Trump’s onslaught has created economic chaos from coast to coast. The Economist recently examined the results of Trump’s horrific approach: labor shortages, shrinking workforce, slower growth, and loss of economic dynamism. “Longer-lasting damage may come from a slowdown in high-skilled immigration,” it found. “America turned its ability to attract the best of the brightest into an extraordinary economic advantage. Mr Trump’s immigration crackdown risks leaving the country with fewer workers today and fewer innovators tomorrow.”

Instead of targeting dangerous criminals, the Trump regime has systematically deported — en masse — law-abiding, productive, non-white migrants. “A surge in immigration arrests this summer has swept up thousands. . . includ[ing] people married to U.S. citizens, people who had entered legally and were pursuing an asylum claim, and others with a temporary legal status that the administration pushed to revoke.” The New York Times reported last week. The statistics repudiate the regime’s lie that its approach protects innocent Americans. “The share with a past violent criminal conviction fell to less than 4 percent.” [Emphasis added.]

The Trump team does not hide its ambition to “ethnically cleanse” America. His immigration crew has transformed the status of hundreds of thousands of non-white persons from countries in Africa, South America, and the Caribbean by revoking their Temporary Protected Status. Hardworking people who are legally present must nevertheless prepare to lose employment, separate from family, and either flee the nation or face forcible expulsion.

In rounding up TPS refugees and other legally present immigrants, the administration has violated due process rights and subjected thousands of people (over 23,000 in total) to deportation under hellish conditions in third countries in which the deportees have no connection to their families and where they are subject to torture and often repatriation to their country of origin. Scores of immigrants — some with serious medical conditions and most under duress/physical restraint — were recently deposited in Afghanistan, Cuba, Nicaragua, Burundi, Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Eswatini, Liberia, Rwanda, and Sierra Leone. Meanwhile, of the 6,668 refugees admitted since October 2025, 6,665 are white South Africans.

Subscribe now

Trump’s authoritarian goons have also run roughshod over First and Fifth Amendment rights by attempting to deport critics of the regime’s policies. Just as Trump’s minions, according to whistleblowers, concocted evidence of antisemitism to suppress academic freedom at universities, they have devised a national security pretext to stamp out dissent on foreign policy.

Last week, U.S. District Court Judge Noël Wise in California held that the Trump regime had violated international students’ constitutional rights by targeting them over their views on the Middle East, specifically their criticism of Israel’s war in Gaza. This ruling follows a similar decision delivered last year by Ronald Reagan-appointed U.S. District Court Judge William G. Young in Massachusetts, who held that “[n]o one’s freedom of speech is unlimited, of course, but these limits are the same for both citizens and noncitizens alike.

Judge Wise excoriated Trump’s assault on free speech, finding the record “replete with examples of the government enforcing the Revocation and Deportation provisions against noncitizens who have publicly expressed—through their speech, writings, or participation in protests—disagreement with Israel or support for Palestine.” But, as Wise held, “noncitizens are afforded First and Fifth Amendment rights to the same extent as citizens,” adding:

Wise, therefore, held that delegating broad discretion to the secretary of State to trample on protected speech in the name of vague goals, e.g., “countering support for terrorist groups and addressing antisemitism,” runs afoul of the First and Fifth Amendments.

Judge Wise’s conclusion is worth savoring:

Foundational to America’s enduring democracy are our freedoms of speech and the press embodied in the First Amendment. In the United States, free speech, including the freedom to criticize the government and its leaders, is not a sign of our democracy’s fragility. It is evidence of its strength. That strength is diminished when members of our society—citizens and noncitizens alike—must self-censor and “behave” or suffer the government’s retaliation. In March 2025, that retaliation was directed at those engaged in pro-Palestine and anti-Israel speech.

In September 2025, caught in the government’s net were people critical of Charlie Kirk. In May 2026, it potentially included “weighing in on a peace deal that’s being negotiated” in Iran regarding the Strait of Hormuz. Tomorrow, or perhaps even today, targets may include anyone in the United States who exercises their freedom of speech to simply express opinions the government does not like.

This downward spiral is antithetical to our Constitution that recognizes our right to speak freely. Here you can simultaneously hate the content of a person’s speech and love the country that cherishes the freedom to allow it. Zealous protection of our Constitutional right to free speech is a provocative demonstration of our country’s powerful lack of fear.

Share

In the face of Trump’s racist, cruel approach, Americans have recoiled at the abuse of immigration laws to terrorize minority communities, remake American demographics, and silence critics. A July NPR/PBS News/Marist poll found 65 percent of Americans think ICE has gone “too far.” Even more surprising, on border security, which “had been Trump’s reliable strength since his second inauguration in January 2025,” his support dropped to a net -5, the worst result since the Strength in Numbers/Verasight tracker launched in May 2025.

And an August Economist/YouGov poll found “Trump is badly underwater on immigration,” with only 40 percent approval and 53 percent disapproval (a net -13 percent), “down from +11 at the start of his second term, when 51% approved and 40% disapproved.” Contrary to Trump’s ICE fusillade, large majorities favor a path to citizenship for those who were brought here as children (63 percent), are married to U.S. citizens (62 percent), have lived here more than 20 years (58 percent), or have children who are U.S. citizens (55 percent).

Likewise, a survey released Wednesday from University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation conducted in 11 competitive states and 28 congressional districts across the country showed broad support for legal status for noncriminal immigrants (Democrats 75 to 89 percent, Republicans 55 to 78 percent, overall 65 to 84 percent) and reducing illegal immigration by requiring employers to verify work status and expanding legal work visas (75 to 90 percent of Democrats, 67 to 89 percent of Republicans). Huge bipartisan majorities “favor hiring several hundred more asylum judges and staff to significantly speed up the process of evaluating claims (Democrats 72 to 87 percent, Republicans 66 to 83 percent, overall 71 to 83 percent).

In sum, the MAGA reign of terror against immigrants has not only been a law enforcement, constitutional, and economic disaster — it has also been a political loser.

Savvy Democrats should advocate replacing rogue, wildly deceitful, corrupt, and violent agencies (both ICE and Customs and Border Protection) with law-abiding, professional entities that Americans can trust to implement sane policies to protect the border, facilitate legal immigration (i.e., provide an adequate supply of workers), and rationalize our asylum process. Any Trump official who broke the law (including any who lied to Congress or the courts) must be held fully accountable.

After experiencing Trump’s heinous overreach, the American people are way ahead of the politicians. They should know that the midterms provide the opening to end this shameful chapter in immigration policy and reclaim our deepest-held values.

Except that it is not. Mr. Trump’s war in Iran…is anything but accomplished. Half a year in, the conflict has deteriorated into a quagmire of the president’s own making with no clear goals, no obvious strategy and no end in sight.

He finds himself stuck in a maddening purgatory between full-fledged combat and genuine peace. He is reluctant to resume an all-out bombardment despite his thunderous threats, yet has been unable so far to broker an agreement to end the war on satisfactory terms. He has no victory to take credit for, yet is paying the political price in terms of the toll on the American economy and his party’s chances in the fall elections.

Bluntly put, Trump has produced a defeat of unprecedented proportions, handed the Iranian leadership a new lease on life, and given Tehran control of the Strait of Hormuz — a benefit of more utility than a nuclear weapon — without obtaining restrictions on its nuclear weapons program, despite Trump’s assertions to the contrary.

Historian Robert Kagan writes:

Iran has, with American help, completely reconfigured the power structure of the Middle East and the Persian Gulf. The dominant power in the region going forward will be Iran, not the U.S. or Israel. Neighboring countries are already making their adjustments to this new reality. More distant powers will too. For years, the world has been dealing with an Iran constrained. It will now discover what Iran unleashed looks like. . . . .

Iran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz is a more useful instrument of power than a nuclear weapon would be. A nuclear weapon might deter an attack, but control of the strait gives Iran leverage every day, over dozens of countries. With it, Iran can reward friends, punish enemies, extract revenue, force the loosening of sanctions, and make governments think twice before opposing Iranian policies. It can do all of this without firing a shot, and while preserving the ability to threaten violence when necessary.

Iran’s regime remains intact, retains its missile program, can reconstitute its terror network (with monies it will extract from control of the Strait), and claims bragging rights that it laid low a decrepit, delusional bully who threatened it with genocide.

Most obviously, Iran demolished the U.S.’s status as protector of international waterways. With control of the Strait, Iran “is also claiming the right to decide who may pass. It has proposed excluding vessels associated with governments it deems hostile, such as the U.S. and Israel, and it has demanded compensation from nations that participated in attacks against it,” Kagan explains. In place of free passage through a key waterway, Iran has “establish[ed] the principle that passage through the strait will henceforth be a privilege that Tehran can grant, condition, delay, or deny.”

Subscribe now

As strained as Iran’s economy is, and as much pain as its people have absorbed, its regime is widely expected to outlast the Trump presidency. The U.S. will struggle to maintain any semblance of sanctions against Iran, which stands to collect fists full of currency from ships seeking passage through the Strait.

Trump’s empty threats of a new era of economic warfare against Iran based on secondary sanctions on other countries are as devoid of credibility as his military ultimatums. Vivian Salama writes for The Atlantic:

[S]econdary sanctions make the U.S. more vulnerable when its own economy is already under pressure, with the technology, manufacturing, and financial sectors likely to bear the brunt. Oil and gasoline prices have already risen, inflation remains a problem, and voters are unhappy with a conflict they were told would make their country safer. The American public’s approval of the war with ​Iran has fallen to its lowest level since the first days of the conflict…. With the midterms approaching, Republicans have little reason to welcome another round of economic pain, let alone the possible U.S.-induced global financial crisis that [Treasury Secretary Scott] Bessent talked about.

Salama confirmed that regional experts see Trump’s sanctions threats “less as an escalation strategy than as the latest step in the administration’s continuing search for an exit from the war.” The pattern is eerily familiar:

The administration keeps reaching for a bigger threat because the last one failed to deliver a decisive victory, or even a face-saving off-ramp. Deadlines move. Threats get grace periods. “Maximum pressure” is followed by more maximum pressure. The question is no longer simply how Washington plans to force Iran to negotiate. It is how the U.S. gets out of a war in which its options seem only to shrink.

In the real world, the U.S. has failed to achieve any of its stated goals (e.g., eliminating Iran’s missile arsenal, ending its nuclear program, obtaining regime change, curbing its regional influence) and certainly has no clear strategy for doing so now that its complete aversion to resuming military action is out in the open.

Share

The harm to U.S. national security is profound. Senior brass has warned the hapless Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth that our continued deployment is unsustainable, with the most dire warning coming from the chief of Naval operations, who reports only one quarter of the fleet is deployable.

Our munitions stocks are dangerously low, impairing military options in the region and beyond. “The U.S. has rushed so many munitions to the Middle East to fight Iran that military planners are concerned the loss of firepower is diminishing America’s ability to defend against potential threats from China and Russia,” the Wall Street Journal reports. “The cuts have been so deep that the U.S. inventories in Europe of PAC-3 Patriot air defense interceptors and ATACMS [Army Tactical Missile System] surface-to-surface missiles are deemed to be ‘beyond critical.’”

Within the region, our influence is at a low ebb, with Gulf allies now looking for partners other than the U.S. As Kagan notes: “Saudi Arabia’s rejection of the U.S.-and Israel-backed Abraham Accords in favor of a strategic compact with Pakistan and Turkey hints at the shape of the future.” Outside the Middle East, both allies and foes recognize that the U.S. lacks the strategic smarts and staying power to defeat even a second-rate power.

So forget “Mission Accomplished.” Don’t bother with “victory” triumphalism. This international humiliation far surpasses U.S. setbacks in Vietnam or even Iraq. Perhaps the worst strategic blunder in U.S. history is entirely Trump’s doing, aided and abetted by incompetent Cabinet flunkies and congressional Republicans too cowardly to live up to their oaths to protect the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Booting Republicans from office en masse is the essential first step in addressing this catastrophe.

Trump delusionally “ordered” Lake Ontario to be renamed “Lake America,” in another cringeworthy temper tantrum amidst a self-defeating trade war with Canada. In addition, his lame effort to order an end run around a judge’s order barring him from slapping his name on the Kennedy Center — with lawyers threatening to tear down the historic institution unless he gets his way on renovations and a two-year closure — earned him a court tongue-lashing on Thursday, forcing him to put off its planned September 8 defacement (trying to rename the plaza adjoining the building). And Trump’s latest, desperate effort to inject confusion into midterm voting was thwarted on Thursday, thanks to the order of U.S. Judge Indira Talwani in Massachusetts, who “once again temporarily prohibited the U.S. Postal Service from carrying out a plan to restrict mail-in voting… [that] appeared to overstep its legal mandate and could spark chaos by changing rules fewer than 70 days before an election.”

And, to the amazement of experienced political consultants in both parties, Trump’s minions continue to freak out over Georgia Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff’s innocuous barb aimed at Trump babysitter hanger-on and obsessive fan Natalie Harp, thereby reinforcing his persona as a decrepit, needy has-been.

“Their relationship appears enmeshed and pathological,” observed former George W. Bush White House adviser Pete Wehner. “The information she passes along to him is unvetted, unfiltered, and highly warped and unreliable.” Aside from the creepiness, “She is further distorting the world for a man who, with every passing year, is detaching more and more from reality. His world is narrowing to a pinhole.” His courtiers’ over-the-top defense only confirms Trump is emotionally enfeebled.

