In a blistering opinion, a Federal Court judge ruled that President Donald Trump improperly used a $10 billion lawsuit he filed against the IRS to extract personal benefits from the government and prevented the terms of a settlement agreement from taking legal effect.
71 Wyoming attorneys signed onto the letter. Lummis and Barrasso will ignore it.
August 1, 2026
Charges against an Olympic kayaker for vandalizing the reflecting pool have been dropped.
That was predictable, but what the Justice Department admitted was not. It admitted the damage was the result of "flawed installation by the contractor" as well as "the rush to complete the project prior to events associated with the America 250 celebration in the weeks surrounding Independence Day 2026."
Every lawyer associated with this should be dismissed and disbarred. Trump should be impeached. The victim of these false charges should sue for malicious prosecution.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office dismissed all charges against David Hearn, Justin Carreno, Sophie Dennison-Gibby and Cameron Thiers for the pool vandalization that never occured. Donald Trump had previously described these people as “SICK, DERANGED PEOPLE". He's the sick deranged people, but people who aren't victims of Trump Derangement Syndrome and think he's something other than a rampaging deranged narcissist know that.
Now, even after the Toddler's tantrums, no charges are pending at all. They never should be.
Lawsuits should, and I predict will, be filed against the government over this.
August 8, 2026
The DC Circuit ordered Trump to halt his illegal ballroom construction but, in a wussy move, stayed its decision for fourteen days in order to allow Trump to appeal, which he, or rather his administration, will.
The Court, in its decision, noted:
Whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help.
August 11, 2026
It's not that there aren't some really issues here.
Gray violated the law on this and needs to be held fully accountable. Courts looking at this issue have uniformly supported the states that refused to provide the information.
Gray should be made to recover the information he supplied. This was illegal.
But coming when it does, it may very well be the law in a practical sense this election cycle, and impact the election. It's specifically designed to frustrate Democratic voting. However, as Amy Howe reports:
A separate ruling by the same judge, in a case filed by a different set of plaintiffs, temporarily prohibits the U.S. Postal Service from implementing one provision of the executive order anywhere in the United States. That ruling remains in effect, at least for now.
The decision is flat out wrong and the Supreme Court will regret it. The Democrats are increasingly like to win both houses of Congress this Fall and they will begin to work on major Supreme Court reform. Trump can prevent that while he's in office, but he's becoming the political kiss of death for GOP candidates and when a new Democratic President comes in, this order will come off and the Supreme Court will be radically reformed. Perhaps first up will be age limitations, likely 70 years of old, which will wipe out the conservative majority on the court.
A decision like this one will help bring about that downfall. So does stuff like this:
The mail in voting one at least has some think judicial reasoning Staying ballroom construction was the obvious choice here and the Court didn't do it. That probably signals that they'll let this insane project go forward.
One of Rasner's previous suits is in the CST today on the pending summary judgment motion.
August 31, 2026
The Supreme Court sealed its fate today in holding that the Plaintiffs in a case challenging the legality of Trump's illegal construction of a giant garden shed on White House Grounds lacked standing.
Bullshit.
Justice Roberts, who dissented in the 5 to 4 decision, noted that the construction was likely illegal. It is. This was a standing decision.
So construction will commence and may well get completed. The legality will be ruled upon in the future, and then the heaping pile of shit hopefully blown to the ground by a future administration that will rely on this decision. The Supreme Court will go to 13 members, and an age limitation will be put on the justices guaranteeing a liberal majority on the court for a century.
September 10. 2026
Twenty states filed two separate lawsuits against the government alleging the Trump administration illegally weakened the Endangered Species Act.
September 11, 2026
The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals refused to lift an injunction on the USPS prohibiting the implementation of crybaby's attempt for a fall coup by banning mail in voting.
September 15, 2026
The US Supreme Court decided in a 7 to 2 vote to block the Trump USPS rule prohibiting mail in voting. Alito and Thomas were the two dissenting votes.
The International Red Cross completed its evacuation of foreigners from Vietnam. The numbers were about 3,000, people left after the fall with no easy way out.
President Ford signed into law the National Emergencies Act allowing the automatic termination of existing states of emergency in the U.S. effective September 14, 1978, and providing a two year limit on the duration of emergencies unless renewed by the U.S. President..
The first Laetoli footprints, fossilized footprints laid down by, must like, Australopithecus pedestrians, were found in Tanzania.
