of all foreign visitors prior to entry.”

Davis also mentioned dissolving the union, writing “A nation which can’t even restrict who gets to be a citizen isn’t a nation.” (I suggest Davis add this maxim to his quiver: "A nation that refuses to hold credibly accused pedophiles accountable, isn't a nation.")

Jack Posobiec, another conservative media figure, wrote in a post that "The court never said we can't mandate spot pregnancy tests for foreigners." Posobiec is a well-known loon, who has called for replacing democracy with theocracy and has ties to white supremacy.          

Many on the right lashed out at conservative justices who joined the majority decision.

“Impeach rogue, activist judges,” Rep. Nancy Mace, R-South Carolina, wrote on social media. “We're looking at you Amy Coney Barrett."

Conservative podcaster Megyn Kelly also slammed Barrett.

“I’m sick of Barrett. I’m sick of this bull***t by Barrett, I gotta be honest,” Kelly said on her show.

Not all conservatives sided with MAGA. Some said the hard-core types were out of line, Anderson reports:

The outpouring of anger on the right prompted pushback from some conservatives.

"The right-wing meltdown over the citizenship case is shockingly dishonest," wrote Gregg Nunziata, an aide to Secretary of State Marco Rubio when he was in the Senate and now the executive director of the Society for the Rule of Law, a group founded by conservative legal figures from previous Republican administrations.

"The ruling preserves the status quo," added Nunziata. "The majority landed where most conservative scholarship has been."

Trump has pushed a hard-line immigration agenda centered around mass deportations, but targeting birthright citizenship may have been his most aggressive move. It clashed with how the Constitution has long been understood and sought to dramatically redefine who gets to be a citizen. Trump was deeply invested in the case, attending Supreme Court arguments, a first for a sitting president. 

The president described birthright citizenship as an “anchor” wrapped around the country’s neck, but Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, said, "Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights − to freely participate in our political community.”

Even some prominent Republicans seemed unsure about where the party likely will go on birthright citizenship. Vice President J.D. Vance, long known for overstating things, engaged in . . . more overstatement: 

The loss had some conservatives lamenting about the path forward. Vice President JD Vance, appearing on Fox News, said the ruling was “disappointing” and a “major, major mistake” but said it had a “silver lining.”

It showed there is significant support among the justices for ending birthright citizenship, which Vance said is “hanging by a thread.” Four of the justices said Trump's executive order didn't violate the 14th Amendment, although one said it violated a 1952 immigration law.

"We have to keep fighting because we actually have an opportunity to reverse this decision, just as we've reversed so many bad decisions throughout the generations,” Vance said.

Steve Bannon, a prominent MAGA media figure, opened his podcast on June 30 by declaring it was a "day that will live in infamy" but said the fight wasn't over.

"You know what we’re going to do? We’re going to get up and dust ourselves off and we’re going to go to war," Bannon said. 

Robert Reich: SCOTUS got it right on its birthright citizenship ruling, but that the vote was close is a sign we have a compromised high court that needs change

(Wall Street Journal)

Birthright citizenship, enshrined in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1868, and upheld 30 years later by the U.S. Supreme Court in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), has been under attack since day one of Donald Trump's second term. The current high court, with its conservative majority that has been willing to ignore or bend precedent in order to side with Trump, gave their hero a stinging loss yesterday -- ruling, in so many words, that a bedrock constitutional right cannot be overturned by executive order. That doesn't mean, however, that Trump and the loyalists he has installed throughout the government won't continue to chip away at the 14th Amendment. 

The bigger issue flowing from Trump v. Barbara, U.S. Sup. Ct., 2026 might be this: The ruling provides the latest evidence that we are stuck with a Supreme Court that is more loyal to partisan politics than to the rule of law. That is from Robert Reich, former labor secretary under Bill Clinton and longtime professor of public policy at the University of California Berkeley, who says the closeness of the Barbara ruling is a sign that some members of SCOTUS are "bonkers." That is the relatively kind word Reich uses. I would use the term "crooks," as in the kind of lowlifes who need to be investigated for bribery, possible ties to extortion (perhaps as targets of blackmailers), and old-fashioned violation of their oaths -- and perhaps much more, meaning they should face serious repercussions, including impeachment, criminal prosecution (and if convicted in court) time behind bars.