As political and court defeats pile up, Trump becomes more unhinged and desperate to boost his public image. With his approval ratings sinking, he demanded his aides whip up “a series of television advertisements about his own record that will serve as a backdrop to the hundreds of individual House and Senate contests.” You can practically hear Democrats guffaw, ‘Oh, really!?’ They could not be more delighted that Trump intends to saddle his party with constant reminders of a record that an overwhelming percentage of Americans (including crucial independent voters and Hispanics) deeply dislike. (‘From the president who brought you a war you didn’t want, more expensive healthcare, dangerous lettuce, and…’)

The New York Times sums up how Trump risks becoming a “liability” for his party, and the Democrats’ response:

He has urged supporters to “pretend” he is on the ballot and suggested he will spend significant campaign cash reserves.

Democrats are just as eager for him to play a starring role. Representative Jamie Raskin, Democrat of Maryland, argued that congressional Republicans had been boxed in by the president and rendered little more than a rubber stamp for his agenda.

“Donald Trump controls the Republican caucus in Congress like a bunch of trained seals,” Mr. Raskin said . . . . “This is essentially what the November elections are about.”

Well, if Trump insists, let’s all pretend he is on the ballot! Democrats are practically gleeful, ready to pounce with more mockery and sharp humor, which in turn will likely provoke even more hysterical responses from Trump and his supporters.

Subscribe now

The horror show for Republicans is just getting underway. Trump’s planned unprecedented midterm convention on the eve of 9/11 (!) has all the makings of another bust. “Republicans are privately questioning if it strikes the right tone amid the electorate’s tightening budgets — and the wisdom of diverting candidates from their districts just weeks out from Election Day,” CNN reports. “Further compounding concerns: expensive entrance fees for lawmakers, competing events like the start of the NFL season and 9/11 commemorations, and some state parties struggling to drum up enthusiasm with their members.”

“[T]here’s the overarching fear — that an event once dubbed ‘Trumpapalooza’ will indeed end up being far more about promoting the president than the candidates who are actually on the ballot,” CNN observes.

Some of this would be amusing — especially for Democrats who stand to benefit from the spasm of self-inflicted injuries — if not for the power that the president of the United States wields. Taken together, incidents of this sort (plus Trump’s vindictive threats against the wrongly accused “vandals” of the reflecting pool, firings of Stars & Stripes journalists, a bizarre vow to deploy the military against the bond market, and nonstop touting of imaginary positive polls) underscore Trump’s delusional isolation from reality.

The nonstop stream of ostensibly “small,” petty, and entirely politically daft outbursts reminds us that an emotionally unstable, decaying figure atop the only global superpower (though that status has become a subject of increasing debate) poses enormous risks for the U.S. and the rest of the world. It’s not the laughable midterm ad campaign that should keep us up at night, but the realization that someone so obviously off his rocker is making life-and-death decisions about war and peace, blowing up trillions in market value and family wealth, deporting hundreds of thousands of hard-working migrants, and striving to bollix up the smooth operation of the upcoming midterm elections.

Now is no time for legacy media sanewashing of Trump nor for Democrats to underplay the urgency of the moment. Trump’s danger to the republic has never been greater, nor has MAGA Republicans’ cowardly refusal to grab the wheel and protect the country been more dispiriting.

It is up to voters to deliver an unequivocal, overwhelming defeat to this MAGA cult of personality. Only then would Congress be able to recover its constitutional role, implement real checks on his mad reign of terror, and devise a plan for holding accountable those who have driven the country into a ditch.

But, in the meantime, more Trump self-reverential ads please!

Hosted by the Rev. Al Sharpton’s National Action Network, the event today reiterates three goals:

• We march to defend the vote, because voting rights are under attack, and the protections generations fought, bled, and died for are being weakened.

• We march to defend civil rights, because attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion are attempts to roll back access, opportunity, and representation.

• We march for economic justice, because too many families are still fighting for fair wages, affordable housing, equal opportunity, and a fair chance to build wealth.

Thirteen years ago, President Barack Obama reminded us at the 50^th commemoration that the very significance of political/legal victories achieved following the 1963 March may have “obscured” the march’s economic agenda. The original attendees, Obama recalled, “were not there in search of some abstract ideal. They were there seeking jobs as well as justice — not just the absence of oppression but the presence of economic opportunity.”

Obama told the crowd in 2013:

For what does it profit a man, Dr. King would ask, to sit at an integrated lunch counter if he can’t afford the meal? This idea — that one’s liberty is linked to one’s livelihood; that the pursuit of happiness requires the dignity of work, the skills to find work, decent pay, some measure of material security — this idea was not new. Lincoln himself understood the Declaration of Independence in such terms — as a promise that in due time, “the weights should be lifted from the shoulders of all men, and that all should have an equal chance.”

Share

While acknowledging economic gains made by African Americans and Hispanics, Obama noted that “working Americans of all races have seen their wages and incomes stagnate, even as corporate profits soar, even as the pay of a fortunate few explodes.” He observed: “Inequality has steadily risen over the decades. Upward mobility has become harder. In too many communities across this country, in cities and suburbs and rural hamlets, the shadow of poverty casts a pall over our youth, their lives a fortress of substandard schools and diminished prospects, inadequate health care and perennial violence.”

Sadly, that portrait of economic stagnation and widening inequality is even more accurate today, and, hence, the need to pursue both pro-democracy objectives and shared economic prosperity has never been more acute.

The movement for civil rights and economic equality faces daunting new challenges from the most corrupt, cruel, and racist presidency in our lifetimes. As Donald Trump’s social media account and speeches shamelessly feature egregiously racist language and imagery (which, in turn, reverberate through the language and media accounts of Trump officials and cult followers), his regime wages daily assaults on the right to vote (aided and abetted by a MAGA Supreme Court majority eager to defer to blatantly illegal executive decrees), demonizes and even prosecutes venerated civil rights organizations such as the Southern Poverty Law Center, and corrupts the Justice Department (which originated in response to post-Civil War violence against Black people). Meanwhile, the Trump team has systematically savaged the livelihoods and blocked economic advancement for African Americans and other minority communities.

As the Center for American Progress recently recounted, the Trump regime has decimated the ranks of the federal civil service, a historic pathway for upward mobility for African Americans (personnel cuts “have affected Black women in particular, as they are disproportionately represented in agencies that have been hit the hardest”). It has promulgated anti-DEI orders that threaten legal action against government contractors and private employers and slashed programs that aid minority advancement (e.g., the Minority Business Development Agency, the Small Business Administration). Its blatantly racist threat of mass deportation aimed at Haitians and Somalians has already devastated those communities, forcing many to abandon their jobs.

Coupled with other policies, including freezing educational grants, cost hikes for student borrowers, lawsuits against higher education to stymie diversity outreach, rolling back enforcement of fair housing enforcement rules, and massive cuts to the social safety net, the Trump regime’s onslaught has inflicted economic pain disproportionately on African Americans. Black unemployment, for example, remains persistently high, widening the gap between Blacks and Whites.

The National Urban League’s annual “State of Black America” confirmed that “prospects for minorities in the U.S. are under threat during the second Trump administration,” as The Hill reported earlier this month. The report recapped the damage Trump and his MAGA crew have wrought:

When the Secretary of the Department of War blatantly refuses to promote Black military leaders, fires them discriminately, and goes as far as to refuse to have them photographed with the sitting President, there can be no other explanation than racism. Watching the Civil Rights division of the Department of Justice and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which were created to combat racist practices in the federal government and the workforce, become bastardized and morphed into tools to favor white men, our government has sanctioned racism. And every case on the Supreme Court docket, from the SAVE Act and Louisiana v. Callais to Watson v. the Republican National Committee, is an assault on voting rights that disproportionately silences our community.

The Federal Reserve backed up that assessment in its May Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking, which documented the decline in the economic standing of African Americans: “In 2025, Black adults were most likely to report a decline in their financial standing. The share of Black adults ‘doing okay’ or ‘living comfortably’ declined by almost 5 percentage points last year to 60%.... This is the lowest figure the Survey of Household Economic and Decisionmaking survey has recorded since 2015.”

Share

Despite this onslaught, we must not falter in fulfilling the march’s promise. Today, we should recognize not only the courage and sacrifices of the civil rights pioneers but also those of today’s heroic leaders who resist Trump’s racist agenda and assault on economic opportunity. Movement leaders in public office and organizations such as SPLC, Common Cause, Fair Fight Action, The Leadership Conference, LULAC, the Poor People’s Campaign, the ACLU, the National Council of Churches, the Urban Institute, Public Citizen, and Black Voters Matter — to name just a few — defend immigrants under siege, litigate in defense of voting rights, expose injustice and corruption, and work to expand economic opportunity for millions of Americans.

We salute the undaunted champions of civil rights and economic justice, past and present, who remain determined to move us closer to that “more perfect union” our Founders envisioned.

The problem is evident in serial court debacles. CNN reported on U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro’s recent humiliation — a second trial defeat — in failing to convict an alleged high-profile MS-13 gang mastermind. Her loss fits the former Fox TV host’s pattern of unprecedented defeats (also evident in DOJ’s unprecedented record of getting “no bills” from grand juries) that has stunned legal experts. “An increasingly alarming number of cases have fallen apart this year in DC’s federal court — even when the cases appear to be strong arguments against violent crime, relatively straightforward to prove, and tried by experienced prosecutors,” CNN wrote. In nearly a dozen criminal cases, two defendants were acquitted and four ended in mistrials with “jurors reporting in courtroom notes that they deliberated ‘hopelessly’ and were in complete ‘impasse.’”

That failure rate is unmatched by prior administrations but typical in the Trump regime’s often vindictive prosecutions. Despite Attorney General Todd Blanche’s wild accusations, many cases are shockingly devoid of evidence, ensuring defeat before even reaching a jury. Hence, the D.C. district court just granted the DOJ’s motion to dismiss the bogus “vandalism” case against former Olympic canoeist David Hearn, falsely accused of destroying the lining on the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool (which — no surprise! — actually resulted from the no-bid contractor’s error).

Wild accusations from Donald Trump and his minions; no facts; no case. That is the pattern in a slew of vindictive investigations/prosecutions (e.g., mortgage “fraud” cases against Letitia James, a “perjury” case against James Comey, a baseless investigation into former Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, a threatened investigation of Sen. Adam Schiff). Remember when Blanche publicly declared there was plenty of evidence of criminal intent to bolster his bizarre indictment of Comey because he reposted an image of seashells? Now? Crickets. The case, widely regarded as preposterous, is expected to be dismissed.

Trump and his minions’ utter failure to back up wild accusations extends well beyond courtrooms. Whistleblowers, for example, now reveal the Trump regime lacked facts to sustain its vendetta against colleges and universities for alleged antisemitism, its go-to cudgel for attacking academic independence and diversity efforts.

As the New York Times reported:

Trump administration officials ignored the recommendations of their own investigators as they pushed to find civil rights violations at three Ivy League universities…. The Aug. 17 account came from a former Department of Justice civil rights lawyer, Haley Van Erem, and colleagues whose names were redacted, who said they were assigned in 2025 to an administration task force on antisemitism.

In a report from Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee, whistleblower lawyers confirmed the Trump crew used antisemitism “as a pretext to cut federal grants to pressure Brown, Columbia and Harvard.”

Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) denounced the DOJ in an August 18 letter:

Trump Administration officials abandoned their duty as government lawyers to impartially investigate the facts and apply the law. Instead, they used the legitimate goal of investigating antisemitic discrimination on campus as a pretext for retaliating against, and punishing, universities, faculty, and students for engaging in protected speech disfavored by President Trump and his Administration. In other words, you seem to have overseen a large-scale fraud perpetrated against the American people and our universities, attacking disfavored groups on knowingly false grounds and exacerbating fear and division among different groups in our society.

(Brown and Columbia, which already capitulated to DOJ’s threats, might consider trying to unwind the settlements based on supposedly baseless accusations.)

In a similar vein, Trump’s flunkies have never produced evidence to back up his incessant claims of massive noncitizen voting. Following Trump’s widely panned Oval Office speech regarding alleged noncitizen voting, the big document “reveal” turned out to be a bust. As The Guardian reported, data “described electronic voting machine vulnerabilities, foreign access to state voter registration data and foreign digital manipulation strategies ... [but] no evidence Beijing altered the 2020 vote, which Trump lost.” More recently, a bogus report from the Census Bureau fashioned by an outside MAGA-friendly outfit to bolster specious voting fraud claims proved to be essentially worthless.

Share

And now, the New York Times reported, “A month after the Trump administration declared without evidence that thousands of noncitizens had illegally registered to vote in Nevada, officials with the Department of Homeland Security were unable to substantiate the claim.” Trump’s wild accusation that “278,000 noncitizens registered to vote in four states, including an exact number of 15,903 in Nevada,” turned out to be — surprise ! — nonsense. DHS officials let on during a meeting that “they had identified just 185 potential noncitizens in the state so far,” a minuscule percentage of registered voters.

In contrast to its baseless cascade of allegations and accusations, the Trump team melts down when confronted with disagreeable, quantifiable proof that refutes its propaganda, as it did when the Center for American Progress produced a report showing “his deployment of the National Guard to cities across the country has had little effect on reducing violent crime,” the New York Times reported. Trump’s personal lawyer then threatened to sue CAP for $5 billion (yet to be filed as of this writing), the “latest effort to use the legal system to punish critics for voicing unflattering facts and opinions generally protected by the First Amendment.”

