Trump's Speech to a Joint Session of Congress

by Jeff Steele — last modified Mar 05, 2025 10:06 AM

Cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump spoke to a joint session of Congress, telling a lot of lies and boring me nearly to tears.

Today I am going to give my impression of cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump's address to a joint session of Congress last night. Let me fully caveat this by saying that if you have absolutely anything else to do, no matter how unproductive it may seem, it is probably a better use of your time than reading my thoughts about Trump's speech. Frankly, watching paint dry would probably be more useful and maybe even more interesting. For those of you choosing to continue reading, I can summarize my opinion succinctly. The speech sucked.

There was a time that regardless of whatever you thought of Trump, you had to concede that he could give an entertaining, if largely false and not particularly interesting, speech. But this one strained my capacity to stay awake. It was interminably long and, not to put too fine of a point on it, boring. It was the longest such speech in U.S. history. In hindsight, I should have followed Representative Al Green's example and gotten myself ejected from my living room. But having neither the foresight nor a Sergeant of Arms at hand, I was stuck watching for the entire ordeal.

Trump began his speech with a fanciful description of the state of our country. Trump's presentation had little in common with the reality that most Americans are experiencing. It's one thing to put lipstick on a pig, but being completely delusional is another thing entirely. Trump described a country that most of us wouldn't recognize. As Trump went through his list of what he considers accomplishments, Americans throughout the country must have realized how little those things matter to their daily lives. Trump spent less than two minutes discussing the cost of living and never mentioned Medicaid. Grocery prices are still high and getting higher. The stock market is down. Consumer confidence is down. People's lives are not getting better, and no amount of gaslighting is going to prevent them from understanding this. Moreover, a number of Trump's proclaimed accomplishments are currently tied up in court and have not taken effect. Trump even took credit for several of former President Joe Biden's accomplishments. While Trump claimed that he had inherited a disastrous economy from Biden, the truth is just the opposite. Four weeks ago, the Atlanta Federal Reserve was estimating that first-quarter GDP growth would be 3.9%. Now it is expecting GDP to be -2.8% down. Great job everyone.

As is the Republican tendency, when all else fails, they turn to cultural issues. Trump could hardly run on the economy. Hence, he devoted considerable time to attacking transgender people. He repeatedly returned to transgender issues throughout his speech and probably spent more time talking about trans people than any other topic. You would never know that Trump recently hosted two prominent trans women at Mar-a-Lago. I am very skeptical that those watching from home who are witnessing growing inflation, job losses, and uncertain futures really believe that the trans community is worth that amount of attention.

Let's all take a moment and spare a thought for the fact-checkers who are probably still tied to their computers attempting to address Trump's full list of falsehoods. Trump told lies big and small. He claimed that the U.S. DOGE Service (DOGE) discovered $8 million being spent to "make mice transgender". The doge.gov website lists no such savings but, more importantly, Trump was probably referring to research involving the injection of hormones into animals (including mice) in order to research the effects with regard to disease prevention or susceptibility. There are no transgender mice because a mouse cannot tell you how it identifies. Trump claimed that a drop in interest rates was a result of DOGE cuts. In fact, interest rates dropped because investors were fleeing the collapsing stock market and buying bonds. Trump even fell for Shadow President Elon Musk's Social Security lies. Musk recently presented a list of extremely old people whose records are still in the Social Security database. Part of this confusion was a lack of understanding of how the version of COBOL being used on the computers handles dates. More importantly, Musk provided no evidence that those of unlikely ages were actually receiving benefits. Nevertheless, Trump claimed that fraudulent funds were being paid out to such individuals. There is no evidence to support that allegation, and a previous investigation identified the problem but determined that it was not cost-effective to correct the issue (there is no cost savings when funds are not be paid out). Trump also lied about getting rid of an electric vehicle mandate. Since no such mandate ever existed, Trump could hardly get rid of it.

