Search This Blog

Thursday, July 2, 2026

The Widening Gyre

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
-- W.B. Yeats


Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. The first year of the second Trump administration was full of ominous developments -- including a tranche of racist and anti-Semitic chats by prominent Young Republicans.  Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation, defended Tucker Carlson after his softball interview with Nazi wannabe Nick Fuentes.  Meanwhile, the Democrats grapple with their own extremists, including anti-Semites and hardcore leftists.  Seventy-two years after the fall of Joe McCarthy, some of the new leftists are saying "You're goddamn right we're communists!"

Most of the men I spoke with said that the president is abandoning his “America First” agenda, which is what attracted them to the Republican Party in the first place. Rather than defect to the Democratic Party, they want a more radical GOP—one led not by MAGA insiders such as J. D. Vance but by figures further to the right, who they believe can deliver on the promises that Trump has failed to keep on immigration and foreign policy. Some young activists, though, articulated a political vision that goes far beyond any Trump-campaign pledge. For them, the future of American conservatism should be rooted in a patriarchal version of Christianity and an unapologetic ethnonationalism.

...

For Kai Schwemmer, who is the national political director for the College Republicans of America as well as Utah County’s deputy elections clerk, embracing overtly racial nationalism isn’t just good in itself. It’s shrewd politics. “If we go back to this kind of civic nationalism”—the idea that America is united by shared ideals rather than common ethnicity or culture—“I think the Republican Party will end up losing,” Schwemmer told me. “Nationalism is not a dirty word,” he continued. “We can’t retreat from it, and we can’t retreat from having a more conservative Republican Party.” He said that the party’s future leaders must “appeal to the fears and worries of the majority of Americans, who are white.”
Speaking of potential leaders, Schwemmer identified a “big three” for young conservatives: Nick Fuentes, Tucker Carlson, and Candace Owens. This “dissident” wing, Schwemmer said, has displaced the “old guard”—figures such as Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson who first drew many young conservatives into politics.
None of the conservative activists I spoke with endorsed Fuentes unequivocally, and a couple condemned him, distancing themselves from the “groyper” label that his white-nationalist followers embrace. A member of the College Republicans at a private Ohio university estimated that only a minority of his group’s membership considered themselves fans of Fuentes, and most rejected the streamer’s blatant anti-Semitism. But he also conceded that about three-quarters of them “broadly sympathize” with Fuentes’s views. Skepticism of Israel, he told me, is the “dominant narrative” among his peers.

The Turning Point president from the southeastern university, however, has observed something much warmer, and more worrisome, than broad sympathy: the belief that Fuentes is a more genuine representative than Trump of the America First vision, not in spite of his anti-Semitism but because of it. “Almost all of Gen Z hates the Jews,” he told me. In his Turning Point chapter, he said, “Fuentes is the guy."

The DSA, in fact, seems to despise the Democratic Party. Darializa Avila Chevalier has called Joe Biden a “rapist” and wrote “Fuck Kamala Harris” on social media. She proceeded to be nominated for a House race in New York last week by Democratic voters who presumably do not all share those feelings. The DSA now includes a growing caucus of supporters in Congress, has mayoral candidates well positioned to win in several big cities, and has plans to throw its weight behind a yet-to-be-determined presidential candidate in 2028.
The DSA’s feelings about Democrats encompass not only the party’s leadership but also the philosophical commitments that have guided it since the New Deal: a mixed economy undergirded by democratic values. Chevalier, for instance, joined a post–October 7 celebratory rally and portrayed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a defensive response to Western “bullying.” She previously called for seizing land and the means of production and has repeatedly praised communism.

...

Militant anti-Zionism became a wedge that the group’s more radical activists used to drive away critics of authoritarianism on the left. In 2025, the group’s convention voted to officially remove its founding language allowing for the expulsion of members who worked for communist cells, and added a provision calling the Palestinian “right to resistance” a central tenet of the DSA. Having dismantled the guardrails that Harrington built to exclude communists, the group established new guardrails to exclude anybody opposed to Israel’s destruction. “Michael Harrington’s DSA is dead,” a dispatch from the proceedings gloated.
The DSA’s Red Star caucus was formed the year after the North Star caucus, in an apparent rebuke. It writes that nearly half of the members of the National Political Committee, the DSA’s highest leadership body, “openly identify as communists.”

These left-wing factions have realigned the organization in firm opposition to liberal democracy. In 2021, the DSA joined the São Paulo Forum, a communist-led international network—a move that would, one DSA member protested at the time, “support authoritarian governments who systematically violate the basic tenets of democratic socialism.” It proclaimed its solidarity with Venezuela under the dictatorship of Nicolás Maduro, and with Cuba under that of the Castro brothers. The DSA now locates its vision of the ideal society in the world’s most despotic regimes.