In response to the blatant effort to chill speech and saddle it with crippling legal costs (as the Federal Trade Commission tried, one may recall, with Media Matters), CAP President and CEO Neera Tanden defiantly defended her organization’s “rigorous, evidence-based research and analysis” in a written statement:

Based on analysis of crime data, our report demonstrated facts about the National Guard deployments that are inconvenient to the Trump administration. Since its inception, CAP has published analysis of the impact of government policy under Democratic and Republican administrations.

This threatened lawsuit’s attack on facts and evidence is baseless. A fundamental protection of the First Amendment is to allow for the publication of facts and analysis that are contrary to the arguments and claims of any administration.

She vowed not to “cower nor bend” to Trump’s authoritarian bullying. It was gratifying to see right-leaning think tanks, including the Cato Institute and the Niskanen Center, denounce the attack on free speech.

Share

In sum, Trump’s accusations, whether in court filings, presidential addresses, policy declarations, or legal threats, do not deserve any presumption of good faith. This gang’s attacks on enemies and in support of its own twisted agenda routinely lack substantiation. Moreover, its attacks on foes who do have the facts amount to nothing more than fascist bullying.

It’s long past time for legacy media to inform Americans that the regime routinely lies about perceived adversaries. When it comes up with new allegations, it would behoove reporters to remind Americans of its well-established habit of fabulist claims and baseless accusations.

First and foremost, Jeffries made a cardinal error in meeting with Kushner, a non-government employee whose self-promotional antics — aided by his family connection — have no doubt made Hunter Biden blush. (If you can imagine Speaker Mike Johnson meeting with Hunter Biden in search of “common ground,” you can appreciate the absurdity of the Jeffries meeting.)

The meeting inevitably extends legitimacy to Kushner’s ethical gamesmanship, which characterizes the regime’s grotesque corruption. Kushner has fully exploited his name to pursue billions in foreign investment opportunities, all the while evading whatever ethical constraints (concern for presidential relations’ ethics — how quaint!) exist for those performing top government jobs. While continuing to carry out missions for his father-in-law regarding Gaza and Iran, Kushner has leveraged his role to reap riches in the Middle East, triggered an uprising in Albania stemming from his scheme to develop an island resort, and been forced to back out of a scandal-plagued Serbian boondoggle.

As Jeffries surely knows, reports in March that Kushner was soliciting funds from Middle East sovereign wealth funds (while acting as an envoy, however incompetently, in Iran talks) triggered a furious statement from Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-OR) and House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA). In it, they recapped Kushner’s years-long exploits, starting with Wyden’s “investigation of Kushner’s conflicts of interest in 2020 with an initial probe into whether Kushner advised Donald Trump to support a blockade against Qatar while Kushner Companies was seeking a billion-dollar bailout from Qatari, and possibly other Middle Eastern officials, for the property at 666 Fifth Avenue.”

As Wyden recounted, his investigation in 2024 examined “whether Affinity Partners, the firm Kushner launched immediately after the end of the first Trump administration, was in reality a compensation scheme designed in part to skirt federal disclosure requirements.” As a result of the investigation, he referred Kushner to the Justice Department for possible violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act in connection with his Saudi investment activities.

Subscribe now

On the House side, in 2024, Ranking Member Garcia and Ranking Member Jamie Raskin “urged Chairmen James Comer and Glenn Grothman to hold a hearing regarding Kushner’s apparent influence peddling and quid pro quos for actions he undertook to reshape U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East and beyond, as senior adviser in President Trump’s first Administration, following reports that Kushner was close to finalizing investments in Albania and Serbia and leveraged relationships he built during his time as a senior adviser in his father-in-law’s White House.” And Kushner continues to evade Congressional inquiry to this day, a direct affront to its Article I power. Once in the majority, Democrats should be investigating — not looking for common ground with — Kushner.

Given all that, any meeting with him strikes one as ill-conceived (at the very least). One can imagine some critical messages Jeffries could have delivered, including:

• a warning to preserve all documents relevant to allegations of self-dealing with foreign powers;

• a heads-up that Democrats will pursue, without exception, all allegations of corruption involving Trump, Trump family members, associates, and government employees;

• a preview of legislation that would mandate full financial disclosure and conflicts of interest rules for anyone serving as an envoy/international negotiator; and

• an FYI that the disgraced Board of Peace will be put under close supervision of Congress (and/all U.S. government employees and/or presidential relations barred from participation), beginning with public hearings and a subpoena of all relevant documents.

In response to written questions to Jeffries’s staff asking: whether Kushner’s conflicts of interest came up at the meeting; what common ground Jeffries believes might exist; and why Jeffries decided to meet with someone who has purposefully sidestepped a government role to avoid scrutiny, I received a bland written statement early Monday evening:

Throughout this Congress, Republicans have adopted a my-way-or-the-highway approach to governing that has failed the American people. To stop the madness, we have repeatedly made clear that an extremist approach will not work and will be met with forceful opposition. The American people want bold change and that’s what House Democrats will deliver. In every conversation that we have with the Trump administration, we will continue to make it explicitly clear that the affordability crisis is not a hoax and nothing short of transformational policy change is acceptable. We are fighting for an affordable America. The question is whether Republicans will join us.”

That was not going to mollify irate Democrats. Fortunately, later Monday evening, Jeffries’s tone noticeably shifted. He released the following video just a few hours later:

To review: Jeffries’ tone did improve, although the original decision to meet with Kushner was, as they say in soccer, an “own goal.” When Democrats, as seems increasingly likely, win the House majority, their leadership will meet with Trump, his Cabinet, and/or White House staff. But even then, it is hard to fathom any rationale for meeting with someone who has chosen to avoid a government post to flout White House conflicts of interest laws and keep his affairs hidden from Congress.

Moreover, in the future, Jeffries must avoid any signal that that this is a “normal” president with whom he expects to do business, lest he rekindle criticism that he does not appreciate the nature of the Trumpian threat to democracy and is seeking to accommodate rather than confront a dangerous president. To be clear: no “common ground” exists with a regime engaging in an illegal war (contemptuous of Congress’s constitutional role), massive self-dealing (allegedly involving family members!), a reign of terror against immigrants, routine destruction of constitutional guardrails (e.g., ignoring Congress’s appropriations’ role, violating the Epstein Files Disclosure Act), a savage assault on healthcare to pay for billionaires’ tax cuts, thorough corruption of the Justice Department, and routine racist insults.

If they gain the majority, Democrats’ mandate will not be to find “common ground” with a decrepit autocrat bent on destroying congressional power. It will be to halt him in his tracks, reverse disastrous policies, and exercise exacting oversight. For now, Democratic leaders should focus entirely on achieving a resounding defeat that will hold Kushner, his father-in-law, and the entire regime accountable for their incompetence, malfeasance, and illegality.

Rep. Becca Balint (D-VT) summed it up perfectly: “We get lectured all of the time by these supposed fiscal hawks. And then every single time they grandstand, they do a little dance on the floor that they’re actually going to stand up to the, you know, the debt and increasing the deficit, and then they fold every time like a cheap fan. I’m so sick of being lectured by them.”

In a similar vein, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) blasted the Republican pearl-clutching about the debt. “$40 TRILLION. That’s our national debt. Republicans ran up the tab, handed billionaires another tax break, and now wanna lecture working families about ‘fiscal responsibility,’” she POSTED on X. “You can’t max out the card AND pretend you’re the accountant.”

Under Trump, fiscal irresponsibility has reached new heights. “The Treasury Department’s daily financial report shows that the nation’s debt reached $40.05 trillion on August 18, more than double its level in 2017. The federal debt has ballooned because government spending is outstripping revenue, forcing the U.S. to borrow more money to cover the shortfall,” CBS News reported, quoting Michael Peterson, CEO of the nonpartisan Peter G. Peterson Foundation. He reminds us, “It’s clearly been accelerating because, like any debt problem, the longer you ignore it, the worse it gets.”

Whether you think the enormity of the debt is itself a crisis or simply a drag on the economy, the immediate results are indisputable. “As the government continues to borrow, interest payments are consuming a larger share of the nation’s spending, creating a compounding effect that further fuels the debt,” CBS News reports. “The U.S. government now spends more on servicing its debt than on national defense or Medicare.”

Republicans’ galling hypocrisy about spending, debt, and deficits aside, the real crisis (and the cause of MAGA’s political crisis) is an utterly corrupt and incompetent regime pursuing policies that worsen inflation, aggravate the gap between rich and everyone else, keep interest rates high, and thereby produce anemic economic results. As University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers said recently, this president has given us “the most incoherent, chaotic, unhelpful economic policy” of our lifetime, strewn with self-owns (e.g., mass deportation, frenetic tariff shifts) that undermine even the most robust, innovative economy in the world.

In full view last week was the maladministration of our feckless Treasury, egged on by an unhinged president. Paul Krugman explained the latest machination from incompetent sycophant Scott Bessent (whose laughably false statements describing the nonexistent Golden Age — e.g. “unprecedented economic growth, lasting dollar dominance, and fiscal strength and stability” — are further evidence that this Cabinet is a refuge for unqualified White suck-ups):

High long-term interest rates are an embarrassment for the Trump administration, and Bessent is trying to make the picture look prettier, even though this means undermining the people who are supposed to be making monetary policy.

The maneuver is failing: 30-year yields fell briefly on Wednesday, when the policy was announced, but bounced back on Thursday and were higher as I write this than they were a week ago — clear proof that you can’t gaslight the bond market.

So Bessent, a former bond trader himself, has squandered all of his credibility with his sycophancy, his apparent demands that top officials engage in unethical and probably illegal conduct, and his abuse of the Treasury’s financial power for clearly political goals.

The Wall Street Journal’s headline dryly observed: “The Wild Week When Scott Bessent Was Schooled by the Bond Market.” The report continued: “Investors remain anxious about stubbornly high inflation, mounting federal debt, a deluge of corporate borrowing to fund artificial-intelligence investments, and a new Federal Reserve chairman whose approach to setting interest rates remains enigmatic to many. For some, the Treasury Department’s response only added to the sense of a typically staid market gone disturbingly off-kilter.”

When confronted with Bessent’s face plant, Trump lashed out, fulminating on the failed bond market gambit: “The ultimate intervention is our military. And if we have to use that, we will.” At best, one can say Trump is shockingly ignorant; at worst, he is so crazed as to imagine the military can storm the bond markets. In any sane political universe, the 25^th Amendment should be seriously considered.

Subscribe now

It’s no wonder why the American people have utterly lost confidence in the Trump regime. “A new poll [before the latest meltdown] shows Democrats with a 6-point advantage over Republicans on the economy two months away from the midterm elections,” The Hill reported, citing the results of the Financial Times’ Focaldata poll. With 63 percent saying the economy is moving in the wrong direction, Trump and Bessent’s happy talk is more likely to annoy voters than put their minds at ease.

Across the board, voters are giving Trump and his crew rotten marks for an economy they know does not work for their own families. “Mr Trump’s net approval rating for his handling of inflation and prices reached -44 in August, the lowest it has been this term,” the Economist’s YouGov poll tracker found.

And to put an explanation on the worst spasm of government mismanagement of economic affairs in our lifetime, with thuggish threats, Trump drove Canada, our longtime ally, from the negotiating table and slapped a new 50% tariff on our second closest trading partner, leaving Prime Minister Mark Carney righteously indignant and vowing to decouple his economy from the U.S. The result will be another blow to U.S. consumers, “who have been paying for Mr. Trump’s tariff policies through higher prices that have also been driven by the war in Iran and spiraling oil costs,” as the New York Times reported.

So let’s dispense with the Republicans’ hypocrisy about debt, blame-shifting, and disingenuous demands to scrounge for savings at the expense of working and middle-class families. The only real “crisis” is a crisis in economic competence, brought on by MAGA’s devotion to an unhinged, thoroughly corrupt president, and Republicans’ insistence on fattening the wallets of billionaires and trillionaires. In doing so, they are savaging regulations that protect the health and well-being of Americans, indulging in maddeningly self-destructive trade and immigration policies, and blaming hardworking Americans for the results of a rigged economy. The solution to the crisis begins in November, with a Democratic Congress willing to rein in Trumpian chaos, reverse ludicrous policies (including chaotic tariff moves), and return a measure of stability to the Trump-generated economic catastrophe.

A case in point: Democrat Brandon Dukes scored a narrow victory in last week’s special election in the Pennsylvania 12^th General Assembly, an overwhelmingly White Pittsburgh suburban district that has not sent a Democrat to the state house since the 1990s, and that voted for Donald Trump by 18 points in 2024. The Pennsylvania Capital Star reported that the win was “a major boon for Pennsylvania Democrats, who are hoping to build momentum going into a series of key elections this fall.” Pennsylvania Democratic Party Chair Eugene DePasquale told the paper:

Pennsylvanians across the political spectrum are sick and tired of Republicans’ chaotic, corrupt, and cost-raising agenda — and they’re ready to reject them at the polls and elect Democrats up and down the ballot in historic fashion.

If Democrats can keep the state house, re-elect Governor Josh Shapiro, and flip 3 state senate seats, they will have a trifecta for the first time in decades.

The PA 12^th state house race follows Democrats’ streak of special election victories since January 2025, in which they have flipped 31 legislative seats. These come in addition to outsized wins in the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial races and a huge turnout advantage in the 2026 primary season in MAGA strongholds like Texas.