Reich analyzes outgrowths from the Barbara ruling -- some hopeful, some deeply alarming -- at his Substack page, under the headline "Born in the U.S.A.; the Supreme Court did the right thing, but four justices are dangerously off their rockers":

Today, the Supreme Court struck down Trump’s Day One executive order canceling the right to birthright citizenship. Good. That executive order declared that children born in the U.S. would not be considered citizens if their parents were living in the country illegally or were visiting the country on temporary visas.

The executive order never took effect. It was quickly blocked by multiple lower courts because it appeared to directly conflict with the 14th Amendment, which states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

The Trump regime appealed the lower-court rulings, contending that the 14th Amendment’s citizenship provision had been misunderstood for more than a century. The administration argued that the drafters of the amendment were focused on guaranteeing citizenship for the children of former slaves—and that the amendment was never intended to extend citizenship to the children of people who weren’t living in the country legally.

Trump and his Solicitor General, who argued this case before the Court, also said that narrowing birthright citizenship was necessary to prevent “birth tourism”—the practice of immigrants coming to the U.S. to give birth here and obtain citizenship for their child.

Birthright citizenship has been in Trump's crosshairs from the moment he entered electoral politics in 2015. For a politician who has made it clear he wants an electorate that is more white, more moneyed, more conservative, and more prone to show cult-like zeal, this was a lodestar issue, one Trump was anxious to push and use to his advantage. Many experts suggested he had almost zero chance of success with the high court -- and, in fact, John Roberts & Co. rejected the president's entreaties yesterday. But that might just mean that Trump has to fight around the edges, rather than undertaking a full-frontal assault. Reich writes:

Trump has been vowing to try to change the law since entering politics in 2015, arguing the 14th Amendment was written specifically to enshrine the rights of freed slaves. His critics have countered that it was always designed to apply to the children of immigrants too. An  1898 Supreme Court decision confirmed that U.S.-born children of immigrant parents are entitled to American citizenship.

Today, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the deeply-rooted understanding that virtually everyone born on American soil is automatically a U.S. citizen was enshrined in the Constitution with the passage of the 14th Amendment in 1868: “Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights—to freely participate in our political community,” Roberts wrote. “The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to every free-born person in this land. We keep that promise today.”

The ruling issued yesterday in Trump v. Barbara was 194 pages long. But the issues boiled down to this simple maxim: You cannot amend the Constitution of the United States by executive fiat. A commentary from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) explains why executive orders have limitations when going up against federal and constitutional law -- and it outlines the arduous process involved in making a serious attempt to amend the constitution.

Anyone with a modicum of legal knowledge could have told Trump that challenging the 14th Amendment by executive order was a fruitless endeavor that was sure to fail. Heather Cox Richardson summed up the landscape in her "Letters From an American" post yesterday. She wrote:

Today the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts upheld birthright citizenship. But, as Jonathan V. Last of The Bulwark notes, the Supreme Court should never have taken this case. The lower court judges who heard the case were appalled that the administration was attacking the clear terms of the Constitution. Judge John Coughenour, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan, called Trump’s executive order “blatantly unconstitutional” and said: “I’ve been on the bench for over four decades. I can’t remember another case where the question presented was as clear as this one is. This is a blatantly unconstitutional order.”

Given that Trump's experience via DOGE hinted that he was serious about reducing fraud and waste, one might have thought he would seek out expert advice and decide his time and effort could be better spent elsewhere. We now know, of course, that Trump is not really interested in attacking fraud and waste, and he does not listen to anyone. So he forged ahead, knowing his legion of MAGA lawyers was being funded by American taxpayers, folks like you and me. Spending other people's money might be Trump's one and only talent in the governing process. 

A query to AI Overview produces this information about the cost of taking a case to the U.S. Supreme Court:

Litigating a case from a local trial court all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) is an extraordinarily expensive endeavor. While actual court filing fees are remarkably low, the total cost for a full life cycle of litigation usually ranges from $500,000 to well over $5 million per side. [1, 2, 3]

Those costs are mild compared to what Trump has wasted starting a war with Iran. But Trump apparently is too hard-headed to understand that a president cannot govern by executive orders alone. He must work with the House, the Senate, the Courts. The U.S. is not set up for one-man rule --  -- even though that apparently is what Trump wants.  Rational observers, of which Robert Reich is one, knew that the outcome should be a nearly unanimous spanking. That it was not unanimous says more about our compromised high court than it does about the merits of Trump's case. Reich writes:

In another era, this would have been a no-brainer. No constitutional lawyer I know thought the Court would decide otherwise. The lower federal courts had consistently and unanimously ruled against Trump.