Back when the Rocky Mountain News was still a thing, they used to run columns by Charley Reese. I didn't always agree with them by any means, Reese was a dyed in wool Confederate Gray Southerner, but they were often quite interesting. I can recall his final column when he noted he was going to retire. On the timing he said something like "when you know, you know".
I'm at that point.
My wife, however, definitely isn't at that point for me, an ongoing source of conflict.
In Wyoming, and maybe in most places, lawyers are admitted to the bar in August for the most part. A second, smaller crops, is admitted in March or so. I was admitted in August, 36 years ago.
Back in September 2025 I started a thread about having passed the 35 year mark but never published it. I was angry about something at the time, pretty clearly, and it was a very bitter posts. I thought better of it and didn't post it, but I didn't wipe it out until recently. I reread it and then did so, even though much of what I wrote in it is still true.
All careers are individual, of course which is what makes career advice so dangerous. I've known people, for instance, who served in the military and absolutely hated it. The entire film M*A*S*H and the television series is, in no small part, based on a hatred of military service, although the book's author, a conservative, ironically did not hate his. The same is true, for what it's worth, of Catch 22. Heller actually admired the military he lampooned. Both books were hugely successful, however, as they not only tapped into the oddities of military life, but also into a hatred of it in some quarters.
In contrast, I've known people who loved it, and I myself liked it.
I note that as I suppose that the law is the same way, maybe all careers are.
That aside, the law is unique and is well known for being so.
The law has an alcoholism and alcohol abuse rate that's far higher than other professions. That isn't the only abusive trait in it, however. It's estimated that something like 60% of lawyers have had in the office sexual infidelities and while I haven't tried to add up percentages, and that percentage seems high, there are indeed a lot of them. The law also has some really screwball personalities in it, although I'm at the point where I now wonder if those personalities became that way due to the law, or entered the law because of it. In my current Gen. Jones stage of life, I'm amazed by the number of burnt out husks of people who won't retire from the law as that's all they have.
I'm not the only one who's noticed that, and a recent conversation is part of what brought me back to this thread. In speaking to an opposing lawyer I've known a long time by phone, on a holiday, he brought up the very things I've noted, this included. Indeed, he noted that for a lot of people, they'd become lawyers, that's what they now were as part of their personality. That's all that's left.
That should never happen, but the law is an all consuming job.
He was actually a bit angry about it. I'm not angry, but I don't want to become one of those people. My friend noted that what he "is", is a hunter and mountain climber. What he "does" is be a lawyer. That's pretty much true for me as well, although I'd substitute outdoorsmen for climber.
He also had the observation that after working years at the law, late nights, early days, weekends, that he and his wife did things together rarely. The pressure of work brought that about. That's pretty much the same story in my own life. Another lawyer I know just had his wife of about 30 years just up and leave him, leaving him wondering why. It seems a "therapist" suggested that, and frankly I have a dim view of most therapist or counsellors, but what I suspect is that the same thing was at work. That fellow had told me not all that long, before the disaster came, that he was never going to retire, because he enjoyed the fellowship of the lawyers.
Well, nothing that we do at work is something "enjoyed" by our spouses, except for perhaps the money. If the lawyer is really one of those ones who enjoys the courtroom combat, or the intellectual challenge, the spouses don't participate in that at all.
Money can matter, however. Yet another lawyer I know, about my same age, is trying to retire but is upset as his wife just can't grasp that the funding burn rate has to stop. I think a lot of lawyers who keep on keeping on face that with a family member or perhaps themselves. From the outside, you know they'd be fine. But to them, or a loved one, the fear of no further income will just drive them into the grave, working. Fears of that type, and not my own, have kept me working for the past four years.
The law is not only an all consuming occupation, it's one that's soul destroying. Many "plaintiffs' lawyers" have really lost their humanity. Not all by any means, but quite a few. They really don't care about the people they represent in many instances. It's one of the thing that makes practicing law so dispiriting and damaging to your own soul. Most of the propaganda that lawyers and law firms of a certain type being there to help people is pure crap. They don't mean it, and everyone inside the law knows that. Simply practicing law, at some point, or perhaps more accurately being in litigation, is participating on a fraud on the public.
I'm told I'm really good at the law. If that's true it's proof you can be good at something that you really don't love. I'm beyond the point of not loving it anymore.