Democrats hope the pattern holds in the Wisconsin 3^rd, where Rebecca Cooke is looking to knock out MAGA foot soldier Rep. Derrick Van Orden, who voted for the big, ugly bill that that “sharply cut Medicaid, the SNAP food assistance program and renewable energy incentives,” all cuts that “have hit rural areas, which have high rates of poverty and food insecurity, hard,” as Reuters recounted. Van Orden’s fidelity to Trump has cost his constituents dearly: “Van Orden also voted ​against rescinding some of Trump’s controversial tariffs. The administration’s tariff policies have stalled purchases of U.S. agricultural products, including by China, a major consumer of goods such as soybeans, which are widely grown in the district.”

In addition to securing the House majority, Democrats are increasingly optimistic that they can net 4 seats to take the Senate. High-quality nominees — e.g., Josh Turek in Iowa, James Talarico in Texas, Roy Cooper in North Carolina, Sherrod Brown in Ohio, Mary Peltola in Alaska — are running neck-and-neck or ahead of Trump loyalists. “Rural Americans are feeling the pain of Trump/MAGA economic policies — for example, high gas prices — that directly impact household budgets. The pain is felt acutely,” Lavora Barnes, former chair of the Michigan Democratic Party, tells me. “Policies in the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ are forcing rural hospitals to close and driving everyone’s prices higher. MAGA policies represent failure to follow through on promises made to rural communities — a betrayal.”

Subscribe now

Trump can insult voters by claiming affordability is a hoax, but rural voters, be they in Iowa, Texas, Wisconsin, or any other state, know that diesel and fertilizer prices have soared (thanks to Trump’s illegal, reckless war, which has jammed up transportation through the Strait of Hormuz); rural hospitals are closing, and tariffs have decimated farm sales.

“What we’re hearing from voters across the political and geographic spectrum — including rural swing voters — is consistent: they feel like the system is broken and nobody gives a damn about them and the pressures on them and their families,” Yasmin Radjy, executive director of the grassroots group Swing Left, told me via email. “MAGA Republicans control Washington with a trifecta that defers entirely to Donald Trump. . . and they own the consequences: higher costs, less affordable health care, and an agenda that asks working families to pay more while giving more to people at the top.”

Trump’s announcement Friday — that he was lowering tariffs on ground beef imports (evidence that somebody has finally convinced him that consumers pay the cost of tariffs) brought howls of protest from farm-state Senate Republicans, who are all too aware that their constituents will see this as another financial body blow. (Perhaps they should have clawed back Congress’s tariff power months ago? Now they reap the blame for Trump’s erratic policies.)

Underscoring the anti-MAGA backlash, Cook Political Report analysis moved both Texas and Iowa Senate races to “toss-ups.” Regarding Iowa, Cook’s Jessica Taylor observed: “Rising fertilizer and diesel prices, in addition to tariffs, have uniquely harmed the state’s agriculture-dependent economy.” On top of that, Iowa farmers have “lost a steady source of income after the Trump administration cancelled food purchasing assistance programs that enabled state and tribal governments to purchase locally farmed food and distribute it to food banks.” To add to Iowans’ woes, Yasmin Radjy tells me, “We’re hearing from women voters who now have to drive for hours to get basic gynecological care because of rural hospital closures they blame their Republican representatives for.”

Moreover, Turek benefits from a superb Democratic gubernatorial nominee, Iowa state auditor Rob Sand, in a race now rated “lean Democratic,” and from competitive House races in the 1^st, 2^nd, and 3^rd congressional districts — which Roll Call reports are shifting toward Democrats.

Democrats’ comeback is not merely a function of MAGA incompetence and arrogance. “Democrats have been making investments in outreach to rural communities with sustained voter engagement and organizing,” Barnes tells me. “Candidates are showing up to listen to voters and talk about how they will focus on the issues that impact families every day. And Democratic State parties are fielding candidates everywhere — no longer allowing seats to go unchallenged.”

In the face of Trump’s plummeting popularity, a rotten economy, soaring opposition to data centers in farm communities, and rising fury over mistreatment of our military, MAGA Republicans increasingly look flummoxed. Former Republican voters find it increasingly hard to defend very non-conservative policies, resulting in record debt, rising interest rates, and anemic growth. Some MAGA candidates, faced with questions about such policies, have scrambled to change the topic to ludicrous hot-button issues. Senator Darline Graham says she “doesn’t speak politician,” meaning she cannot talk cogently about Iran, but knows trans girls in high school sports are the real problem! Others deflect by ranting about “socialism” or pathetically blaming Joe Biden for Trump’s debacles.

Republicans’ last-gasp tactics are unlikely to forestall massive Republican losses not just in traditional swing races but in states and districts that were safely Republican just two years ago. Democrats should take nothing for granted. They have 71 days to make the most of the electoral opportunity and historic victories — with the support of red enclaves — for pro-democracy forces.

First, in keeping with his telltale authoritarian habit of ignoring, sidestepping, or outright violating unambiguous statutes regarding federal properties, Trump has been trying to thwart the FBI headquarters’ move to Maryland in violation of an ongoing, congressionally authorized relocation process. Just as the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals recently slapped down his East Wing building project (and before that, a district court nixed his renaming of the Kennedy Center), U.S. District Judge Theodore D. Chuang in Greenbelt, Maryland, this week held that Trump could not negate the decision of the General Services Administration’s action, pursuant to its statutory authority, to relocate the headquarters. Trump and embattled FBI director Kash Patel, in deciding to countermand the GSA’s site selection without going back to Congress, had acted “unlawfully,” Chuang held.

Maryland’s attorney general and governor took a victory lap, as the Associated Press reported:

“Maryland and Prince George’s County committed more than a decade of work to earn the FBI headquarters and pledged hundreds of millions of dollars,” Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown, a Democrat, said in a statement. “By blocking the Trump Administration’s unlawful attempt to move the FBI to the Reagan Building and divert the funds Congress set aside for this project, the Court has cleared the path back to Greenbelt.”

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, also a Democrat, said, “Now it is time to stop the games and get to work building the world-class FBI headquarters that our public servants deserve, where it belongs: in Prince George’s County, Maryland.”

As Brown put it, the case (in keeping with other recent humiliating Trump defeats) was really about separation of powers and defending the legislative branch’s powers, which Trump threatened to override. “[W]hen Congress makes a decision, the Trump administration does not get to ignore it because they do not like the outcome,” Brown said simply. He added, “Congress made a promise. The Trump Administration tried to break it. Now, the jobs, investment, and opportunity Marylanders deserve are within reach.” Trump vows to appeal, but for now his imperious move is on hold.

Subscribe now

This was not Trump’s only court loss this week, nor even the only case in which a judge slammed the regime for capricious, arbitrary action. A White House that posits itself as the great defender of religion has been overtly hostile to groups other than white Christian Evangelicals (e.g., Muslims), blasphemous in its imagery of Trump, and disrespectful of places of religious worship.

In a case that came to the 4^th Circuit, Trump tried to reverse a longstanding government policy limiting immigration raids at places of worship. The panel unanimously held in favor of litigants from Cooperative Baptists, Quakers, and Sikh congregations, whose houses of worship had been imperiled by indiscriminate, often violent immigration dragnet operations:

In January 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) rescinded a long-standing policy of limiting immigration enforcement actions at or near houses of worship. Among other things, DHS’s new policy removed guidelines requiring that immigration officers weigh various considerations before conducting enforcement actions at these sensitive locations. Instead, the new policy requires only that the officials use their discretion and “common sense” in deciding where to conduct immigration enforcement actions. . . .

The plaintiffs assert, among other things, that the new policy has and will continue to chill immigrant attendance at the plaintiffs’ worship services and other ministries. They further allege that this decline in attendance burdens their ability to worship communally and to minister to immigrant communities, both acts of which are fundamental to their religious exercise.

The 4^th Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision, issuing a preliminary injunction under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), finding many immigrants decided “not to attend the plaintiffs’ houses of worship because of the new policy. . . . [and that] the plaintiffs’ asserted injury of a decline in attendance at worship services and other activities is fairly traceable to the new policy.”

Despite the court’s restrained language, it highlighted the White House’s obvious contempt for diverse religious faiths for whom communal worship is vital:

DHS has made clear that it intends to target houses of worship in future immigration enforcement actions. As recounted above, a DHS spokesperson explained in January 2025 that the new policy expands the reach of law enforcement in sensitive locations so that “[c]riminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest.” For the plaintiffs, who welcome immigrant worshipers and have locations in or near immigrant communities, DHS’s statement emphasizing the rationale for this policy change shows that the threat of immigration enforcement at their houses of worship is real and substantial.

This was not a close call. “[W]e easily conclude that the district court did not err in determining that the balance of equities and the public interest support granting the preliminary injunction.”

Share

Third, in another defeat for the Trump regime’s gambit of trying to install U.S. attorneys without Senate confirmation (following a similar defeat in the Third Circuit regarding Alina Habba), a 9^th Circuit panel unanimously slapped down Trump’s attempt to leave in place interim U.S. attorney Sigal Chattah, a Trump flunky and election denier who “has reportedly sought to investigate a political adversary and benefit allies and pushed the FBI to investigate claims of noncitizens voting in the 2020 election,” the Nevada Independent reported.

In an opinion authored by Trump appointee Judge Eric D. Miller, the court held Attorney General Todd Blanche could not “make someone an Acting United States Attorney — bypassing the usual requirement that a U.S. Attorney be confirmed by the Senate — by designating that person as the first assistant to an already-vacant office of U.S. Attorney.” It refused to allow Blanche to make her a “de facto acting U.S. attorney by delegating all of the functions and duties of the U.S. attorney to someone else.” The court thereby preserved the Senate’s constitutional role, despite Trump and his puppet Blanche’s antics, which, as the New York Times reported, have fomented “a sense of chaos within the Justice Department, which has pivoted in some instances to a retribution campaign against President Trump’s perceived enemies” and severely damaged its prosecutorial record, with defeats ranging “from its immigration-related prosecutions to the recent abandonment of [the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool] vandalism case.”

Trump’s raging arrogance, contempt for Congress and due process, and willful disregard for Americans’ rights will not abate, nor will his spineless congressional allies defend their own institutional prerogatives. However, lower federal court judges have consistently defended the rule of law, the separation of powers, and due process against arbitrary actions by an unhinged president. We should be grateful for their undaunted and uncompromising stance in defense of our democracy that keeps tyranny at bay.

In these sorts of free-wheeling environments with combative primary races, Democratic minority leaders can easily wind up in a no-win situation. You can bet that corporate media figures and agitated corporate Democrats, alarmed at Nixon’s socialist affiliation (she joined the DSA in June, but it did not endorse her), will be looking to egg on intraparty fights.

Between trying to avoid gaffes, responding to unhinged lies from the White House (which helpfully generates non-stop backlash against MAGA lackeys), and refereeing factions of their diverse party, Democratic leaders can easily sound defensive or overly cautious just when the base is itching for boldness. And while House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is among the most hesitant to get out ahead of his members, Democrats’ greatest risk is skittish failure to convey that leadership has internalized the base’s demand for bold change.

However, with Donald Trump collapsing in the polls and suffering one defeat after another, Democratic leadership and their surrogates are well positioned to project strength and avoid the trap of excessive timidity.

In this environment, Democratic leaders should not waste time on Sunday legacy media shows (whose aging audiences have dwindled), on which hosts recycle tired tropes (Dems in disarray!) and false equivalence. If Dems want to reach persuadable voters, they should recall a crucial 2024 election lesson: independent media, podcasts, and candidates’ own social media accounts offer a reach as large as — if not larger — than legacy media’s, allowing access to critical swing voters. Moreover, as Nixon (as well as Senate nominees in Maine, Michigan, and Minnesota) proved on Tuesday, high-energy grassroots campaigning must not be underestimated.

If Democratic leaders talk about “socialists’” role in the party (in part because some corporate Democrats fuel the left vs. center-left sniping by punching left rather than forging an anti-fascist common front), they should remember that voters do not agree on the meaning of “socialism,” let alone attach a negative connotation to the term. The party's leaders would be foolish to flyspeck the policy views of voters or candidates identifying as “socialists” who support the party’s basic agenda (e.g., extending healthcare access, halting the illegal war, upholding the rule of law).

As Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) said in his Atlanta speech on Sunday, Democrats need to present their campaign as a place “for everyone who craves sanity, competence, [and] quality public service.” Anyone irate that the Trump regime and its MAGA enablers make you “pay more for everything and took us to war on lies and spent most of last year trying to cover up for the world’s most famous pedophile while the crook president and his crook family rake[d] in billions” should feel right at home.

Subscribe now

On policy, Democratic leaders need not get tied up in knots debating the details of issues that will not get resolved before the 2028 election (e.g., Medicare for All). Their present task regarding healthcare is stopping MAGA’s assault on Medicare and Medicaid and fighting to restore Affordable Care Act subsidies.

Democrats should also seize the chance to flip the script when, as often happens, Trump’s accusations turn out to be nothing more than projection. Trump hollering about “communism” is deeply ironic, given his own infatuation with the most ruthless communist dictator on the planet, North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un. Regarding Trump’s order to cancel or curtail military exercises with longtime ally South Korea, the New York Times reported:

President Trump denounced [joint summer military exercises], dealing yet another blow to the seven-decade-old alliance between Washington and Seoul. Under Mr. Trump, bilateral relations have already come under immense strain from ​his punishing tariffs on South Korean exports.​ And his transactional diplomacy has frustrated South Korea, most recently when he appeared to put Saudi Arabia on the path to enriching nuclear fuel on its own soil, a demand Seoul has made for years.