Wednesday, July 1, 2026

NRSC v. FEC

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. It includes a chapter on congressional and state elections.

 Rick Hasen at Slate:

As disastrous Supreme Court election cases go, Tuesday’s decision in National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission doesn’t make the list of complete abominations, like the court’s decision this term in Louisiana v. Callais killing off the remaining key part of the Voting Rights Act, or earlier decisions like 2010’s Citizens United that kicked off the unraveling of our campaign finance system. Indeed, it’s possible that the NRSC decision makes our campaign finance system a bit less distorted in bringing candidates and parties closer together. But NRSC, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh for the six Republican-appointed justices, is an excellent example of the Roberts court’s “deregulatory bootstrapping,” in which the court relies on its earlier partial overruling of precedents—that only makes things worse—to justify more changes in the law. Fundamental change to campaign finance will have to wait for a new Supreme Court.

...

The court went through a period in the early 2000s when it was deferential to Congress’ judgments as to the need for contribution limits and for spending limits on corporations and unions, and in one of those cases, Colorado II, from 2001, the Supreme Court held that Congress could limit how much money political parties may spend in coordination and cooperation with candidates. The court reasoned that without these limits, large donors could seek improper influence over candidates by giving money through political parties.

...

In Tuesday’s opinion in NRSC, the court overturned Colorado II, and said that the part of federal campaign finance law limiting how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates violates the First Amendment. The court pointed to the “unique” role that political parties play in helping candidates win, and that they have their own First Amendment rights.

But the court also pointed to the development of super PACs as a reason to overturn the limits. All of these outside groups are unaccountable, spreading negative messages. Parties help preserve democracy in the court majority’s view, and it was only fair to free the parties of limits on them.

Tuesday, June 30, 2026

Trump's Predator Problem

Our new book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. Scandals persist.  Especially Epstein.

 Kelsey Dallas and Amy Howe at SCOTUSblog:

The Supreme Court on Monday announced that it will not hear an appeal by President Donald Trump seeking review of the $5 million jury verdict entered against him in the sexual abuse and defamation case filed by journalist E. Jean Carroll. The petition for review was conferenced by the justices for the first time on June 25 after being scheduled for a conference in February and then rescheduled more than a dozen times.

Carroll filed the lawsuit that led to Trump’s petition in 2022 in a federal court in New York. She asserted that Trump had sexually assaulted her in a dressing room at a Manhattan department store in 1996 and then defamed her in 2022 after she went public with her assault allegations. A jury ultimately awarded Carroll $5 million, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit upheld that verdict.

Marilyn W. Thompason at The Guardian:

A woman known as Jane Doe 4 in the Jeffrey Epstein files is “staying off the grid” and lives in fear of retaliation from the Trump administration amid an escalating controversy over its handling of her case, according to a family member.

“Trauma is brutal. Chronic trauma destroys,” said the relative, who described the woman’s life as layers of abuse dating back to early childhood. “She’s coping as best she can.”

The woman had four interviews with FBI agents in 2019 that keep resurfacing in the Epstein sex-trafficking scandal. She made unproven allegations she was abused by the New York financier in the 1980s, then sexually assaulted by Donald Trump, when she was between 13 and 15 years old. The White House has called her allegations “completely baseless” and “backed by zero credible evidence”, a claim it said was supported by the fact that the Biden administration’s justice department knew about the allegations but “did nothing with them”.

She is one of the only alleged Epstein victims to have directly accused Trump, and irregularities in the justice department’s handling of her case files have now become a rallying point for critics of acting attorney general Todd Blanche, who is the US president’s nominee for permanent appointment.

A federal judge in Washington last week gave Blanche until 2 July to produce unredacted versions of files the justice department has already released, or provide an explanation for why it cannot produce the unredacted records. The Department of Justice (DoJ) was also ordered to release interview notes related to Jane Doe 4’s allegations. The decision was part of a civil case against Blanche brought by journalist Katie Phang.

 

Monday, June 29, 2026

SCOTUS Decides Case on Mail Ballots

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. It includes a chapter on congressional and state elections.

California sends mail ballots to every registered voter and allows the counting of ballots postmarked by election day even if they arrive a week later.  This process helps explain why the state's vote count is slow Despite the total lack of evidence for significant cheating,  the slow count gives Trumpists an occasion to spread lies about election fraud.

 Amy Howe at SCOTUSblog:

Just over four months before the 2026 midterm elections, the Supreme Court on Monday upheld a Mississippi law that allows mail-in ballots to be counted as long as they are postmarked by, and received within five days of, Election Day. By a vote of 5-4, the justices in Watson v. Republican National Committee rejected an argument, made by the political parties and others challenging the law, that federal law requires mail-in ballots to be received by Election Day.

Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett concluded that “the election-day statutes require the electorate’s choice to be made on election day. That occurs so long as election day is the deadline for individuals to vote—as it is in Mississippi. But the election-day statutes do not set a deadline for ballot receipt, so they do not prevent Mississippi from counting ballots postmarked before election day yet received afterward.”

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Samuel Alito argued that “from this Nation’s founding until the last few decades of the 20th century—a period that spans the enactment of all three election-day statutes—having an ‘election’ on a particular day meant completing ballot collection on that day.”

Mississippi passed the law at the center of the dispute in 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Four years later, the Republican National Committee and the Mississippi Republican Party, along with a Mississippi voter and a county election official, went to federal court in Gulfport, Mississippi, to challenge the post-election ballot deadline; the Libertarian Party of Mississippi filed a similar lawsuit a few weeks later, which was combined with the first suit. They argued that Mississippi’s law clashes with a federal law, first passed by Congress in 1845, that designates the Tuesday after the first Monday in November as the “election day.”


Sunday, June 28, 2026

Billionaire Bucks

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics.  Among other things, it discusses campaign finance.

Bruce Mehlman:

Campaign costs are increasing much faster than inflation, with the richest Americans increasingly dominating election finance. Does this make our democracy more robust & resilient, or does it undermine trust, accelerate alienation & drive populism? 

Source: Americans for Tax Fairness 


Friday, June 26, 2026

Trump v. Republicans in Congress


Trump is acting without regard for the political needs of Republicans in Congress.  An unpopular war is just part of it. Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen at Axios:
  • The big picture: Trump has spent his second term steamrolling his own party, confident the lawmakers he humiliates will keep voting his way. You see it everywhere:He canceled the signing of a landmark bipartisan housing bill just hours before the ceremony — trying to strong-arm the Senate into passing the SAVE America Act, a sweeping voter ID bill with no realistic path to 60 (or even 50) votes.
  • He dismissed the housing bill — which his own White House had called "one of the most significant pieces of housing affordability legislation in American history" — as "of minor importance."
  • He berated the "Four Republican Losers" in the Senate who voted this week to rein in his Iran war powers, calling the rebuke "poorly timed and meaningless." (Hours after his barrage, Republicans passed a symbolic reversal.)
  • He blew up a bipartisan scramble aimed at renewing the government's FISA surveillance powers, demanding the SAVE Act on voting rules be bolted on. He let the authority lapse rather than back down.
  • He yanked his own intelligence nominee, Jay Clayton, from a confirmation hearing hours before it began, leaving the nation's spy agencies under an acting director both parties distrust.
  • He refused to brief Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and other senators on his Iran deal until after the text was finally released, leaving them to defend terms they hadn't seen.
  • He blindsided senators by proposing a $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization" fund just as they moved a $70 billion immigration package, defending Jan. 6 rioters who attacked the building where the senators work.

Thursday, June 25, 2026

Plotzing Plutocrats

Our new book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. It includes a chapter on congressional,  state, and local elections.

Wealthy, self-financing candidates are hardly shoo-insMichael Bloomberg (president, 2020) and Meg Whitman (CA governor 2010) are examples of plutocrats who plotzed.

Praveena Somasundaram, Clara Ence Morse and Erin Cox at WP:
Wealthy Americans have spent hundreds of millions from their fortunes in their quests to join Congress. It usually doesn’t pay off.

The most recent example came Tuesday in Maryland, when billionaire and former congressman David Trone’s record-breaking $25 million comeback bid ended in defeat in the Democratic primary. Trone, who amassed his fortune by co-founding a national alcohol retailer, has been one of the most prolific self-funders of congressional campaigns. He spent $134 million across six races over the course of a decade, winning three terms in the House but spending $101 million on contests he lost.

This year, voters gave mixed results to self-funded candidates on the ballot for state offices too. In California, billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer spent $218 million on his Democratic campaign for governor but narrowly failed to advance to the general election. In Georgia, billionaire health care executive Rick Jackson won the Republican gubernatorial primary after spending more than $100 million on his campaign. the Republican gubernatorial primary after spending more than $100 million on his campaign.
Of the top 20 self-funded congressional campaigns since 2000 by spending, only four were successful, according to a Washington Post analysis of publicly available campaign finance data from OpenSecrets and the Federal Election Commission. Together, the candidates spent more than $600 million on their campaigns.

 

Wednesday, June 24, 2026

Leftward Ho, Gotham City

Our new book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. It includes a chapter on congressional,  state, and local elections.