Had Trump won, it would have probably caused panic among recent immigrants and their families. Although Trump has insisted his policy would apply only to future births, it was far from clear that the logic of any win for Trump wouldn’t apply retrospectively if a future president (JD Vance? perish the thought) wanted to go there.

What I find troubling is that the decision was 5 to 4 rather than unanimous or nearly so, as it should have been.

How did the ruling wind up being much closer than expected? Reich explains, and it doesn't say anything positive about the competence or ethics of our Supreme Court:

Only five of the nine justice ruled against Trump on constitutional grounds. Brett Kavanaugh dissented on statutory grounds; while agreeing that Trump’s executive order was unlawful, he argued that the court should have resolved the case under federal immigration law rather than the Constitution.

The Court’s three most conservative justices — Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Samuel Alito — dissented. Thomas wrote for the group: “The Court adds to the sad history of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed and understood to secure equal rights for the freed blacks but has instead been repurposed for political projects that the Reconstruction Congress did not support.”

Pure and utter claptrap.

Reich comes to this conclusion: Even though SCOTUS reached the correct decision, looking beneath the surface tells you that something has to change. This court has emboldened and empowered Trump at nearly every turn -- even allowing Trump on the ballot in the face of the 14th Amendment, which disqualified him due to his status as an insurrectionist on Jan. 6, 2021.  Reich writes:

Thomas, Gorsuch, and Alito are so far to the right of America that their views on this case and other matters should be presumed bonkers. Yet what’s particularly sobering is that Trump is only one justice away from having a Supreme Court majority that would have gone his way on this absurd reading of the 14th Amendment.

Clearly, the Supreme Court must be changed — either by expanding the number of justices or by invoking term limits on Supreme Court justices. The Constitution would permit both remedies.

Perhaps the best thing about today’s majority decision is that it’s a direct repudiation of Tump, who has long taken a personal interest in the issue. During his 2024 campaign, he made curtailing birthright citizenship a key element of his immigration platform.

For the Court to so directly reject Trump’s position today is surely a humiliation for him. But then again, humiliation requires a capacity to feel shame, and he has repeatedly shown he has no shame. 

Trump was to be the main event at his Great American State Fair, but it became a MAGA who wound up in handcuffs for alleged lewd acts while eyeing acrobats

(FTD Speaks -- Facebook)

What if you are a MAGA influencer, broadcasting live from Donald Trump's Great American State Fair on the National Mall, and the sparsely attended event (see photo below) begins to, umm, lose your interest? If you are one right-wing livestreamer, you busy yourself by pleasuring yourself. That's from reports at multiple news outlets, including this jointly published piece at The Daily Beast and Yahoo! News, under the headline "MAGA Fanatic Accused of Twisted Sex Acts at Trump's State Fair." A report like this demands insightful commentary -- both about apparent activity in a livestreamer's pants and lack of activity at Trump's "Great" fair -- and Canada-based Substacker Dean Blundell provides it. But first, let's get the basics from Farrah Tomazin, of The Daily Beast:

A MAGA supporter dressed as Uncle Sam was arrested at Donald Trump's Great American State Fair after police alleged he committed a lewd act.

Police documents reviewed by The Daily Beast show that Gian Rachtelli was charged with "lewd, indecent, or obscene acts" after three separate witnesses told police they observed what appeared to be a sexual act while watching a troupe of female circus performers.

Rachtelli, 54, has been identified online by supporters as the MAGA livestreamer known as "Manny," who was broadcasting live from the event. The influencer's most recent livestream from the day of the arrest cut off abruptly when police officers were shown approaching him, though there was no audio to capture what was being said. He has not posted since.

"False Report. Unfair Report. Wrongful Detention. Free Manny!" one X user wrote in response to word of Rachtelli's arrest.

The acts allegedly took place in front of the Cirque Mechanics acrobatic show on the first day of the fair.

One witness said they were standing behind the man who was vaping and filming the female performers before placing his hand inside his pants in what the witness believed was a sexual act.

Another told police that Rachtelli "returned for the second show, and I saw him with his hand in his pants, likely doing what we all thought he was doing."

And a third witness said they were "approached by a female member of the acrobat team who had noticed an older white male that was making her and other female performers uncomfortable."

"They informed me that they noticed him making lewd gestures in his pants … while they were performing," the witness said. 