In recent years, North Korea has not only expanded its nuclear arsenal but also repeatedly threatened ​to use it against South ​Korea, labeling its neighbor ​a “most ​hostile enemy.” Its leader, Kim Jong-un, has also forged a mutual defense treaty with Moscow, dispatching troops and​ weapons to ​support Russia’s war against Ukraine. Despite these escalations, Mr. Trump, in a social media post, characterized North Korea as “unthreatening and respectful” while boasting of his “very good relationship” with Mr. Kim.​

Between Trump’s latest gift to the communist regime and his suck-uppery to China’s President Xi Jinping (at Taiwan’s expense), Trump and his congressional enablers deserve every ounce of condemnation Democrats can muster for his facilitation of communist aggression.

In addition, Democrats can be much more explicit about their commitment to reform (e.g., a mandatory Supreme Court ethics code and term limits) and oversight. In vowing to hold Trump — as well as his family, cronies, and Cabinet — accountable for malfeasance and gross incompetence, Democrats can underscore Republicans’ acquiescence in unprecedented corruption and their tolerance of life-endangering incompetence.

Share

Impeachment should remain on the table for the worst offenders. Since his confirmation, despite ample evidence of unfitness, Attorney General Todd Blanche showed up to campaign for Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman, the GOP’s New York gubernatorial nominee. Blanche’s participation potentially violated the Hatch Act and was an outrageous breach of ethical norms expected from the top law enforcement official for all Americans. Blanche revels in his role as a political hack, while refusing to reassert the department’s independence (further highlighting the moral cowardice of Republicans such as Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, who couldn’t bear to oppose his nomination).

Given that, plus Blanche’s ongoing flouting of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, Democrats should remain committed to investigating his conduct and pursuing impeachment. While they’re at it, they should explicitly remind Justice Department employees of their ethical and legal obligations to the Constitution, the courts, and the public. Regardless of what orders their MAGA bosses deliver, they too will have to answer for their conduct.

Democrats must reiterate that Blanche and other flagrantly incompetent and/or dishonest Cabinet members (e.g., RFK, Jr., who destroyed our national health infrastructure, or Pete Hegseth, who bollixed the war and corrupted military promotions) will not get a pass for lying, malicious assault on the rule of law, or stomach-turning malfeasance.

In sum, Democratic leaders’ task is to sustain an aggressive attack on the MAGA menace while keeping the flaps of the big tent wide open for all who want to defeat fascism. They should avoid feeding legacy media horserace storylines designed to highlight intraparty conflict. Instead, they must work 24/7 to forge the broadest pro-democracy coalition in history and relentlessly attack MAGA’s reckless, pro-communist foreign policy; domestic policy disasters; and relentless corruption.

The Jewish sage Hillel:

“If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?”

Last week’s horrendous attack at Central Synagogue underscores the scourge of antisemitism that has shaken American Jews to their core. In an era of rising violence, American Jews and non-Jews seeking values-based leadership would do well to look to the leadership of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA), founded 80 years ago to engage communities on issues of common concern and shared values (especially civil rights, justice, and equality).

My conversation with Amy Spitalnick, JCPA’s CEO, lightly edited for style and length, addressed antisemitism and Islamophobia, xenophobia, Israel, and the defense of democracy.

JCPA works “to build a just and inclusive democracy.” Why is that critical, and is America at risk when one party undermines democratic values?

Jewish safety and inclusive, pluralistic democracy are inextricably linked — simply put, there is no true democracy without real Jewish safety, and there is no real Jewish safety without ensuring a truly inclusive, pluralistic democracy.

Democratic norms and institutions have played a vital role in Jewish advancement and safety in this country for generations. My own family is a case study: My grandparents survived the Holocaust and came here as refugees after the war. It was through the opportunities they found here — my grandmother as a seamstress and card-carrying union member, my grandfather as a taxi driver — that they were able to build a better life for my mother. My mother and father both became NYC public school teachers and members of the UFT, and I benefited from a great public school education, all of which allowed us to really survive and thrive in the middle class. So many of these norms and institutions are now under assault by the administration and other leaders.

In fact, right now we see how rising antisemitism and this anti-democratic extremism go hand-in-hand. Antisemitic conspiracy theories rooted in tropes and lies about Jewish control and power — including “replacement” and “invasion” rhetoric — are used to sow division and distrust in our democratic institutions. If a shadowy cabal is controlling things, how can we trust in our elections? Our government? Our economy? And as our democracy erodes, it only allows antisemitism and broader hate and extremism to flourish. We’re in this feedback loop in which increasingly normalized conspiracy theories undermine our democracy, and eroding democracy only makes our communities less safe.

At the same time, we’re being offered false choices: by the administration and others on the right telling us that fighting antisemitism requires us to undermine democracy, and by some on the far-left working to divide Jews from the very coalitions we need right now to fight for our democracy.

Our job right now is to reject false choices and false binaries — to recognize that fighting antisemitism (wherever it exists) and protecting our democracy are one and the same, and those who suggest otherwise intend to divide our communities rather than advance our shared future.

Subscribe now

Debate is raging over funding for Israel and AIPAC’s dark money spending. Is criticism of AIPAC or urging reassessment of Israeli aid antisemitic?

Criticism of AIPAC (or any other organization, for that matter) or debate over U.S. aid is not inherently antisemitic — and there are absolutely those using blanket accusations of antisemitism to stifle such important debate.

Of course there are also a number of ways in which these conversations have veered into dehumanizing rhetoric or tropes and conspiracy theories related to Jewish money or power, or disproportionately singled out Israel or AIPAC — which our leaders must be particularly attuned to as we see rising and increasingly violent hate targeting Jews under the guise of protesting Israel.

There are some fairly simple ways to engage in important debate on these topics without veering into harm: Focus on policies and tactics rather than identity. Ensure your critiques apply to all organizations and entities that spend in our elections, not just one. Keep an ear out for dual loyalty or disloyalty claims, antisemitic caricatures, and other harmful tropes.

At the end of the day, when we flatten all critique of Israeli policy or pro-Israel organizations into reductive, binary terms, it’s that much harder both to call out and address real antisemitism AND to illustrate that it is possible (and even necessary) to criticize Israeli policy without dehumanizing Israelis or Jews.

What’s the appropriate response to grotesque Islamophobia regarding Abdul El-Sayed?

Every single one of us — no matter whether we agree with El-Sayed — has an obligation to reject those using this Senate race or policy disagreements to advance Islamophobia. Some of the rhetoric we’ve seen about Abdul El-Sayed, Mayor Mamdani, and other Muslim leaders has just been horrific and disgusting — period. When we allow hate against any individual or community to be normalized, it makes all of us less safe.

It is absolutely fair game to disagree with these leaders on their policies and on their own rhetoric. But we undermine our own arguments when we allow them to be co-opted by those spreading dehumanization and bigotry. We know where such hate can lead. My safety as a Jewish person is bound up with the safety of my Muslim neighbors — and we should all refuse to allow our disagreements and fears to be exploited to pit our communities against each other right now, no matter who’s doing so.

The Trump regime is savaging voting rights and unleashing violence against immigrants, now threatening mass deportations of law-abiding TPS refugees. How do these endanger our democratic values, and how do we protect our neighbors?

At the core of the assaults on immigrant and voting rights are deeply xenophobic, racist, and antisemitic conspiracy theories that have become normalized over the last decade.

When neo-Nazis with torches descended on Charlottesville and chanted “Jews will not replace us!” it was considered fringe and shocking. Those ideas fueled a cycle of violence against so many communities (including Charlottesville, Pittsburgh, El Paso, and Buffalo). They also directly underpin draconian, dehumanizing policies targeting immigrants, voting rights, and more. Claims of an immigrant “invasion” or a “stolen” election are fundamentally rooted in these extremist, hateful lies, suggesting that there is a conspiracy to replace white people, our electorate, or core American values.

We should be clear about a few things: Our elections are safe, voter fraud is incredibly rare, and the impact of these dangerous policies would be to potentially disenfranchise millions of eligible voters. We must understand how this assault on voting rights threatens all of our rights and safety — and push back.

Similarly — especially as descendants of refugees and immigrants who experienced both persecution and the hope of safety in America — we know that closing our door to those in need abandons our core values while helping normalize extremism and bigotry, ultimately threatening all of us. The only moral response to ICE raids and violence and the broader dehumanizing attacks on our communities is to reject them — and instead advance smart, humane immigration policies rooted in shared safety and opportunity.

BASH: It sounds like you’re saying you’re not going to return Max Miller’s donations because you believe him

LAWLER: Look, this is a private family matter. Max has also made allegations against his ex-wife. Nothing has been corroborated here. Do you have information that proves the allegations?

It is unconscionable, frankly, to refer to substantial, serious allegations of spousal and child abuse made against a sitting congressman as a “private family matter.” Lawler, who has always peddled himself as a moderate while lining up behind MAGA extremist policies, has hit a new low in self-debasement and countenancing the indefensible actions of his party.

While insisting he did not countenance abuse, Lawler falsely asserted that “ultimately there’s been nothing that has been corroborated here.” His ex-wife’s sworn statements, state investigatory materials, and physical evidence of abuse apparently don’t count in Lawler’s book. He might talk to Miller’s former father-in-law, who calls him unfit to serve.

As Politico reported:

Allegations from Emily Moreno, the senator’s daughter and Miller’s ex-wife, include that Miller held a gun to her head and broke their daughter’s collarbone. Many of the allegations were contained in state investigatory documents related to a child abuse probe. Miller has denied the allegations.

The facts surrounding Miller’s alleged conduct keep getting worse, reinforcing the moral depravity of Lawler and the rest of his party. The Hill reported that his ex-wife sued, alleging Miller “recklessly published and disclosed to the world a nude image” of his child. According to the suit, “Miller ‘recklessly and intentionally’ gave the photo to his lawyer Aaron Minc as part of a tranche of documents and photos ‘to salvage his political job’” and then posts a link to the documents on X “after hosting a livestream defending himself.” The suit alleges Miller will not “provide information about how many times Defendants disclosed and transferred the intimate image to viewers who accessed, viewed or downloaded the intimate image,” and will not “answer questions about who might have accessed, viewed or downloaded the image.”

Any decent human being would recognize, as Moreno did, that after Miller “went out and did what he did — including releasing photos of my granddaughter completely naked … [to] hundreds of thousands of psychotic human beings,” his “oops” reaction is nothing short of grotesque. So, no, this is not a private matter, and, yes, there is ample evidence to support the allegations. Miller is not entitled to the presumption of innocence as he would be in criminal court; all but the most craven MAGA cultists have ample grounds to draw conclusions about his fitness.

Lawler’s opponent, Cait Conley (who served 16 years as an active-duty Army officer, deploying overseas six times to combat zones), reacted to Lawler’s remarks: “Mike Lawler’s refusal to condemn domestic abuser Max Miller and return $17,000 in donations from him is disqualifying.” She added, “Unsurprisingly, his decision comes on the heels of orders from Donald Trump to stand by Miller. It is the absolute bare minimum to call out this despicable behavior, but Mike Lawler’s loyalty to Donald Trump truly knows no bounds.”

Republicans (including Lawler, specifically[!]) screamed bloody murder about abuse allegations (involving adults) that eventually forced Graham Platner from his Maine Senate race. But now they “argue they have no choice but to close ranks.” No choice? Plainly, they lack the capacity for free will, as they habitually kowtow to Trump. Still, “Ohio’s other Republican senator, Jon Husted, has also said Miller should resign and not run for reelection,” so defying Trump is not impossible; it is merely inconvenient.

An overwhelming number of Republicans have no qualms about sticking by Miller and keeping campaign funds from him — or simply keeping mum, since the White House is orchestrating the effort to circle the wagons. Indeed, according to Politico reporting, the White House told Ohio Republicans last week “not to wage a public pressure campaign against embattled GOP Rep. Max Miller, after they became increasingly convinced he wouldn’t end his reelection bid.” So much for Trump’s iron grip on his party. What can he do but back the alleged abuser?!

Subscribe now

Miller is not the only scandal-plagued Republican who remains a candidate in good standing in his party, which supports candidates such as Rep. Cory Mills (who faces primary challengers in his Florida race today) and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton — all backed by a president adjudicated for sexual assault who sits atop the most corrupt administration in history. Every Republican must be pressed to denounce and reject figures like Miller, or accept condemnation for enabling the worst of the worst.

The party line that Miller’s conduct is merely a “private” matter or that there is no evidence to substantiate the serious allegations of abuse is reprehensible but utterly expected. In a party in which no lie is beyond bounds, no deviation from the Trump line is acceptable, and no ounce of human decency can permeate the sealed bubble of MAGA cultism, we now see not only a monstrous double standard (for Democrats, but not for me!) but the evisceration of any shame in public life for desperate Republican politicians like Lawler.

At least voters know exactly whom they would get by returning Lawler and other MAGA zombies to the House — scared, spineless toadies who will say anything and throw any item under the bus to save their own political skins.

A time to unite against a common foe

Losing Democratic candidates have demonstrated restraint, humility, and patriotism, rallying to embrace their opponents, some of whom bitterly debated hot-button policy issues. Contrary to the “Democrats are at each other’s throats” patter, Rep. Haley Stevens in Michigan, Rep. Angie Craig in Minnesota, and Francesca Hong in Wisconsin were among those who after their defeats swiftly adopted a unity message in service of cementing the pro-democracy coalition. Likewise, winning candidates (who had been viciously attacked in some cases by the losers’ backers and by partisan pundits) have been remarkably gracious in forging solidarity after tough fights.