Nicholas Fandos at NYT:
Mayor Zohran Mamdani and his allies swept a series of congressional primaries in New York City on Tuesday in a remarkable show of strength for the insurgent left that sent shock waves through the Democratic Party.

Mr. Mamdani’s candidates toppled a pair of incumbents backed by the city’s political establishment, including major labor unions and the House Democratic leader. Another candidate backed by the mayor won an open House seat, and a handful of democratic socialist challengers he supported were winning down the ballot.

For months, Mr. Mamdani threw himself and his energized political organization into the three marquee congressional contests, campaigning late into the night in the race’s final days and calling the election a referendum on the direction of the party.
...

Brad Lander, 56, a close ally whom Mr. Mamdani urged to run for Congress, ran up a staggering 30-point margin in the affluent 10th District in Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan. He defeated Representative Daniel Goldman, a wealthy Levi Strauss heir who had opposed the mayor in last year’s elections and had close ties to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the pro-Israel lobby.

Claire Valdez, 36, a little-known state assemblywoman also recruited by Mr. Mamdani to run, ran up larger than expected margins for the open seat in the Seventh District in a gentrifying swath of Brooklyn and Queens so far left it has been nicknamed the “Commie Corridor.”
She defeated Antonio Reynoso, the Brooklyn borough president, who had far deeper roots in the district and the support of the popular congresswoman, Representative Nydia Velázquez, who is retiring; the left-leaning Working Families Party; and nearly every major labor union in the city.

And Mr. Mamdani’s allies even won in the predominantly Black and Dominican 13th District in Upper Manhattan and the Bronx. In perhaps the night’s most surprising victory, Darializa Avila Chevalier, 32, another democratic socialist who entered the race as a political unknown, narrowly knocked off Representative Adriano Espaillat, the influential chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

 

Tuesday, June 23, 2026

GOP Groups Meddling in Democratic Primaries


In the 2012 Missouri  Senate race, incumbent Democrat Claire McCaskill ran ads during the GOP primary campaign saying that Todd Akin was "too conservative."  The idea of the "attack ad" was to drive GOP voters to Akin, her weakest potential foe.  It worked.  Other campaigns have tried variations of the "pick your opponent" ploy.  And it has happened in 2025 and 2026. (See the LA Mayor race.)


Judd Legum at Popular Information:
A network of purportedly progressive super PACs, spending millions in Democratic primaries across the country, is funded by a Republican dark money group, the American Prosperity Alliance (APA).

Newly filed FEC documents reveal that three PACs that claim to oppose Trump and Republican policies — Lead Left PAC, Real Change PAC, and California Blue PAC — are wholly funded by Conservative Americans PAC, another super PAC. Conservative Americans PAC, in turn, received all of its funding this cycle, over $30 million, from the APA.

The APA is a key part of the GOP financial infrastructure. It was established in 2022 and received $5.5 million in seed funding from the American Action Network, a non-profit associated with the House Republican super PAC, the Congressional Leadership Fund. Brian Walsh, a top aide to former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R), is a senior advisor to the APA, according to a 2024 report in NBC News. Walsh was a founder and former president of the Congressional Leadership Fund and former president of the American Action Network.

Since 2022, the APA has raised over $100 million from undisclosed sources. Millions of dollars were routed from the APA, usually through intermediaries, to the Congressional Leadership Fund and its sister organization, the Senate Leadership Fund. The APA has also funneled cash to MAGA Inc, President Trump’s super PAC, the Republican Convention, and a host of other Republican groups. The APA does not have to disclose its donors because it is organized as a 501(c)(4) non-profit group.

David Wright and Patrick Svitekat CNN:

Despite the group’s name and messaging, filings show that Lead Left PAC received more than $3 million in May from Conservative Americans PAC — itself funded by American Prosperity Alliance, the influential Republican nonprofit.

In a statement, Conservative Americans PAC acknowledged its role in seeking to shape the Democratic primaries.

“Republicans are leveling the playing field after over a decade of Democrats meddling in our primaries, and with the Democrat Party in the midst of a civil war, Republicans would be stupid not to take advantage while pushing their candidates farther left,” spokesperson Samantha Bullock said.

 

Saturday, June 20, 2026

Midterm: Congressional and Presidential Perspectives

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. It includes a chapter on congressional and state elections.

Megan Messerly, Alex Gangitano and Myah Ward at POLITICO:

President Donald Trump believes he handed Republicans a winning playbook for the midterms — if only they’d follow it.

Gerrymander everywhere possible, get rid of the filibuster, fire the Senate parliamentarian and pass the SAVE America Act.