I entered the profession for the same reasons a lot of people do. My earlier career had not worked out and I didn't seem to have any other place to go. I had started off obtaining a very difficult science degree only to graduate into an economy where I was unemployable. This is, I'd note, more common than a person might suppose. There was no family business to step into. What I really wanted to do, and still do, wasn't open to me. Even at that, I hesitated and I chose not to enter the law school class I was admitted into. I waited a year hoping to find work, and didn't. Soldiering was the work that year. I guess I could have chosen to make that a career, and in some ways I"m surprised I didn't.
The last year of my undergraduate degree I tried switch to a different field:
I'd be offered a summer position with them, but not until years later, at which point I was already practicing law and engaged. I've posted on that before.
If 'd had my druthers, which hardly anyone does, I would have have been a rancher. I have been around agriculture which is to say that I would have ranched full time. I came close it without really realizing it after law school right as my father was looking at retiring. We came close to the two of us starting a place, and then he died. I abandoned that particular effort in order to help my mother, who had no such interest. Laster I found she was baffled why I hadn't let her know.
My wife and I have always had cattle, but it's never been a full time thing. Sometimes it's promised to almost be that, but it never has. Now I'm 63 and time has moved on. It's something I'll never recover from. It was one of the goals that kept me at my desk job, and now the goal can't be met.
Time and effort wasted.
There are some things that are quite scary about time moving on, I'll note. Fear of death is not one of them. I constantly hear that people are supposed to be afraid of death, but I've lived pretty close to death my entire life and I'm not. If death arrives before my plans play out, well, so be it. Nobody knows the day nor the hour. Momento mori.
But what has moved on is the opportunity to complete a bunch of things I used to do and be engaged in before I started practicing law. That must show something about my own character, as other lawyers take long vacations and the like, but I don't really seem capable of devoting time to vocations and avocations. I'll leave it to the reader to decide which is which. The interest in those pursuits remains, however.
Gone is interest in the law itself. I'm not interested nor fascinated in it. I never loved it in the first place, but I have had over the years a reputation as being a legal scholar. I still get calls from various lawyers about legal situations which are rare or difficult. The difference is that I no longer find them interesting at all.
At one time, seeing as I was a lawyer, I really wanted to be a judge, which is a position for legal scholars, and I've applied within our system a bunch of times, and been encouraged to do so by judges. Now I'm too old, as mandatory retirement is at age 70 and the committee isn't going to appoint somebody at age 63 for a single term. Or I suppose not. To my surprise, they recently almost in fact did that in a district in which very few people were applying for the position. The past two Governors and the Judicial Nominating Committee have pretty much wrecked the process for successful lawyers, so applications are way down.
Indeed, one of my frustrations with the practice of law has been watching the decline of the judicial nominating system, which has grown much more political over the last few decades. When I started out you could really see why various judges got appointed to their positions. When Matt Mead became Governor, however, he had an agenda of appointing women and that's what he was going to do. That was a politically motivated bias and it meant if there was a man up for the same position, he wasn't getting it.
Governor Gordon has had a very strong bias towards prosecutors, although there are some exceptions.
The oncoming Governor, Barlow, will be interesting to watch in this regard. He's a professional himself (veterinarian) and perhaps he'll take a more informed and balanced view.
Anyhow, after 36 years of this, it's time to move on, so I'm moving on. I'll complete this year, but I'm not starting another one.
Indeed, on the topic, I'm capable of reading the signs. The American dream is that you live to age 100 and die in your sleep. You probably aren't going to.
Over the last couple of years I've watched some of the lawyers who are older than me decline pretty seriously in some ways. And I'm declining too. I had colon surgery out of the blue, something that probably could have been averted if I'd had regular colon checkups like you are supposed to. Going through that process I ended up having an odd thing on my thyroid discovered. Half my thyroid ended up coming out, although I probably could have avoided that if I was willing to risk it being nothing, which didn't seem to be a solid risk at the time. Now I have to take pills every day for the first time in my life.
A year ago the eye doctor noted something peculiar in my eye. Last week, on my follow up exam, it was clear it was a tiny cataract It's not a problem yet, but it probably will be in "ten years". I'm young for a cataract, but it's due to an injury.
I've endured a lot of injuries over the years.
I'm considerably more tired than I used to be, and my physical stamina, still pretty good, has declined. I could probably address this as people ought to at my age by exercise, but my schedule is incredibly burdened.
I don't handle stress anywhere near as good as I used to, however, and stress is a killer.