Hong, after a razor-thin defeat to Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley for the Wisconsin Democratic gubernatorial nomination, declared: “This campaign was not about getting one person into office. It is about building a movement for permanent affordability and a government that puts working people first. Our movement is strong, and the work isn’t done.” She added, “I fully support him and look forward to working with him to defeat Congressman Tiffany in November.” Crowley responded in kind: “We may not agree on every policy, we may not use the same labels, but we all want safe communities, strong schools, affordable health care, good-paying jobs and a brighter future for all of our children.”

Magnanimity was evident in Minnesota as well, as Minnesota Reformer reported on the aftermath of the Senate primary won easily by Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan:

In her victory speech, Flanagan looked to swiftly repair the fissures from the costly and acrimonious primary. She reminded her supporters that she and Craig are both proud Democrats despite their differences, and told Craig’s supporters she will work hard to earn their vote.

Craig likewise stressed her “top priority” was winning in November. Even before election day, when the electoral handwriting was plainly on the wall, Craig said during the last debate, “We have an existential crisis in our nation with Trump and Republicans, and so I would be right by the lieutenant governor’s side asking my supporters to support her.” Craig continued, “The most important thing in this election is that we beat Republicans. That’s what matters.”

Share

And in Michigan, Stevens trumpeted calls for unity, telling Meet the Press NOW, there was “no drama” following the primary. She reiterated on CNN, “I’ll do whatever they want!” Stevens stressed she had not given up her values (nor need her voters) but nevertheless was fully committed to making certain the “big tent” held together. Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed meanwhile continues his appeal to voters who opposed him in the primaries.

In sum, facing general election Republican opponents who rank as the most morally objectionable, extreme, and blatantly racist characters ever to run for office, responsible Democrats are linking arms to capitalize on an election environment in which Donald Trump’s approval is cratering. Under such circumstances, Democrats and pro-democracy independents and Republicans should applaud those who prioritize defeating a fascist movement before it can do more damage.

Frequent Contrarian contributor Simon Rosenberg, noting that “every flavor of Democrat had victories in the last few months,” observed recently:

You’re seeing the Democratic Party in all of its glory and its diversity, what I call embracing the rainbow.... And in a change election, it’s really important that it looks to the public like we’re changing and we’re not just doing the same old, same old.... We needed to change. We needed to evolve and grow. We didn’t win the last election. And I think you’re seeing our party evolve and grow.

That bodes well for the party’s chances in November.

A time to move on

Democrats (voters, donors, operatives, candidates) should understand that age, not just abstract “generational change,” will increasingly be an issue in national politics. Americans have watched two presidents suffering from glaringly age-related deterioration. They have witnessed the infirm former Senate majority leader’s long absence as the public had reason to doubt whether he remained sentient.

Despite a batch of retirements, we are left with a Congress among the oldest by median age, with nearly a quarter 70 or older. Since 2023, “10 sitting members of Congress have died, all 65 or older, and a number of others have spent weeks and even months off the job in the hospital.” And voters keep telling us they are tired of geriatric rule. A recent NPR/PBS/Marist poll found: “80% strongly support or support imposing a maximum age limit for candidates” and 83% “strongly support or support limiting the number of times candidates can run for congressional office.”

The waning patience with candidates who have hung around too long was evident in last Tuesday’s Democratic primary in Connecticut’s 1^st Congressional District. Fourteen-term incumbent Rep. John Larson, 78, who had a seizure on the House floor this year, lost his primary race to younger moderate Democrat, Luke Bronin. Bronin bluntly argued that “this race is about energy and effectiveness and building a Democratic Party that is strong enough to defeat Donald Trump.” While praising those who served “for decades,” he emphasized that “we would be so much stronger as a Democratic Party if we had more leaders that recognized that part of leadership is knowing when to pass the torch.” Voters agreed.

Other Democrats should pay attention. As The Connecticut Mirror reported, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) will find it hard “to dodge questions about age and the calls for generational change that are sure to play a role in future campaigns.” (Blumenthal, shrugging off age as merely “a state of mind,” irresponsibly denies hard truths about aging.) He and senior colleagues in both the House and Senate should consider leaving on their own volition and decline to seek reelection in 2028.

The age issue is most acute for Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY), who is nearing nearly 30 years in office. With his stooped posture and glasses sliding down his nose, he hardly projects the image of a vibrant party ready to turn the page. Criticism targeting his lackluster rhetoric, inconsistent record in confronting Trump, recruitment of mediocre candidates, identification with the corporate wing of the party, and rigid AIPAC dogma will fuel demands for a leadership makeover.

Share

The prospect of a leadership fight after the midterms or a strong 2028 challenger may force his hand. But he could decide to avoid messy fights, as did his longtime ally (and milquetoast Senate Judiciary Chairman) Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL), who declined to run in 2026, allowing a talented African American woman, Juliana Stratton, to emerge as his successor.

In sum, robust pluralistic democracy demands a flow of fresh faces. Voters ultimately decide when “enough is enough,” as they did with Larson. But, by announcing they are serving their last term, aging candidates could spare themselves and the party unneeded angst and give promising newcomers time to prepare campaigns. If they do, they will earn their party’s gratitude.

Here is part of that conversation:

Pelosi’s sage advice for her party and for voters centered on a key word: “representative.” This was not only the job title she occupied but the political raison d’etre for Pelosi and her colleagues. The branch intimately connected to and most responsive to the people retains, as she pointed out, a special place in Article I under the Framer’s Constitutional framework. She chided those who say they do not like this or that candidate in a particular district. “Who cares?” she essentially said. It’s not their representative. Each district gets its voters’ pick, and it is entirely irrelevant (inappropriate, even, as she suggested) for others to micromanage or disparage their choices. She spoke emotionally, reverentially, about the role the Framers carved out for the House, for whom voters must go to the ballot every two years.

With a sly dig at the Senate (Wyoming gets 2 senators, well that’s the Constitution!), she observed that while the president gets a four-year term, two years after his election the entire House goes to the voters as a “referendum” on themselves but also on “what is going on” in the White House. No one could miss her meaning: The upcoming House election is the chance to short-circuit Trump’s reign of corruption, incompetence, and malfeasance, putting him under close supervision by the people’s House.

She threw out 30 as the number of seats she’d like to win. But “I’ll take more,” she said with a grin. Indeed, winning decisively — she made clear — not only would help foreclose Trump election shenanigans but would make an emphatic statement that voters definitively reject Trump’s authoritarian putsch.

Her account of former president Joe Biden (who accomplished a “remarkable” amount in two years, she recalled, ticking off the roster of significant wins) was affectionate but candid. As she has before, she denies telling him to get out of the race following the debate disaster, saying she only told him his pollsters were not giving him the full story. She told him in a “prayerful meeting,” she recalled, that he should meet with other pollsters, and said bluntly that his campaign “ain’t working.” But she also told the audience this week that she recommended he share with the voters any cognitive testing he might have gotten. Biden apparently responded that he got “tested” every day in the job. He never took her up on the offer, nor is it clear it would have helped.

As she has in previous interviews, Pelosi denied going on Morning Joe the next day to open the door to his exit. She says her answer about his campaign — “It’s up to the president” — was intended to be innocuous. (That part of her account does not ring entirely true to those who appreciate she is among the savviest politicians of her era, and surely would have foreseen the impact of her comments.) And of course, the “deluge” did follow, as the party recognized she had given him a “path” out.

Pelosi was appropriately unsparing about those in his family and on his staff who saw him up close and could have observed his health. “Those who did know should have acted upon it,” she said tersely. After Democrats went into the minority in 2022, she says, she saw him sparingly, leaving her without sufficient opportunities to observe his mental or physical condition.

Biden’s inner circle’s refusal to level with him, she did not need to reiterate, set us on a constitutionally-threatening, perilous slide into MAGA totalitarian rule. Frankly, those who refused to confront Biden and force the issue shoulder the blame for untold constitutional damage, ICE murders, an illegal and disastrous war, and the suffering of millions who have lost vital social safety net services.

Subscribe now

Pelosi’s appearance reminds us of the chasm between, on one hand, her adept, successful leadership and prodigious legislative record (under both Biden and Obama) and, on the other, the ruin and mayhem resulting from incompetent, foolish, and irresponsible Republican bootlickers and Trump enablers who took up the Speaker’s gavel in her wake. One could never imagine Nancy Pelosi losing control of the House and suffering multiple losses on discharge petitions, failing to do basic oversight over a disastrously cruel and inept presidency (regardless of party), tolerating rank bigotry among her members, or silently countenancing illegal military operations.

Pelosi’s recitation of Biden’s legislative accomplishments (and her recounting the details of the Belarus political upheaval that precipitated her Morning Joe appearance) underscored her remarkable memory, grasp of detail, and love of governance. Few public servants have ever been as good at their job — or seemingly loved it as much. Her faith in the power of government to do good, here and abroad, especially in light of the current chaotic rule by entirely self-interested, corrupt MAGA thugs, makes one nostalgic for the “good old days” — which seem like a lifetime ago.

Nevertheless, her faith in the Lincoln adage: “Public sentiment is everything. With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it nothing can succeed” restores hope that, roused to the Trump menace, the public will usher in an arduous but political about-face and dramatic march to recapture our democracy in November.

Pelosi’s appearance, most importantly, should serve as a cautionary tale for Democrats. Her famous expression (channeling the late Al Davis, former owner of the Raiders) — “Just win, baby” — could not be more timely as Democrats move to the general election. Any factional fights, recriminations about primaries, and social media sniping among the pro-democracy forces are gifts to the MAGA totalitarian regime. They add to the risk that the assaults on the rule of law, simple decency, democratic pluralism, and truth will persist. Those who proceed in that vein are enabling Trump. Period.

Those who love American ideals as much as Speaker Emerita Pelosi, and harbor faith in the ability of government to improve ordinary people’s lives, still draw inspiration from her lifelong example of undaunted, undimmed, unafraid, and uncompromising patriotism. America is indebted to her for her decades of service.

In Wisconsin, current Governor Tony Evers helped ensure he will have a Democratic successor. Democratic Socialist Francesca Hong appeared to open a lead in late polling in the race. But — as in Michigan — we learned that primary polling with fast-moving shifts in voter sentiment and highly partisan respondents (who can be mis-sampled based on enthusiasm of activists) is a dicey business.

Unlike a batch of successful progressives (for example, Democratic Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed), Hong is an avowed socialist. She also left a string of questionable statements and extreme positions in her wake (forcing her to walk back stances on everything from abolishing the police to condemning Thanksgiving) that kept even progressive kingmakers like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) from endorsing her. The prospect of blowing a key governorship prompted Evers to lure back into the race David Crowley, the serious, low-key Milwaukee County executive, and help him eke out a narrow victory. Democrats made history by nominating Wisconsin’s first Black governor, if Crowley prevails.

Before patting themselves on the back for dodging a near-disaster, party centrists might want to revisit why they once more found themselves behind the curve. Plainly, dynamic candidates with sharp, clear messages out of the gate could help avoid these Perils of Pauline finishes.

Those looking for a single hot take (Progressives win everything! Centrists revenge!) will be disappointed to see that in neither Wisconsin nor in Minnesota is there one grand, singular ideological surge in the party. The better candidate with the clearest message tends to win. Even within a single state, unique matchups, specific personalities, and distinct political vibe have more to do with the winner than ideological purity or pushback.

In Minnesota, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), the quintessential pragmatic moderate, sailed to victory to face House state speaker Lisa Demuth, whom Republican voters chose over Trump favorite, Mr. Pillow CEO (and fanatic MAGA election denier) Mike Lindell, and healthcare executive Kendall Qualls. Aside from snubbing Trump, the Republicans’ pick hardly matters. Minnesotans are unlikely to embrace a party or candidate who refuses to condemn CBP or ICE, which collectively terrorized the state and killed two Minnesotans.

At a recent candidate forum, Klobuchar declared, “None of my opponents on this stage condemned what ICE did. Not a word. Not a word. Two innocent people were killed, shot in the back. We had many people arrested when they weren’t supposed to be arrested, and we all know that.” She has called for immigration reform and objects to $70B+ funding for the murderous outfit, money badly needed for housing, healthcare, childcare, etc.

In the highest-profile Minnesota race, the battle to replace retiring Sen. Tina Smith (D-MN), progressive Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, a charismatic campaigner, trounced moderate Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN), winning nearly 60 percent of the vote. While the policy differences between the two were not great, once more a dynamic, aggressive progressive was able to connect with voters looking for bold change in a way that an incrementalist, cautious incumbent congresswoman was not.

As the Minnesota Reformer put it, despite stylistic differences, the two generally favored “banning corporate money in elections, expanding the Supreme Court, allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices, making it easier for workers to unionize, providing undocumented immigrants a path to legal status, [and] eliminating taxes on Social Security.” However, Flanagan is a uniquely powerful campaigner with a tremendous personal story. “I was raised by an amazing single working mom struggling to pay for food and rent. So to me, food assistance isn’t just another line item in the federal budget. It’s why I was able to walk out of the food shelf with a block of commodity cheese under my arm like a football,” she told supporters Tuesday, as she spoke about how Section 8 housing and Medicaid had saved her family.

By contrast, Craig's support for the Laken Riley Act, mandating the detention of undocumented immigrants for relatively minor crimes, hurt her. That vote in the wake of the ICE invasion looked egregiously off-key. As in other Democratic primary races, PAC spending on Craig’s behalf to boost the crypto industry and her vote to continue aid to Israel also undercut her support. These issues, aside from the merits, have come to represent whether a candidate is willing to defy powerful establishment figures and donors.