None of it is likely to happen, and the gap between what is likely and what is possible explains Trump’s frustrations with many in Congress and the anger the White House channels at operatives and pundits who say the president isn’t doing enough to help retain control of Congress.

“If everyone just follows his lead, follows the blueprints he’s laid out, and runs on the record that he has, then I think we’ll fare well,” said a senior White House official, granted anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

The divide reflects irreconcilable views of political power: Trump’s ends-justify-the-means approach is colliding with the protect-the-norms posture of Republicans on the Hill and in statehouses. Unlike Trump, rank-and-file Republicans are staring down years of electoral consequences and hedging their bets on institutions they will have to operate within long after he’s gone.

And, with five months until the midterms, the president and many in his party have been left talking past one another.
...

A person familiar with Senate dynamics, granted anonymity to speak candidly, shot back that Thune’s eye is on the ball and that Trump’s focus on election integrity does more harm than good.

“Poll after poll shows that voters — the ones who decide general elections — are increasingly driven by the economy, not the SAVE America Act or arcane Senate rules, which is why John Thune has been practically begging his colleagues and the president to focus on wins like the president’s signature achievement: The One Big Beautiful Bill,” the person said. “It’s hard to turn on CSPAN2 these days without seeing Thune on the floor talking about the litany of pro-growth policies that are positively affecting American families – lower tax rates, no tax on tips and overtime, a bigger child tax credit. It’s no accident that he’s clearly trying to reset the narrative amid the litany of daily distractions.”



Friday, June 19, 2026

Trump and Power

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. The second Trump administration has been full of ominous developments.  Just as an authoritarian regime would, it is abusing the legal process to punish opponents.

Trump lost the Iran War, but his spin is revealing. Dave Lawler at Axios:

President Trump denied that the Iran war revealed the limits of his ability to exert power, telling "The Axios Show" he still believes there are "no limits."

The big picture: Trump entered the war demanding "unconditional surrender." He ended it with a limited memorandum of understanding instead.Trump acknowledged to Axios' Marc Caputo that he'd negotiated that deal to keep the war from turning into a global economic depression.

Still, Trump denied he was in any way humbled by that experience. Asked what he'd learned from the war about the limits to his power, he said: "There are no limits."

What he's saying: "I haven't learned that lesson yet. I know there are, but there are no limits," he continued.

Trump claimed that "we defeated them totally militarily," and even that the MOU "probably is unconditional surrender."

He argued the war had actually demonstrated America's military strength. "Who else could have done a blockade like that? I did a naval blockade where not one ship was able to get through. Some tried. It didn't last very long."

Tim Bauk at NYT with takeaways from Regime Change:

In an interview that Ms. Haberman and Mr. Swan conducted with Mr. Trump for the book, the president, who had started the war with Iran two weeks earlier, reflected on his power.

The president listed a series of powerful figures from history, drawn from a two-page document that an acquaintance had given him, and then explained why he thought their power paled in comparison to his, since they lacked global reach.

Rattling off names including Alexander the Great and William the Conqueror, the president noted, “They didn’t have airplanes,” according to the book.

He continued, reciting more names: Napoleon, Hitler, Mao, Stalin. Those leaders, Mr. Trump told the authors, “maintained power through fear.”

“Who would ever do a thing like that?” Mr. Trump asked, according to the book. “Right?”

(The paper was by Gary Player's caddie.)  

Brian Schwartz, Natalie Andrews and  Alexander Ward at WSJ:

President Trump has delivered the same retort to political allies who have offered him strategic advice in recent weeks, according to people with knowledge of the conversations: “I’m the president and you’re not.

Seventeen months into his second term, Trump is increasingly relying on his own gut instincts, dismissing the counsel of aides, conservative lawmakers and longtime associates. The result has been a series of decisions that have confounded and frustrated Republicans—heightening fears that voters will punish the GOP in the November elections and testing Trump’s iron grip on the party.


Thursday, June 18, 2026

The Politics of the US Surrender

President Trump tried to make the case for his interim peace deal with Iran on Wednesday, but a lengthy news conference only revealed that no last-minute rabbits would be pulled from the hat to assuage his critics.

Trump’s comments, delivered as he prepared to leave a Group of Seven (G7) summit in France, also exposed just how far the U.S. has shifted from its original war aims as the president avidly seeks to bring the conflict to a close.

An especially startling example came when Trump defended Iran’s right to maintain ballistic missiles — despite the fact that a prior U.S. and Israeli objective had been the destruction of this capacity.

“They have to have some because other people have some. You’ve got to have some,” Trump mused, referring to Iran’s position in relation to other Persian Gulf nations.