When it came to DOGE and Musk, Trump was a bit all over the place. He recognized Musk — who was seated in the gallery — and described him as the "head of DOGE". This is legally problematic because government lawyers have argued in court that Musk is simply an advisor to the President and has no connection to DOGE. I know of one court case in which plaintiffs have already submitted Trump's remark to buttress their case. Trump also praised Musk and his group of young computer geeks who have taken over running broad swathes of the government, but then went on to complain about "unelected bureaucrats". Apparently, the irony escaped him.

Trump's supporters have often stressed that unlike other candidates, he is against foreign intervention. I don't know if those who made such claims have changed their tune or, as cult members tend to do, simply embraced the new reality. Either way, the non-interventionist Trump was nowhere to be seen. He said that the U.S. would take control of Greenland, "one way or another". Similarly, discussing the Panama Canal, Trump said that it was built by Americans for Americans and suggested that the U.S. would regain sovereignty over it. In this regard, one omission was any mention of Gaza and Trump's hopes that the Palestinians could be evicted and ownership of the land given to the U.S.

Trump spent a considerable amount of time recognizing members of the audience. In what could have been a heartwarming moment, Trump singled out a young cancer survivor who dreamed of being a police officer. At Trump's direction, the head of the U.S. Secret Service made the boy an honorary member of the service and gave him a badge and ID card. The reality, however, is that just earlier in his speech, Trump had praised DOGE's cuts which, among other things, removed funding for pediatric cancer research. The boy may well owe his life to the types of programs that Trump and Musk have just eliminated. Similarly, Trump informed another audience member that he had just been awarded acceptance at a military academy. The young man seemed well-qualified and was certainly shocked and excited. I don't begrudge him this honor in the least. However, I found Trump's exploitation of this moment to be distasteful. I saw that some compared Trump's performance to Oprah Winfrey's famous "and you get a car" moment. But to me, what this brought to mind was a king bestowing favors on his subjects. I suspect that is an image that Trump would not necessarily discourage.

As I said earlier, to hear Trump tell it, everything is going great in the country. The reality is different. Trump did not mention the stock market collapse that had occurred the very day of his speech. This has been a particularly bad week for stocks thanks to the tariffs Trump imposed on Canada and Mexico. But, Trump's reaction to the economic issues facing the country was to brush them off. He claimed that we are facing "a little disturbance" and, when talking about farmers who are being hit particularly hard by Trump's policies, said that they wouldn't mind the difficulties.

Trump concluded his speech by saying that the future will be like nothing we've seen before. Frankly, that is exactly my fear. Until now, I have never seen a President who was so squarely determined to destroy our government, our economy, our foreign relations, and our standing in the world. If Trump can do this amount of damage in just a few weeks, imagine what he will do in four years?