Predictably, MAGAs seemed to be "standing by their man," no matter how many witnesses made statements to the police. Tomazin writes:

"I'm standing by Manny 100%. He didn't do this. He was live streaming the entire time, and the footage shows what happened before his arrest," one said on Reddit.

"From everything I've seen, this appears to be an attempt to destroy his reputation, damage his livelihood, and silence someone because of his political views."

That raises these questions: How does Rachtelli earn a living, what is his profession, where does he work? A query to AI Overview produces the following:

Public professional profiles, such as LinkedIn, list him as the CEO and operator of a business called First Class Cellular, based in Parkville, Missouri. (Note: The company actually appears to be in Parkville, Maryland -- with Rachtelli's home reportedly in Baltimore.)

It is unclear if he supports himself primarily through his streaming revenue or his cellular business. He is best known in the public sphere as part of a network of pro-Trump streamers who monetize their content through digital interactions, donations, and audience support.

We have been unable to find a phone number or Website for First-Class Cellular in Parkville, MD. Does it exist? We don't have an answer yet.

As for commentary, we turn to Dean Blundell, who long has been a prominent figure in Canadian media -- working as a radio personality, online commentator, podcaster, and media executive. His Dean Bundell Show became the top-rated morning show in the Toronto market with the core 18-34 demographic. Blundell shifted to independent digital media ownership, launching the digital content and podcast hub DeanBundell.com, which was an aggregator for more than 60 independent creators. That venture, in early 2023, became Crier Media. Blundell now can be found in a number of online locations -- at Substack, at Narative.org, where he and former CBS executive producer Zev Shalev discuss top stories of the day in their "FiveStack"commentary. He also produces The Daily Dean Newsletter," to which you can subscribe here.

I discovered Blundell's work a few months back and have become a big fan. He's insightful, timely, original, and fearless -- unafraid to throw a punch, especially in the direction of the Trump administration. 

Let's take a look at his take on Trump's colossal bust of a fair, which featured a devoted follower being accused by cops of committing a lewd act in public. Blundell writes:

You know how every state fair has butter sculptures? This one had a portrait of Donald Trump, a Turning Point USA booth, and a cow named after Melania. North Carolina’s pavilion got busted on opening day for displaying an “unapproved image” of the Confederate flag. Alabama’s booth was, according to a reporter on the ground, one room with a bucket of peanuts in the middle. That’s the whole exhibit. A bucket. Of peanuts. In a room. Representing Alabama at America’s 250th.

And that is before we get to Manny.

Manny, of course, is Gian Rachtelli -- who apparently was so bored that he decided to show support for Cirque Mechanics, a female-led acrobatic troupe, by diddling himself with no crowd around to provide cover. Three witnesses approached law enforcement with information about what they had seen, and No. 3 might have been the most impactful witness of all, as Blundell reports:

Witness 3: Was approached by one of the female acrobats while she was supposed to be performing. “I was approached by a female member of the acrobat team who had noticed an older white male that was making her & other female performer uncomfortable. They informed me that they noticed him making lewd gestures in his pants (as if he was attempting to/masturbating) while they were performing.”

Three witnesses. Independently. Including a member of the troupe who was so disturbed during her own act that she stepped off and reported it.

Park Police determined probable cause. Rachtelli was arrested on the spot, charged with one count of “lewd, indecent, or obscene acts,” and transported to U.S. Park Police District 1 for processing. His livestream — the one streaming live to his MAGA audience — went black mid-broadcast as officers approached him. He has not posted since.

Knowing that MAGAs were likely to downsize any form of "pocket pool" Rachtelli might have been playing and upsize any attempts to estimate the crowd, Blundell decided to take matters into his own hands, writing:

You know what’s coming. You always know what’s coming. Within hours, MAGA Reddit and MAGA X had a new martyr.

“False Report. Unfair Report. Wrongful Detention. Free Manny!”

“I’m standing by Manny 100%. He didn’t do this. He was live-streaming the entire time, and the footage shows what happened before his arrest.”

“From everything I’ve seen, this appears to be an attempt to destroy his reputation, damage his livelihood, and silence someone because of his political views.”

Yes. Yes. The deep state has finally come for the guy in the Uncle Sam costume jerking it at the circus. It’s all coming together. They don’t want you to enjoy Cirque Mechanics in your own pants. They are silencing Manny because of his political views — the political view being, apparently, “I should be allowed to do whatever I want at a taxpayer-funded event because I’m wearing patriotic clothing.” Free speech. First Amendment. Free Manny.