Subscribe now

If business-captive centrists are alarmed by progressive challengers, they should start listening to voters and find more inspiring candidates. Craig immediately reached out to endorse her opponent, telling her supporters, “We are both proud Democrats … and we love this state. And we both know that we can’t just hand Donald Trump another Senate seat.”

In a competitive Minnesota Democratic House primary race, Matt Little, a former DFL state senator and the most progressive of the top contenders, beat out two state lawmakers for the nomination for the 2nd congressional district to replace Craig. His winning message stressed Medicare for All, criticized data center overbuilding, and rejected AIPAC money. In the 1^st congressional district, high school math teacher and political newcomer Jake Johnson won, running as a fiscal conservative. He will have a shot at knocking out incumbent Rep. Brad Finstad (R-MN) in a Republican-leaning seat.

Finally, in South Carolina, Darline Graham, the utterly unqualified placeholder Donald Trump’s pick to fill her late brother’s seat, did not impress voters. Trump’s endorsement failed to clear the field, leaving her to face a batch of fresh competitors. While she placed first, she got less than a third of the vote, forcing her into an Aug. 25 runoff. All of that is good news for an impressive underdog Democratic nominee and pediatrician, Annie Andrews, who has been stressing exceptionally timely issues such as the measles outbreak brought on by irresponsible MAGA science denial, the Cyclospora outbreak and other health disasters, gun safety, and access to affordable healthcare. She remains the longest of long shots, a reminder of the price that red states pay for remaining in the cult of personality where Republicans refuse to deviate one iota from Trump’s deranged rhetoric, lies, and disastrous policies.

In sum, Democrats remain a big-tent party gravitating toward an aggressive, anti-oligarch economic message. Republicans, meanwhile, remain depressingly predictable — running as unblinking foot soldiers in an authoritarian cult that repudiates science, the rule of law, and pluralistic democracy. That might fly in deep red South Carolina, but it alienates large swaths of the electorate looking for sane, decent leadership. If Democrats run solid campaigns against MAGA extremists, Republicans will face historic losses around the country in November.

In competitive, highly anticipated primaries Tuesday, Democrats defied “hot takes” and bad punditry, showing that (boring but true!) better candidates beat worse ones and Democrats are coalescing around a theme of economic populism with broad appeal.

Wisconsin Democrats apparently decided (barely) not to roll the dice on Democratic Socialist Francesca Hong (who sported a boatload of extreme statements from her past, had not mustered endorsements from progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders, and momentarily whetted Republicans’ appetite for a November free for all). Instead, they followed the lead of Gov. Tony Evers, who helped Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley return to the race he had left and edge out a victory. With a lead of just 3,000 votes, Crowley became the first African American Democratic gubernatorial nominee for the state. Democrats in the quintessential swing state seem to have chosen the pragmatic route to victory in the midterms. (Kudos go to Democratic gubernatorial candidate Mandela Barnes, who dropped out to help clear the way for a consensus center-left winner.)

In Minnesota, centrist Amy Klobuchar cruised to the nomination for governor, while progressive superstar Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan trounced her more moderate opponent, becoming the first Native American Senate nominee in the state’s history. In a possible House pickup opportunity, a progressive won in the 2^nd Congressional District (Matt Little), while in a stretch/possible red-to-blue flip race in the 1^st Congressional District, high school math teacher Jake Johnson won running as a fiscal conservative.

For Republicans, Donald Trump’s clout seems to be fading. His pick, My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell, lost in the Minnesota gubernatorial primary, and his South Carolina designated successor for Sen. Lindsey Graham, his sister Darline, came nowhere near clearing the field or securing a majority in her special election, necessitating a runoff on Aug. 25.

I will have a full report tomorrow, but for now: “Democrats in array, Republicans struggling with Trump endorsements” may be the most fitting takeaway.

As disastrous as Donald Trump’s domestic policies have been — e.g., tariffs, slashing SNAP and healthcare, unleashing rogue shock troops that kill Americans on our streets, corrupting the Justice Department, dismantling life-saving government functions — Iran may be the longest-lasting calamity of his presidency, one that subsequent presidents will be hard-pressed to reverse.

As veteran Middle East negotiator Phil Gordon of Brookings put it:

U.S. acceptance of Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz is an extraordinary outcome only made conceivable by an administration that squandered legitimacy, alienated allies, attempted regime change in a war it had not adequately prepared for and that is being forced to accept a catastrophic outcome without viable alternatives. . . . US and other countries are now being forced to accept an outcome that would have been unthinkable before the war but seems to have become unavoidable because of it.

No clear military solution exists, as is evident from Trump repeatedly threatening to resume fighting, announcing non-existent deals, and then retreating.

Even Trump seems to have given up on the canard that he will restart the war in earnest, given that “the threat to heavily bomb Iran may have been a useful deterrent but is now almost useless because that card has been played,” as Gordon writes. We are viewed as feckless, unreliable, and — now — low on military capacity, so restoring freedom of navigation seems unattainable at this point.

In other words, Iran now gets to dictate terms concerning the Strait of Hormuz to the U.S. and the rest of the world. Iran is going to make money, choking off what was an open international waterway, thanks to Trump’s utter stupidity, rotten judgment, and incompetence. Its financial windfall will allow the Iranians to rebuild their military, including its missile program, reinforce their terrorist networks, and guarantee new stability for the regime Trump vowed to change. And, we will have achieved absolutely no progress in restraining Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

Meanwhile, Trump’s influence in Israel, predictably, has withered. “The Israeli government has rejected a 15-point plan backed by the Trump administration aimed at disarming the Palestinian militant group Hamas in Gaza, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday,” the New York Times reported. “It appeared to be an unusually public break with President Trump, whose relationship with Mr. Netanyahu has had a dizzying and often unpredictable arc.” Trump’s grand “Board of Peace” plan for a phased peace and reconstruction, Netanyahu lets on, never had Israel’s buy-in. The absence of any benefit (other than the potential for continued war that fuels Netanyahu’s rationale for clinging to power) typifies Trump’s utter failure to use leverage to secure outcomes that are attainable and sustainable in the real world. (Trump’s sway with the rest of the region is faring no better, as witnessed by the crumbling of the Abraham Accords structure.)

Trump, his utterly incompetent secretaries of state and defense, and Republican cheerleaders for the war (plus the cadre of right-wing pundits who celebrated the Iran War and kept insisting progress was possible) must bear the blame for a catastrophic outcome.

Democrats can and should hammer home responsibility for this fiasco throughout the campaign. Republicans put unfit, unhinged Pete Hegseth in office and refused to exercise oversight. Republicans gave Trump a blank check. Republicans continue to throw money at a mismanaged, dysfunctional Pentagon, which refuses to conduct an after-action investigation on potential war crimes or accurately account for the injured and dead. The Iran war disaster is a Republican disaster, one that should disqualify the party from holding power.

As Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) declared in a stemwinder in a Black Church in Georgia:

[T]here’s something uniquely despicable about lying a nation into war, treating citizens as fools and the selfless patriots who serve as pawns. Remember earlier this year they claimed there was an imminent nuclear threat after last year they told us they had obliterated that threat? Do you remember that? Both times: lies. On day 12 of this war, the president said quote, “We won.” On day 14, Secretary Hegseth said Iran’s military was quote “destroyed.” Day 14. Five months later, we’re still bombing. Americans are still dying. Iran still has its uranium. The Strait of Hormuz is still closed. I challenge anyone to defend this. A war built on lies told by a White House that is utterly absent [of] any figures of integrity to dissuade this president from his delusions.

It is also a Republican Congress utterly absent of any figures of integrity to dissuade Trump from his delusions.

Beyond the campaign, Democrats would be wise to pursue three responses as they attempt to hold the Trump regime accountable and reverse the horrendous cost to America. Fortunately, the American people overwhelmingly agree with them on the war.

Subscribe now

First, once they have control of one or both houses, Democrats must end funding for the illegal war. Full stop. Spending more U.S. taxpayers’ dollars, continuing to divert assets from other parts of the world, risking more lives, and adding to the cost of humanitarian, military, and economic reconstruction would compound the Republican debacle. (In the longer vein, Democrats must lean in to the effort to re-evaluate all military aid to countries in the region and realign our Middle East interests with achievable policy goals.)

Second, serious, exhaustive hearings on the conduct of the war akin to the Fulbright hearings that exposed the lies, duplicity, and blunders associated with the Vietnam War are essential. That entails calling active and retired military personnel to testify under oath, and drawing on bipartisan expertise from prior administrations (including the first Trump term). It will be up to Congress to explain how Trump blundered into war, misled the country, mismanaged the war, and then botched post-hostility negotiations (about which Trump continually lies). Its findings may, in some cases, justify impeachment or criminal referrals for perjury.

Third, if nothing else, Trump’s Iran disaster should prompt a complete revision of the War Powers Act. Given that the Constitution gives Congress the sole power to declare war, it is time to reverse the trend to bestow the president with unilateral control over hard power. After a brief time for the commander in chief to deploy troops in cases of national emergency, Congress’s failure to authorize ongoing deployment and to fund operations should end any military engagement. No further vote should be needed; no joint resolution or presidential sign-off should be required. With that rule in place, the president would be much less inclined to unilaterally drag us into war without congressional consultation or even public debate.

In sum, voters must hold those responsible for one of the worst foreign policy blunders in modern American history accountable for the damage they have caused. And Democrats must grab the opportunity to rejigger the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches and stop spending money and resources in the Middle East in ways that offend our deepest-held values, achieve no tangible benefits, and result in one disastrous war after another.

It’s long past time to stop calling consistently dismal results part of a “unexpected contraction.” There is simply nothing “unexpected” about Trump’s economic failures rooted in the same flawed policies.

Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union (and formerly a superb reporter for the Washington Post, before it imploded) called the July jobs report “bleak”:

The U.S. labor market is stalling again and that is going to make the Federal Reserve’s job harder and life for job seekers rough. The big surprise was job losses in July. But that was only the beginning of the bad news. The unemployment rate fell for the wrong reasons. People continue to leave the labor force. Labor force participation is at the lowest level since February 2021. Even worse is that wage growth cooled to a mere 3.2%, the lowest level in five years. This is not what workers need as inflation soars again.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics also announced a downward revision of more than 100,000 jobs for May and June. The results are especially embarrassing for a MAGA crew that promised to stay ahead of inflation (hourly earnings rose just 3.2 percent) and that derides Democrats for failing to promote work. (The labor participation rate has receded to 61.4 percent; when Joe Biden left office, it was 62.6 percent.)

All Trump’s incompetent minions can do is lamely spin. The New York Times dryly reported: “Kevin Hassett, the director of the National Economic Council, tried to make the case that the economy remained strong despite the poor jobs report that was released today.”

Trump may wind up “delivering” on something we have not seriously worried about since the 1970s: stagflation. “A weakening labor market and elevated inflation is the toughest of combinations for the Fed to manage. It pits its two goals of low, stable inflation and a healthy labor market against one another and causes officials to have to make difficult trade-offs over which one to prioritize,” the Times explained.

Trump’s jobs/inflation/growth results are bad enough. But let’s not forget that the self-proclaimed real estate maven was supposed to make great deals for America. Unfortunately, while the grift, scams, and self-dealing parts of his personal portfolio seem to have paid handsomely, his record of public deals (a Qatari jet now in the shop, a series of failed Iran agreements, non-existent Gaza rebuilding plans) and botched projects in D.C. (ranging from the faulty helipad design to the Reflecting Pool debacle to his garish gold-flocked White House) have become testaments to his tacky taste and incompetence.

Share

In the most spectacular mess, his leveling of the East Wing will remain an eyesore and national embarrassment indefinitely. The Circuit Court for the District of Columbia, by a 2-1 vote, held that of course he doesn’t have the power to unilaterally level the People’s House and try to scrounge up outside funds to pay for his monstrosity:

Each President is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House and its Executive Residence. The President has no—and claims no—constitutionally assigned authority over that property, which is designed and maintained for the use of all Presidents, current and future, and for the American people. …

We are aware of no instance in American history in which a President unilaterally and using privately collected funds demolished substantial portions of the White House that Congress authorized to be built and American taxpayers paid for. Until now.

Congress is statutorily and constitutionally charged with the upkeep of and funding for the White House, and nothing Trump says can alter that.

Aside from that, Trump’s handiwork would be a visual abomination. “The Park Service determined that the project ‘would have permanent adverse impacts on the cultural landscape’ of President’s Park because the proposed ballroom would ‘depart[] from the traditional aesthetic values and architectural integrity’ of the White House complex,” the court wrote. As the court found:

The government’s Environmental Assessment also found that the ballroom “would disrupt the historical continuity of the White House grounds” because the “new building’s larger footprint and height would dominate the eastern portion of the site, creating a visual imbalance with the more modestly scaled West Wing and Executive Mansion. The planned second-story addition to the East Colonnade would exacerbate the asymmetry. According to the assessment, this discrepancy would “chang[e] the traditional spatial organization and sightlines of the grounds[.]” In combination, the proposed construction would “adversely alter the design, setting, and feeling of the White House and the grounds over the long-term.” … The Environmental Assessment further concluded that the proposed ballroom’s size would permanently alter the views of President’s Park for visitors in “certain locations, particularly Lafayette Square and portions of the Ellipse[.]” The Park Service added that “[t]he removal of the current East Wing” to build the ballroom “will result in a permanent adverse impact for those who value the experience of this specific space.”