The president added that when unnamed advisers told him he needed to wholly eliminate the Iranian conventional arsenal, “I said, ‘Well, what am I going to do? Am I going to let Saudi Arabia have missiles but they can’t have them?’”

Trump cast his push to reopen the Strait of Hormuz as critical for American prosperity. He raised the specter of “economic catastrophe” in the absence of a deal and said he had no desire to end up analogous to former President Herbert Hoover, who is widely blamed for exacerbating the Great Depression.

On the central issue of Iran’s stock of enriched nuclear material, Trump waved away concerns, saying that while the U.S. has “the equipment to get it” and that it would be “psychologically” satisfying to do so, “it’s actually not valuable. Not a lot of value.”

Trump further confirmed that the interim memorandum of understanding (MOU) agreed between American and Iranian negotiators calls for a fund of $300 billion to be set up to help with the cost of Iranian reconstruction. While this would not be directly bankrolled by the U.S., Washington would be involved in the planning and facilitation of the fund, and it appears its Persian Gulf allies would be expected to contribute.

At roughly the same time as Trump was speaking, a senior administration official was on a media call reading the full text of the MOU to reporters. The agreement is expected to be signed in Switzerland on Friday.

The text confirmed by the official shows that the MOU provides for the reopening of the crucial strait by both sides, allows Iran to immediately resume crude oil exports, and includes a provision for the U.S. to unfreeze Iranian assets so long as the deal is implemented.

In return, Iran pledges that it will not “procure or develop” nuclear weapons. Trump is presenting this as a major victory but it in fact merely echoes a promise Iran has made numerous times in the past — including in the deal arrived at during former President Obama’s tenure, known as the JCPOA, which the current president excoriates.

The MOU does say that Iran’s existing stock of highly enriched uranium will, at the least, be subject to dilution on-site under the eyes of the International Atomic Energy Agency. But the relevant paragraph is vague and also notes that a final resolution on “the issue of enrichment” will be punted to a final deal. Skeptics worry this allows Tehran a capacious amount of wiggle room.

Critics on the left and right alike are asking why the war was fought in the first place, if this is to be the shape of its resolution.

The angst is especially sharp among conservative hawks. The staunchly pro-Israel commentator Ben Shapiro called the deal a “disaster” during an interview with Fox News on Wednesday. Another prominent conservative commentator, Erick Erickson, wrote on social media that the accord was “an American surrender.”

It isn’t just the pundit class who are outraged.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), who lost a primary fight last month after Trump backed one of his opponents, blasted what he called “the worst foreign policy blunder in decades.”

Nikki Haley, who served as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations during part of Trump’s first term but went on to run against him in the 2024 presidential primary, wrote on social media that the Iranians will use any funds received to “further their nuclear ambitions and on terrorist proxies against us.”

Haley added, “It’s a huge mistake to pay to rebuild the threat we just destroyed.”

Dana Blanton at Fox:

Voters doubt a peace deal will keep Iran from developing nuclear weapons, according to the latest Fox News poll.

Sixty-four percent say it’s unlikely a peace agreement with the U.S. will stop Iran from pursuing nukes, including more than half of Republicans (53%), independents (69%), and Democrats (73%). Today’s views match those in 2015, when the Obama administration made a deal with Iran, as 63% of voters at that time also said it was unlikely an agreement would stop Iran from building a nuclear program.


 

Wednesday, June 17, 2026

Another Lost War

Our new book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. The first year of the second Trump administration has been full of ominous developments

War and economic woes will hurt the GOP in November.  The only question is how much.

Jonathan Lemire at The Atlantic:

President Trump lost. The war he waged against Iran promises to conclude in a humbling whimper with the signing of a cease-fire agreement later this week. The United States is left weaker—diminished militarily, strategically, economically, and perhaps morally.

The war, which the United States fought alongside Israel, accomplished none of the goals that Trump named at the outset. Instead, it only empowered the hard-liners in Tehran and arguably emboldened them to someday seek a nuclear weapon. Despite that, the president was so desperate for the war to end that he repeatedly backed off his threats—allowing Iran to call his bluff—and upbraided his close ally Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for responding to attacks in the region in a manner that jeopardized the negotiations.

Trump won’t admit to any of this. He has spent recent days furiously spinning the tentative deal as a clear win, and has seethed at unflattering comparisons with the deal that President Obama struck with Iran more than a decade ago, aides and outside advisers told me. Trump, they said, has privately denounced Iran hawks, some of whom are among his closest allies in the Republican Party, for questioning the strength of the agreement. Within the administration, there is a divide on the deal, but Trump sided with those advocating for the war to wind down, no matter the terms, as fears mount about the economic toll on Americans and the political costs for Republicans in the midterms.