So, in four months, I'm done.
The big challenge now is letting everyone know, and getting my wife to accept it. That part isn't going to be easy at all.
It's not going to be easy as at least my long suffering spouse doesn't want to believe I'm at this point. I've been mentioning it, but when retirement comes up, it's always "you can't". Retirement is, she suggests, a year further in the future than I imagine it.
A year isn't much, but it's a year. I hear all the time that somebody retired and then died, as if retirement killed them. Really, they just hang on too long.
And again, that hanging on is a funny thing. I've watched one lawyer who has no family (divorced) and who has no faith keep on going to work. I guess it's his identify . I mentioned retiring to him once and he scoffed, saying "good luck". Of course, I don't have to pay alimony and I don't take expensive trips.
I've also watched a couple of very ill lawyers hang on after their illness set in. It provided a distraction I guess. Indeed, on the very odd occasion I mention this to anyone people always suggest a law job I could take in retirement, which isn't what I have in mind at all.
In contrast, one lawyer who experienced a health care scare recently, one year younger than me told me that next year was definitely the date. When I expressed doubt, the reply was "watch me".
What you are supposed to say, like Edith Piaf, is that you have no regrets about your career as a lawyer.
I can't say that.
I probably should feel that way. Just yesterday, once again, thinking over the past 36 years I came to the conclusion that with the box I was in, I did the only thing I could do. True or not, and it's probably true, hindsight being 20/20, I'd have avoided the law like the plague if I'd known what it was like. As noted above, I'm sure there are people who look back and say they loved every second of it.
I'm not one of them.
To compound things, I've been in litigation the entire time. That was a mistake, as I'm not well suited for it internally. I'm an introvert and I don't like being in extroverted situations. I just couldn't find a way out of it.
Well, anyhow, page one of the concluding chapter.
So now, I have to start informing people. This isn't going to be fun at all, but knowing myself, if I don't, it won't become real.
I've never liked doing trials. Some lawyers claim to love them, and I suppose they do. There's something in their personalities, a defect really, which requires them to test their wits against other people. Most lawyers don't like doing them, and most of the lawyers who say they do, are lying.
Like baseball players before a game, most lawyers have some sort of ritual before they try a case. At one time, as late as the early 90s, that ritual for quite a few involved heavy drinking. I don't think that's the case so much anymore. Frankly, while conservatives are all worked up about it in some quarters, I think that's one of the things that the massive introduction of women into the law changed, and for the better.
When I get close to trials, I usually rewatch The Wild Bunch. I know that's odd, but I love that movie and I find it very engaging. Part of the reason that I watch it in this context is that the protagonists in the move are basically all mercenaries of a sort. Yes, I know that they're criminals, but still. And there's not one redeeming person in their whole contest.
Everyone who likes movies is familiar with the famous concluding gunbattle of the movie. But that's not the last scene. Former gang member turned bounty hunter Deke Thornton is waiting outside the town gate as evening arrives, having sent the dead bodies of the gang back with the other bounty hunters. Elderly gang member Skyes rides up with Mexican Indians and the following exchange occurs.
Sykes: I didn't expect to find you here.
Deke Thornton: Why not? I sent them back. That's all I said I'd do.
Sykes: They didn't get very far.
Deke Thornton: I figured.
Sykes: What are your plans, now?
Deke Thornton: Drift around down here. Try to stay out of jail.
Sykes: Well, me and the boys got some work to do. You want to come with us? It ain't like it used to be, but it'll do.
That's how I feel about things. I intend to hunt, fish, work cattle, write and put in a garden.
But even if I only do a faction of that stuff, it'll be okay.
News broke yesterday about a decision in which the State of Wyoming took place regarding silencers and short barreled rifles and shotguns, all things controlled under the National Firearms Act.
A local news story:
As always, with such things, we like to go to the source, as the press so rarely gets these stories correct. This one is definitely being misreported in some news organs.
The Court did not strike the statutory provisions down, as it was urged to do, and as some parts of the press are reporting it did. In fact it denied declaratory relief. Rather, what it did, was to find that the basis for the NFA, which was passed as a taxation bill, fails once no tax is applicable.
That makes perfect sense.
What doesn't is that the Court didn't take the next logical step, which would have been just to strike those portions of the NFA down. Rather, it simply enjoined the NFA from being enforced as to those provisions on the specific plaintiffs in the suit.
Eh?