This is the cult, in its purest form. There is no behavior — no behavior — a MAGA man can engage in that the rest of MAGA won’t immediately reframe as persecution. A Secret Service agent on Trump’s own detail was arrested earlier this year for indecent exposure for masturbating in front of guests at a Miami hotel. (Look it up. John Spillman. Real story.) Now a MAGA livestreamer in costume gets pinched for the same thing at Trump’s own state fair, and the response from the base is to demand his release and announce a conspiracy. The defense isn’t “he didn’t do it.” The defense is “and if he did, the libs made him.”

These are the same people who spent the last three years demanding the world be “protected from groomers.” Who can’t say the word “drag queen” without losing their lunch. Whose entire moral framework is supposedly built on protecting children and families from public indecency. And the moment one of their own is charged with allegedly committing public indecency in costume, on livestream, in front of female performers at a family event, the line becomes: don’t believe your lying eyes. Free Manny.

Why This Story Is The Whole Story

Look at the picture. Actually look at it. A man in a giant red Uncle Sam top hat, mouth open, American flag glasses, mid-livestream, at an empty federal event on the National Mall, allegedly with his hand down his pants while female acrobats perform six feet from him.

That’s not just the worst day of one guy’s life. That’s the photograph of what’s left of the MAGA spectacle in mid-2026.

The fair was supposed to be the kickoff to America’s biggest birthday ever. The 250th. The semiquincentennial. The thing this country has been planning, in some form, since the 1990s. It was supposed to be unifying. Bipartisan. Like the 200th in 1976, when Republicans and Democrats and everybody in between sat on the same lawn and watched the same fireworks because being American was the point. 

Instead, it’s a Trump rally with a Ferris wheel. The acts boycotted it. The states refused to fund it. The musicians who showed up got rained on. The crowd Trump claims is 45,000 is actually 1,000 with half of them in MAGA hats leaving early. The food is a Disney rip-off with a bucket of room-temperature peanuts representing Alabama. The most expensive single item is a $24.96 pretzel. The “highlights” are a plywood arch and a borrowed Ferris wheel. The cow is named Melania. The Confederate flag had to be removed by Friday afternoon. The president lied about all of it by Thursday afternoon. And the on-the-ground content moment that broke the internet wasn’t a flyover or a fiddle contest or a moment of national unity.

It was a 54-year-old man dressed as Uncle Sam, on his own livestream, allegedly getting himself off in his pants while watching female acrobats — and his fans calling him a political prisoner inside of two hours.

That is what $100 million bought. That is the kickoff to America’s 250th. That is who showed up.

Donald Trump doesn’t throw events. He throws Yelp warnings. Everything he touches becomes a one-star review with photos. The Lincoln Reflecting Pool turned Kermit-green. The Ferris wheel broke. The ice cream melted. The musicians fled. The states bailed. The mascot is a cow named after his wife. And the lasting image — the one that’s going to be in every history book that gets written about this whole grotesque period — is the Uncle Sam in handcuffs.

Trump is going to do this again on July 4th. He’s already said so. “I’ll be speaking again,” he posted, like a regional theater production announcing additional dates. There will be more arches. More plywood. More $23 turkey legs. And, statistically, almost certainly, more Mannys. Because that’s the lineup. That’s the audience. That’s the crowd.

This is who they are. This is who you’re standing next to. Look at the picture. Look at the costume. Look at the livestream timeline. Look at the comments defending him. Then look at every politician, every preacher, every podcaster, every grifter who told you these were the people protecting your kids and your country.

The receipts are heavy. The receipts are public. And the receipts are deeply embarrassing.

From up here in Canada, this is the part where I always remind you: This is not a “both countries are the same” moment. This is not a “every country has problems” moment. This is the United States of America, on the eve of its 250th birthday, with a president openly campaigning to annex my country, throwing a fair where the headline event is an Uncle Sam getting walked out in handcuffs. We’re not laughing at America. We love America. Our grandparents fought beside yours. We’re laughing at this. The cult. The grift. The whole carnival.

You deserve so much better. You deserve fireworks and corn dogs and bunting and Bruce Springsteen. You deserve butter sculptures and pie contests and the world’s smallest horse. You deserve the good version of yourselves on your 250th birthday.

What you got was Manny.

Pour one out for MAGA and America. What a F****** AWESOME DISASTER.

Trump's Great American Fair features plenty of room to stretch out. (Yahoo!)