The court all but called him a barbarian for his assertion that, for example, no one would be “injured by a decision to raze the Statue of Liberty, to obscure the names on the Vietnam War Memorial, or to install a political billboard atop Mount Rushmore ... [since p]eople wounded by the lost historical view could just ‘shift [their] gaze[.]’”

The court slammed Trump for “simply brush[ing] off the signification, emotion, meaning, and particularized value to individuals of witnessing certain places where their history happened, looking upon architectural marvels, reveling in sweeping landscapes, and viewing buildings, memorials, and monuments that tell the American story.”

Share

The man has no taste, but he also has no power to conduct the world’s ugliest real estate makeovers. Because he lacks the ability or desire to consult with people who know what they are doing (and would do something other than enable his worst impulses) and to follow the rules that are inherent in government endeavors (follow due process, respect Congress’s powers, ensure public transparency, abide by open bidding rules, etc.), whatever he touches turns into a disaster zone.

Washington, D.C., is full of Trump’s wreckage, from the massive hole in the ground at the White House to the empty Reflecting Pool with a shredded tarp to a mound of toxic debris at a public golf course to a partially shrouded (and mostly shuttered) Kennedy Center. The president who was supposed to show us how business prowess could remake government has taken a wrecking ball not only to the capital but also to our economy. There is nothing “unexpected” about his streak of cringeworthy failures.

Democrats should not wait until Labor Day, the traditional kickoff of the midterm campaign, to pivot and begin sprinting toward November. No one who genuinely cares about the fate of democracy should be kvetching about primary polling (which partisans trolling for donor dollars, but not real voters, obsessively focus upon) or relitigating the relative electability of primary opponents after primaries are decided. (Kudos to Rep. Haley Stevens for fully embracing Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed in recognition of the stakes.) Fortunately, a batch of insightful Democrats have stepped forward to offer a pathway to win decisively on a populist economic message with broad-based appeal.

Leading the way, Texas Democratic Senate nominee James Talarico delivered a speech last week that adeptly framed the argument for Democrats:

For fifty years, billionaire mega-donors and puppet politicians have been stealing from the American people. Stealing the wealth we created. With their bribes, their bailouts, and their billionaire tax breaks.

This “affordability crisis” isn’t something that happened in the last five years. This affordability crisis has been fifty years in the making.

Since the late 1970s, mega donors and corporate special interests have been buying politicians in both political parties, and then those politicians turned around and rigged this economy to benefit their wealthy donors at our expense.

We have an affordability crisis because we have a corruption crisis.

Pushing back on the notion that Democrats despise capitalism, Talarico makes the case that the far right has destroyed free markets. Corruption, tariffs, and dark money have influenced regulatory favors and tax giveaways, and massive corporate consolidation are the antithesis of a competitive free market that would create wealth for a wide cross-section of Americans.

“[T]he idea behind capitalism was simple and revolutionary: people should get fairly compensated for their labor. We should get paid for our work. But that’s not what we have right now,” he argued. “You can’t tell me the market is working as it should when billionaires are becoming trillionaires — while the people who do all the work can’t afford the basics.” He added, “Adam Smith is rolling over in his grave. This is not capitalism; this is crony capitalism.”

Talarico’s proposed agenda, dubbed the New American Dream, includes raising the minimum wage, expanding overtime, repealing tax cuts for the super-rich, protecting labor organizing, and investing in college and vocational education. He also includes items that genuine fiscal conservatives used to favor — such as reducing the national debt (“closing tax loopholes, cracking down on tax cheats, and ending forever wars that send billions of our tax dollars overseas”) and removing red tape that impedes housing construction.

Talarico’s pro-worker proposals include universal childcare and paid family leave, an expanded child tax credit, and “cracking down on the data centers jacking up our utility bills and using up our water — and preventing new ones from being built unless they meet our demands.” Positions such as these, which legacy media would characterize as “progressive,” and MAGA operatives would denounce as “socialism,” are embraced by super-majorities of Americans. Here is where Talarico adeptly turns MAGA hacks’ rhetoric against them:

They’re going to claim this new dream is radical. They’re going to claim it’s extreme. They’re going to claim we’re socialists, or communists, or whatever sounds scariest in a headline. And we’ll say: Is that the best you can do?

These are the same old scare tactics. The same old politics of the past. The names they’ll call us only reveal how small their dreams are.

The people at the top want this to be a contest of names because they know they’ll lose a contest of ideas.

Subscribe now

Pete Buttigieg, speaking at a unity rally in Michigan on Friday, made a similar argument in the context of the Michigan Senate race:

[W]e have Abdul El-Sayed, who insists that money in politics has gone too far. And we have him running against Mike Rogers, who insists on being part of the problem. We have one candidate, Abdul El-Sayed, who wants to expand affordable health care and keep more money in your pocket. And we have another candidate, Mike Rogers, who literally voted against the Affordable Care Act. And you better believe he will cut health care one more time if you give him a chance in the United States Senate.

Cranky Democratic establishment-types will find it hard to find substantive differences between bogeyman El-Sayed and their favorites such as Talarico and Buttigieg. In truth, their real objection is hearing their corporate donors fingered for rigging the economy.

In a parallel vein, Democratic Senators Chris Murphy (CT), Adam Schiff (CA), Tina Smith (MN), and Elizabeth Warren (MA) put out a memo in January arguing Democrats should not only advance populist economic measures but should sound serious about “tak[ing] on corporate power and the billionaires who are making it impossible for the American people to provide for themselves and their families.” When Democrats don’t mince words, and instead underscore realities such as “big corporations get massive tax breaks and then turn around and lay off American workers,” voters take them seriously.

Citing a raft of polling, the Democratic senators urged their colleagues to sharpen the message and point directly at the culprits. Ordinary voters “do not want insurance companies denying treatments prescribed by doctors, or giant corporations driving small neighborhood shops out of business,” they explain. Regardless of party, voters deeply resent it when “wealthy people and big corporations get away with breaking the law — all while Trump is giving special treatment to his friends, enriching his own family, and pardoning corporate wrongdoing all the time.”

As the senators put it, the “backlash” to this outrageously corrupt presidency is “laying the foundation for a large popular majority to wrestle government back from the billionaires and corporations and give the power back to working people.” Democrats can reap the benefits if they embrace “a platform rooted in true economic populism.”

Share

That’s exactly what El-Sayed and other Democrats in Michigan did at their unity rally. Skewering Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), El-Sayed framed the election as a choice between an advocate for ordinary voters and an oligarch-serving MAGA foot soldier, wisecracking that Rogers’s last name is “very fitting for him… [‘c]ause that’s his answer every time a corporation or Donald Trump tells him to do something”:

“Mike, we need you to put a data center in the backyard.” — “Roger!” “Mike, we need you to hike their prescription drug prices.” — “Roger!” “Mike, we need you to rubber-stamp this war we shouldn’t be fighting.” — “Roger!”

Democrats should follow the unity message from Michigan and flatly repudiate self-absorbed voices in their ranks still waging internecine battles. Launching a war now against Democratic Socialists [!] shows a jaw-dropping lack of perspective, suggests they care more about soothing their corporate donors’ bruised feelings than saving democracy, and inevitably amplifies Trump’s hysterical “socialist” smear against Democrats.

In sum, to win decisively, Democrats must avoid distractions and challenge the billionaire class’s pet policies and oligarchs who have rigged the system against the interests of ordinary workers. Their success will determine the fate of our democracy.

We should keep in mind three takeaways. First, there are no Republicans with the courage and moral fiber to truly risk the wrath of the party. When the chips are down and a critical vote is needed, do not look for profiles in courage. Second, there is no better example of the necessity for voting Republicans out of power. Every vote for Republicans, including a batch of senators on the ballot in November, reminds us that the party has been stripped of moral decency, respect for the rule of law, and respect for truth. Finally, whatever differences exist among Democrats and whatever reservations voters may have about individual positions, they pale in comparison to the stark divide between the two parties. If we care about something as fundamental as protecting children from predators or maintaining the Department of Justice as a respected institution devoted to representing the American people, Republicans cannot remain in positions of power. They cannot be trusted to conduct oversight or properly exercise advise and consent. Never has the choice between governing visions been more vivid.

In Kansas, for example, a senior Methodist pastor who heads a 24,000-member megachurch in deep-red Kansas won the Democratic Senate nomination on Tuesday. Rev. Adam Hamilton will face incumbent Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS), a MAGA foot soldier who has rubber-stamped every unfit nominee, approved every unpopular Donald Trump policy, and parroted every right-wing talking point. Marshall remains the prohibitive favorite to win his re-election in a state that has not had a Democratic senator since FDR was president. That said, Cook Political Report has moved the race from “solid” to “likely” Republican.

Hamilton’s candidacy, regardless of its odds, reaffirms the diverse leanings of the party and serves as an important reaffirmation that no party has a lock on God. “A band of white Democratic pastors have a striking message ahead of November’s US midterm elections: Republicans have hijacked Jesus for political gain, and we’re not going to stand for it,” Barron’s reported last month. “[T]hese ministers are so fed up with President Donald Trump, and particularly his policies against immigrants, that they’re running as Democrats in November to rein him in.” Hamilton, together with Texas Senate nominee James Talarico, are among the most prominent of these religious leaders pushing back against MAGA’s obnoxious claim that Democrats aren’t real Christians.

“The Christians we’re hearing in Washington don’t reflect the Jesus of the Gospels,” Hamilton told AFP. Like many other Americans (regardless of faith), he has been unnerved by the “crassness and mean-spiritedness” that is “inconsistent with the values that I’ve preached for 36 years.” He added, “I want to stand up and be heard saying: ‘This is not OK.’”

White Christian Nationalists who form the backbone of the MAGA movement are outraged that a pro-choice, professed progressive Christian would challenge their claim to theocratic dominance. Paul Raushenbush, CEO and president of the Interfaith Alliance, tells me, “It is painfully ironic that those who claim to care so much about ‘Christian values’ and a ‘Christian nation’ are getting bent out of shape when a pastor such as Rev. Adam Hamilton becomes the Democratic candidate for Senate in Kansas, alongside other moderate to progressive faith leaders running in other races across the country.” He adds, “It should be common knowledge that no single political party has a lock on religion. American history is full of people of faith being active in the political arena for both conservative and progressive causes.”

Raushenbush continued, “What is driving the Christian Nationalist movement nuts right now is that progressive faith leaders are claiming their proud tradition in America and running — and winning — on a moral vision for our inclusive, just, and diverse democracy that clearly attracts voters across partisan divides.”

Hamilton’s initial campaign announcement video made standard issue critiques about affordability and an unnecessary war, but also pitched his dedication to “serving people outside the walls of our church.”

He challenged fellow Kansans who would bring a meal to a neighbor or drive a friend to a doctor to care about federal food assistance and access to affordable healthcare. In other words, he argues that virtue in one’s private life should raise concerns about right-wing policies and politicians that inflict pain on communities and abuse vulnerable people.

Subscribe now

Kansas may not be entirely out of reach in the current political environment. Kansas has had female, Democratic governors (e.g., Joan Finney, Kathleen Sebelius, or incumbent Laura Kelly), and just defeated overwhelmingly a MAGA-backed ballot proposal to amend the state constitution and subject state supreme court justices to direct election. “The move came after the Kansas Supreme Court dealt conservatives some setbacks in recent years, including a 2019 ruling that the state constitution protected the right to an abortion,” NBC News explained. “Voters sided with that decision three years later after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.” Opponents of the ballot gambit made clear that this was really an effort to come after abortion rights, which — even in an overwhelming Republican state — voters have staunchly supported. Hamilton’s pro-choice stance may therefore not be an insurmountable barrier for him. In setting out his position at the onset of the campaign, Hamilton said, “As a pastor for 38 years, I have cared for women and families facing difficult decisions around pregnancy. I acknowledge there is a moral tension surrounding the topic of abortion, but I do not believe that politicians should be making these decisions for women.”

Hamilton has no shortage of popular issues on his side, including his staunch opposition to tariffs, which have crashed soybean sales to China (from $12B in 2024 to practically zero in 2025) and sent Kansas’s economy into recession. Marshall is unmoved. As Greg Frazier, a former official at USDA and Office of the United States Trade Representative, recently wrote:

Instead of sticking up for their constituents, Marshall and [Rep. Tracey] Mann cheer meaningless trade announcements. Marshall said the president “found a way to break through and gain access” to the Australia beef market. In reality, that market has essentially been open for years. Mann recast a Trumpism: “This is the art of the deal.”

The art of the deal? That’s not what experts say: “US beef processors will be lucky to move $1-2 million worth of beef annually into Australia, compared to the $4 billion worth of beef Australia sent to the US last year.” Meanwhile, President Trump has said the US will begin buying beef from Argentina.

Hamilton’s mix of common-sense policy initiatives, genuine religious faith, and superb communication skills — matched with Trump’s lousy economic record and declining approval in the state (dropping a net 16 points since taking office in 2025) — have unnerved MAGA Republicans who must now spend money and justify their disastrous records. For Democrats and the broader pro-democracy coalition, Hamilton offers a unique opportunity to undermine Republicans’ fake piety, arrogance, and governing malpractice.

Hamilton’s undaunted, unbowed, and unqualified defense of his faith brings a much needed rebuke to a MAGA movement, whose actions suggest that Christian faith rests on cruelty, conspiracies, hate-mongering, racism, and misogyny. Win or lose, Hamilton deserves recognition and credit for taking the fight to authoritarian bullies.