That result is frankly rather weird, and not sustainable. This will be appealed, I think, to the Federal Court of Appeals. Having said that, the Trump Administration, in spite of supposedly being "pro gun", was fully defending the law and it might make a strategic decision not to appeal. If it doesn't, this ruling is so narrow that it effectively is a nullity.
Here's the court's entire decision.
On the items in question, I'd like to see the NFA struck down. Without the taxation element of it, it really fails to make any sense.
The big question, of course, is automatic weapons, which are also addressed by the NFA. They are not addressed by this decision, and the taxation aspect of the system still applies to them. Some argue that the NFA violates the 2nd Amendment by restricting them, but I frankly do not think it does as I'm not certain, if analyzed in the 18th Century prospective of the 2nd Amendment, that they would be considered "arms". Rather, I think they'd likely be regarded as "ordinance", as they're actually more akin to cannon, in context, than small arms, in context.
Something remarkable happened last week. Charges were dismissed against a former Olympian for vandalizing the reflecting pool. Anyone who looked at the story knew the charges were false. Indeed, they were so patently false that anyone who sincerely believed them would have to be regarded as a dim besotted delusional
The really remarkable thing, however, is that the dismissal document basically admitted that. It pegged the source of the reflecting pool problem as what it is, a bad Rhino Lining job. That's stunning.
And what's more stunning is that, after a couple of days, Trump was complaining about the charges being dismissed.
That might mean we've reached an "Is Paris burning?" moment.
On August 1, 1944 Dietrich Hugo Hermann von Choltitz was appointed as the military Governor of Paris.1 The appointment came two months after the Allies had landed at Normandy and mere days before the Allies landed in Southern France. Already it was obvious to astute German commanders and the gig was up. Indeed, just two weeks prior some of them had attempted to blow Hitler off the face of the Earth so that they could affect a coup and work towards a negotiated settlement of the war.
On the same day, August 15, that the Allies landed in southern France, the French police in Paris went on strike. On August 19 the city erupted in a general insurrection. On August 23 Hitler ordered that the city be completely destroyed before it fell into Allied hands.
Von Choltitz didn't do it.
In fact, he stayed in Paris and surrendered.
Dietrich von Choltitz with Philippe Leclerc de Hauteclocque and Jacques Soustelle in the M3 Scout Car after the fall of Paris.
How is this relevant to our current situation?
Well, Von Cholitz had been a loyal commander up to that point. But he did know right from wrong. And he was clear eyed. He could see the Allies would win. He could see that there'd just been an open attempt to overthrow the government. He chose to openly disobey his orders rather than perform them, which is why Parish was spared destruction.
This appears in a way to be what just happened.
A couple of weeks ago a Trump cabinet official admitted, for the first time in a television interview, that Joe Biden won the 2020 election (he hasn't been seen, to my knowledge, on television since). That was a direct attack on the foundational myth of the Trump interregnum. Basically, it was an explosive device placed in Der Fibber's aircraft that failed to go off, or perhaps that figures throwing a lifeline out to reality as he can read the handwriting on the wall. The act of the Justice Department's lawyers, however, was an outright "we don't care what outrageous lie Trump told we're not doing it" moment. It was outright rebellion.
And Trump's reaction to it has been anemic, or as he likes to say, low energy. He's complained about it like a toddler.
While this is going on, the Senate has made it fairly clear that they won't confirm Todd Blanche if there's any risk of the Trump judicial slush fund going forward, and some are making it clear they just won't do it. Of course Wyoming's Senators, the outgoing Cynthia Cyberbucks Lummis and John Stern Look, Lim Noodle Barrasso are supporting Trump. They can be planned on supporting Der Fibber right up until its not politically convenient to do so, at which point they'll reveal that they never loved him. Be that as it may, Harriet Hageman has shoved Trump out of the pickup in order to vote against the appropriations bill with the SAVE Act in it, even though Trump endorsed her. She might not have to fear Trump endorsing anyone else, although a late in the day switch to John Holtz might be amusing (it won't occur).
Suddenly, rather obviously, disobeying Trump is really setting in. The bloom must be off the rose and the stinkweeds starting to set in.
Die Alter Kämpfer
A big event in Nazi Germany, for Nazis, was the annual November 8 gathering in which they celebrated the failed Beer Hall Putsch. The last time Hitler attended was November 8, 1943. After that, the war just was going too badly.