Anon says:
Mar 05, 2025 02:19 PM
I don't know how you managed to watch the whole thing. I was only able to stand about 10 minutes before I ejected myself.
Jeff Steele says:
Mar 05, 2025 02:26 PM
That was a good move. I should have done the same thing.
Anonymous says:
Mar 05, 2025 02:56 PM
Great summary. I thought you might mention Trump's mispronunciation and joking about Lesotho, which I found crass and low even for him.
Anonymous says:
Mar 05, 2025 11:02 PM
Agreed. So very distasteful
Amomynous says:
Mar 05, 2025 03:33 PM
Great summary and it's a great service you are providing. I wanted to know what he said but couldn't bring myself to watch. The paint on my walls is already dry but I watched it anyway, mostly with my eyes closed. It was refreshing as usual to get your take on that event today, thanks Jeff!
Anon says:
Mar 05, 2025 09:06 PM
I also appreciate your summaries. I was interested in the point you made earlier about Elon and interest rates. I watched the entire Trump speech. I noticed that many of his guests were wronged women...the volleyball player, the deep fake victim, a foster girl,mothers and sisters of murdered women, a cop's widow, Marc Fogel's mother. They were clearly trying to appeal to female voters with the balance of guests.
Jeff Steele says:
Mar 05, 2025 09:20 PM
That's a good point that I hadn't noticed.
Abomynous says:
Mar 05, 2025 05:52 PM
I appreciate the breakdown. I skived; I couldn't handle that much trumping straight to the face
Anonymous says:
Mar 05, 2025 08:03 PM
Thank you
Clark says:
Mar 05, 2025 08:50 PM
Man. That was a great speech. He was right, nothing he could say would give him praise by the Dem’s. They (Dems) showed absolute disrespect to the office of the president, showed their contempt towards their fellow citizens by not clapping for the brain cancer survivor, the west point admit, or the foster parent of 44 kids! They are out of touch. This is why they lost and will continue to loose with such stance against average American.
Jeff Steele says:
Mar 05, 2025 08:55 PM
Not surprisingly, both you and Trump are wrong. There was something he could have said for which Democrats would have praised him: "I have just accepted JD's resignation and appointed AOC in his place and I hereby submit my own resignation". The praise would have been overwhelming.
Anon says:
Mar 05, 2025 09:00 PM
I think they would clap if he admitted he incited the January 6 mob to attack the Capitol. Or admitted that the Biden election wasn't stolen. I would gladly clap if he told those truths.
Anonymous says:
Mar 06, 2025 08:34 AM
We were supposed to be impressed that he used a pediatric brain cancer survivor for political entertainment, while at the same time gutting NIH and pretty much halting the work being done there to save the lives of kids with cancer? You cannot be this dumb, can you?
Anon says:
Mar 05, 2025 11:39 PM
Today we learned that cars won't be subject to the tariffs for at least 30 days. Am I a cynic to think that there is some stock manipulation going on here?
Anonymous says:
Mar 06, 2025 08:38 AM
The "transgender mouse" thing could be a misunderstanding of what transGENIC mice are. Transgenic mice are created by introducing a new gene into the laboratory mouse, mainly to understand how that gene functions in the context of disease models. Transgenic mice are used to study a wide range of diseases, and are a critical building block in preclinical research necessary to identify new pharmaceutical targets. As you pointed out, transgenic mice are not great models to study topics related to transgender people because mice cannot report their gender identity to us.
Jeff Steele says:
Mar 06, 2025 08:44 AM
I thought this at first as well, but when I looked into it, I found that we spend 100s of millions on transgenic mice, not 8 million. Also, the Trump administration released a list of projects to support the claim. The projects all dealt with the study of hormones. For instance, doctors have injected mice with hormones in order to study how it affects the response to HIV. Because the hormones are described as "gender-affirming", Trump and the DOGE boys think it means transgender. Here is their list:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/[…]/
Anonymous says:
Mar 06, 2025 09:35 AM
Yeah, I haven't ever thought about it (beyond using transgenic mice in my own research) but your numbers are likely correct - transgenic mice truly are the workhorse of biomedical research.

I admit I avoided the whole speech so I missed the context in which he brought it up - that's why I come here to read your recaps instead! Just skimming through the list, the studies appear to a mix of basic and clinical research. Here's my assessment:

The first one is a bit opaque, so I'm not sure what the proposal was about. It could indeed be that the scientists are proposing to treat mice similar to those who get gender affirming care and then investigate HIV outcomes. But mice are neither a good model for gender-affirming care nor HIV, so I'd have to read the actual proposal.

The second one focuses on steroid use on ovarian function - not gender affirming care necessarily, because women get steroids for all sorts of reasons. Sounds like it's more likely fertility or ovarian development research instead of anything the administration would consider scandalous.

The third one actually mentions testosterone gender-affirming therapy in the context of breast cancer incidence. It isn't clear why their doing this, I'd have to look into it. For what it's worth, women get testosterone for many reasons, including menopause-associated issues, which might be why one of their test groups is to use mice where the ovaries have been taken out.

Fourth one is just a title, so no clue what the proposal was actually for or whether they were injecting mice with hormones.

Fifth one sounds really cool and again, manipulating hormones in mice could model many other clinical situations.

The last one actually uses the word 'gender' in the title which is confusing. Could it be that the actual proposal has both preclinical (mouse models) and clinical (patient data) aims? The quote they pulled out doesn't refer to any metrics of gender.

I hope this helps. In conclusion, they pulled a bunch of scary looking language out of grants, likely out of context. As usual.
Add comment

You can add a comment by filling out the form below. Plain text formatting. Web and email addresses are transformed into clickable links. Comments are moderated.