Trump’s own anger masks a desperate desire to find an off-ramp from a conflict that did not go the way he had planned, an outcome that has threatened to leave the United States—and Trump—reduced in the eyes of the world. For a decade, Trump has dominated the global stage and wielded extraordinary executive power. But now he is saddled with low poll numbers and unhappy Republicans, and he may soon have to contend with a Democratic Congress. His evolution into a lame duck is accelerating, and the political world is poised to soon look beyond him and focus on the 2028 contenders hoping to succeed him. World leaders, who were once cowed, have begun to defy him. Trump’s defeat in Iran, and the way he lost, may hasten his irrelevance.


Tuesday, June 16, 2026

Trump DOJ Going After Newsom


Melanie Mason and Dustin Gardiner at POLITICO:
Gavin Newsom is seizing on the political upside of his newly elevated place on Donald Trump’s enemies list.

The California governor mounted an aggressive response to revelations that he is facing multiple investigations by the Trump Justice Department — breaking the news in a video that also bluntly acknowledged his likely presidential ambitions, rallying Democratic allies to his side, and sending out a fundraising appeal within hours.

The defiant posture gave Newsom the chance to disclose the probes on his own terms — and bask in being lifted, once again, to the role of president’s chief antagonist.

“Persecution by Trump — or even prosecution by his weaponized Department of Justice — is a badge of honor to Democrats, kind of like the political version of a Purple Heart,” said Garry South, a veteran Democratic strategist who’s worked with Newsom on past campaigns. “The idiot has already made a martyr, and national figure, out of Newsom by attacking him and calling him childish names. So, of course this revelation will just add to Newsom’s standing as a 2028 presidential candidate.”

The probes echoed those of California Sen. Adam Schiff, New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI director James Comey: Democrats whose feuds with Trump escalated from social media spats to DOJ targets. So far, the retribution campaign has resulted in embarrassing setbacks for the administration instead of successful prosecutions — and has lifted those in Trump’s crosshairs to folk hero status among the Democratic base.

Newsom’s team is hoping he will enjoy a similar boost. Already, the governor’s pugnacious posture toward Trump during last year’s immigration crackdown in Los Angeles and his prescient foray into the redistricting wars sent his approval numbers soaring and landed him among the top contenders in early 2028 polls.

Monday, June 15, 2026

Going After Habeas Corpus

 Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. The second Trump administration is has been full of ominous developments.

Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan at NYT:

Last spring, Will Scharf, an arch-conservative lawyer serving as the White House staff secretary, wrote a secret memo to the chief of staff that reflected growing unease in the West Wing about one of the extreme measures being weighed by Stephen Miller, the powerful adviser driving President Trump’s deportation campaign.

Dated April 29, 2025, and stamped “confidential,” the memo was careful and lawyerly but amounted to a warning against end-running the rule of law. The subject line read: “THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS.”

Habeas corpus — the centuries-old right to force the government to justify, before a judge, why it has locked a person up — is enshrined in Article I of the Constitution. Mr. Scharf’s memo, in its unassuming way, was a blinking red warning light. The second Trump White House was deliberating an explosive new claim of presidential power: the suspension of habeas rights for unauthorized immigrants.

The suspension of habeas corpus has occurred just a handful of times in U.S. history, and always under the most dire circumstances of war or invasion. Yet to a greater degree than previously known, administration officials, encouraged by Mr. Trump, actively weighed taking that step in the early months of his second term — this time to accelerate the mass deportation of immigrants in the country illegally.

...

Suspending habeas corpus was one of two radical ideas Mr. Miller had been pushing that alarmed Mr. Scharf. The other was invoking the Insurrection Act to deploy the military to enforce the law on American streets as protests grew against deportation sweeps.

...
But the documents reflected alarm among a small group of senior aides. They felt that Mr. Miller’s eagerness to test the limits of executive power — and to accuse other branches of encroaching on it, echoing a president who bristled at any constraint — risked steering the administration, and the country, in a dangerous direction.

...

“The Constitution is clear, and that of course is the supreme law of the land, that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus can be suspended in a time of invasion,” Mr. Miller said. “So it’s an option we are actively looking at.”

Mr. Miller was intentional about his choice of words. The president had been trying to recast the immigration surge across the southern border during the Biden years as an invasion by enemy forces — a highly dubious claim intended to unlock extraordinary powers, intended only for wartime, to repel the migrants. Mr. Miller kept using the word “invasion” even after border crossings had fallen to multidecade lows.

“Look, a lot of it depends on whether the courts do the right thing or not,” Mr. Miller added to the reporters, a not-so-subtle warning to federal judges to give the president the leeway he was seeking.