Stalingrad had been retaken by the Red Army in February.
The purpose of the annual gathering was like any nostalgic event, even though it celebrated events that weren't really all that far in the past. Hitler's speech on that occasion was fiery. He'd never be back. Nazi Germany's end was approaching pretty quickly, even if at that point the public didn't realize it. Some in the German military already did, however, and were actively looking for a way to put an end to the regime.
This past week Trump's Alter Kämpfer in Congress, now a diminished set, gathered in true Nazi style to berate Dr. Anthony Fauci. Many outsiders have been baffled. They should not have been. The Nazis have gathered to relish their past and to remind themselves of their hatred of the Jews, or, in contemporary terms, to gathering around one of their great myths, COVID was a fib and Anthony Fauci is a monster.
The public large reacted with, eh?
Frankly, Rand Paul shot the last bolt of credibility he had left, having gained some during the descent of Thomas Massie, who dared to take on the Epstein files. Now that's gone. But he's not the only one.
Still, you can see the Alter Kämpfer rally one last time around around the Blutfahne. In spite of it all, the seas of dead, see they were right all along. . . except they weren't. But that hasn't stopped such figures as Ken Pendergraft from coming out, in his case, to say see, we weren't "knuckleheads".
No, you were anti scientific ignoramuses and we all know it.
This same spirit is part of the reason that all of a sudden Reichsgesundheitsführer Kennedy has been fully released. Kennedy is a complete nutcase and a quack. For the most part, the Administration has kept him under a lid so he couldn't be too destructive. But now, like Stephen Miller, he's been loosed as there's nothing left to lose and maybe the deluded can be deluded again.
Kennedy is back out there unleashed making statements against vaccinations. Over the weekend he said that Lyme disease and came from gain-of-function research, stating:
Lyme disease almost certainly came from these experiments and is now devastating our country.
That's idiotic.
The 5,300 mummified body of Ötzi the Iceman contained the bacteria that causes Lymes disease. Genomic tracking can trace the disease back 60,000 years.
Genetic tracking of RSV shows a common ancestor between human RSV and bovine respiratory syncytial virus (BRSV) to have existed 921 years ago. 338 years ago is the point at which human RSV-A and RSV-B split from their shared ancestor. That would make it a newish disease, compared to Lymes anyhow, but it's not a result of "gain of function research". It's a result of agriculture.
Das Ende
As we progress towards the fall election, and on into next year, we can look for these trends to accelerate. Der Fibber, just like Der Fuhrer, has an accelerating mental health collapse. That is making him more and more erratic. His policies are failing and he will lash out as they continue to fail. A war he was supposed to easily win is being handily lost and dragging on. Heads will roll.
But disloyalty will now increase. Already some out in the field are openly disobeying Der Fibber and no longer working towards Der Fuhrer. At the end, in 1945, even Himmler was looking for a way to betray Hitler and cut a deal of his own. We can bet that Vance and Rubio contemplate such a means out every day, and probably every hour of every day. Traditionally, in a lame duck term, cabinet ministers begin to flee as soon as the midterm results are in. In this administration, that will happen in spakes as people hoping for a political or administrative future look for a way to surrender, and to distance themselves (with tell all books) from Trump.
The true believes, of course, people like Stephen Miller, will remain, and their influence will accordingly grow. The next two and half years are going to be chaos.
January to May 1945 were the bloodiest months of the war in Europe.
Fußnoten
1. I've generally tried to avoid comparing the Trumpites and Trump's administration to the Nazis, but frankly it's impossible not to do so now.
I had originally avoided calling the administration fascist, but it is. It has all the classic features of fascism and it's perfectly comparable to fascism in early fascist Italy while democracy was still liming along a bit. That's right where we are at. The question is whether we descend further into it, or pull out. Right now, it looks like we might actually be able to pull out.
It's often debated if Nazism is fascism or sui generis. It certainly has fascist elements at a large scale. What really distinguishes it is the degree that Nazism was autarkic where as fascism favored state capitalism. Strong elements of both are present in the Trump administration's economic policies.
The other defining characteristic of Nazism that was lacking in fascism was the absolute racial hatred that was a feature of Nazism. Both it and fascism are extremely nationalistic, but fascism doesn't really feature racial hatred to anywhere near the same degree as Nazism. Racial hatred has been an increasing element of Trumpism as time has gone by and it has members who outright advocate for making the United States a white Protestant nation.