After weeks of uproar, and disagreement between government officials on whether it could be done, the proposal eventually faded from view. Asked about it later, Mr. Trump appeared to acknowledge discussing suspending habeas corpus, but downplayed that the discussions were serious, and suggested it was not worth doing so just then.

Sunday, June 14, 2026

The Nodfather, Age 80

 Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. The second Trump administration is has been full of ominous developments In 2024, Trump was already showing signs of cognitive decline. It's getting worse.

 Annie Linskey at WSJ:

President Trump closed his eyes and appeared to nod off while seated in a suite this week at an NBA Finals game in New York City as cameras caught him snacking on french fries and pizza. He returned to the White House after 2 a.m.

By 10 a.m. the next day, he offered a lengthy critique of a recently published Wall Street Journal editorial to a reporter who called him on his cellphone, and said the downing of a U.S. Apache helicopter near the Strait of Hormuz “wasn’t a big deal.” Hours later, he ordered strikes on Iran in retaliation for the incident.

As Trump approaches his 80th birthday on Sunday, he and his advisers have made a strategic decision to turn the president into an omnipresent figure in American life, drawing a contrast with his octogenarian predecessor, Joe Biden. Trump makes regular marathon appearances in the Oval Office, he answers reporters’ cold calls and he tees off on social media at all hours of the day and night.

fThe result is that Americans are seeing more of both the good and the bad of an aging president.

In question-and-answer sessions that sometimes last more than 30 minutes, the president spars with reporters, delivering one-liners that ripple across cable news and the internet.

But cameras often zoom in on his bruised hands, stooped posture and closed eyes. And he sometimes trips over his words and confuses details. He has referred to Greenland as Iceland. He has called the Strait of Hormuz the Strait of Iran. And he has mixed up recent conflicts in South America and the Middle East.

Saturday, June 13, 2026

Schumer Redux

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. It includes a chapter on congressional and state elections.

Jordain Carney at POLITICO:

Chuck Schumer has served as a punching bag for angry Democrats for more than a year — taking flak on everything from his 2026 recruiting to his handling of government funding talks.

But with about five months until the midterm elections, the Senate minority leader is gently starting to punch back — pointing out how some of his bets are paying off as his party
moves within striking distance of taking back the majority in November.

“There’s no victory lap to take in June,” he said in an interview in his Capitol office suite.


But he ticked through moves he oversaw in the past year — from leading opposition to GOP safety-net cuts to picking shutdown fights over health care and immigration enforcement funding and orchestrating national intervention in several Senate primaries — that he argued have strengthened Democrats’ hand for the midterms and beyond.

“We made a lot of strategic decisions that got us to this place — it didn’t happen by accident,” Schumer said. “I knew from the beginning that if we recruited strong candidates, found paths to victory, focused on the issues the American people cared about, and forced … the Republicans, to carry Trump’s water, we’d be in much better shape, and that has happened.”

Thursday, June 11, 2026

Trump Loves Inflation, and There's a Lot to Love

Our new book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. The first year of the second Trump administration has been full of ominous developments

War and economic woes will hurt the GOP in November.  The only question is how much.


Raquel Coronell Uribe at NBC:
President Donald Trump embraced an unlikely foe Wednesday: inflation.

Asked by reporters whether he was concerned about new economic data that showed inflation last month surged to the highest rate since early 2023, Trump praised the government figures.

“The numbers were great. You know what I really love? I love the inflation. You know why? Because as soon as this war is over ... when the war is over, it’s coming down, it’s going to come down like a rock,” he said, referring to U.S. efforts to secretly get oil ships through the Strait of Hormuz.

Democrats pounced on Trump’s remarks, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., accusing him of not caring about the rising cost of living for Americans.

Trump later argued that his words were taken out of context, telling the New York Post what he loved was how inflation wasn’t higher. Trump said that “the numbers are much lower than anticipated” and predicted prices would plunge once the war is over.

He also predicted that the current inflation rate would be the peak in the Iran war, which began Feb. 28.

One day later... Aimee Picchi at CBS News:
Inflation facing U.S. businesses surged in May to its highest level since November 2022 amid higher energy prices stemming from the Iran war.

The Producer Price Index, which registers inflation before it reaches consumers, soared 6.5% in May from a year ago, the Labor Department reported on Thursday. On a monthly basis, the PPI rose 1.1% from April, a faster pace than the 0.6% increase forecast by economists polled by financial data firm FactSet.

The hotter-than-expected reading comes a day after the Consumer Price Index surged in May to an annual rate of 4.2%, its fastest pace in more than three years. Although the PPI doesn't directly signal changes in consumer prices, it can feed into broader inflation if businesses pass those costs on to customers.