Skip to content

Author: Tom Sullivan

U.S. Credibility Dies

Like everything else Trump touches

Grab another coffee.

Rebecca Solnit drew attention to an essay at the Guardian that explains how Donald Trump and Trumpism have undone U.S. primacy in the world:

One thing striking to me about Trump and Trumpism is that while constantly squawking about manliness and strength, it’s a bunch of weak men weakening the United States in every way possible. Another is that by taking a lot of right-wing agendas to their logical destructive conclusion, it helpfully demonstrates the folly of those agendas. Here’s an excellent essay on the response to the USA becoming, under Trump, a rogue nation. (That response could mean the end of US hegemony, which could maybe mean we could down the road stop spending so much money on the military….)

“The highly unpopular and illegal war in Iran is fast becoming a vivid example of the chaos and instability bred by unilateralism,” said Antonio de Aguiar Patriota, Brazil’s ambassador to London, in a speech . “It is laying bare a perception that the world will not be made unipolar again.” That’s because beneath the surface “something is happening. Something is moving.”

The rest of the world is climbing out from under U.S. domination.

Patrick Wintour cites Harvard University’s Prof. Stephen Walt, writing in The Guardian:

… American influence is not just a function of its wealth or power. It’s also a function of how the US is viewed. He said it was important for allies “to think that the United States knows what it’s doing, not that it’s infallible, but it generally knows what it’s doing, that it can execute a plan in a competent fashion. The Trump administration has sent a message to the rest of the world that that’s not the case any more, and that means other states are going to be less likely to rely on American advice going forward, at least for a while.”

Walt added that “the other message this war has sent is that the administration really cared about only one other country in the world, Israel, and that came at the expense of other allies in Europe and Asia”, because of the huge economic damage the war has caused and the lack of consultation with other allies before the war began.

U.S. no longer a force for good

“Everything Trump touches dies,” insists former Republican operative Rick Wilson. Including U.S. credibility. Reflecting on Trump’s aggression against Iran, former U.S. ambassador to London, Jane Hartley, recently observed that the world “no longer thinks America is a force for good.” Trump’s aggression against Iran was the final nail in the coffin of American world leadership. Other world powers now must reorder their priorities in trade, defense, and international relations.

Mark Carney, the Canadian prime minister, has set out his concept of a middle powers grouping, and Canada has already signed more than 20 economic and security deals, including with China, to increase exports outside its US base. New ad hoc alliances and trade corridors that do not go through Washington are being formed. From the Brazilian perspective it is new “coalitions of the responsible” that are being created, with “coordination across regions, cultures and political systems”.

Trump, the convicted felon, pathological liar, despotophile, and Jan. 6 insurrectionist twice elected by American voters is now an electoral albatross. Even MAGA Republicans know it. They just lack the spines and strength of character to admit it. And their own complicity. He is who he is. They are who they are.

“The far right and the right are not shouting because they are winning; they are shouting because they know their time is running out,” Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, said in a recent speech in China. He’s condemned the Iran war as illegal. Trump responded by threatening to expel Spain from NATO, something he has no power to do. (Still, he’ll huff, and he’ll puff….)

Opportunity and risk in chaos

The collapse of U.S. leadership represents opportunity, explains Wintour, The Guardian’s diplomatic editor:

For millions of people, the head of the UN humanitarian programme, Tom Fletcher, said last week: “The international order is not on the cusp of collapse, it has already collapsed. What we are going through right now is not a drill.” Fletcher called for greater honesty about the scale of global upheaval and the need for a renewed seriousness in public life.

This is because the way Trump and his fellow travellers have put an axe to international law has made the task of humanitarians near impossible. Indeed, humanity itself is under attack, Agnès Callamard, the secretary general of Amnesty International, said in presenting the human rights organisation’s 2025 report. She described 2025 as the year of the predators.

At the head of the line is us. Rather, U.S.

But where there is opportunity in chaos, there is also risk. Think “The Shock Doctrine,‘ for one, but also the risk in unipolarists desperate to “retain their power to punish and wreak revenge” on those who no longer refuse to bow. It’s who they are. It’s definitely who Trump is. This will get worse before it gets better. The game ahead — and your challenge — is Political Survivor: Outwit, Outplay, Outlast. Or in mock Latin, Illegitimi non carborundum.

Someone on my FB feed posted “A Eulogy for the Worst That Has Ever Drawn Breath” by one Tom Wellborn, subtitled “Being a Complete and Unflinching Account of the Most Loathsome Specimen Ever to Consume Resources, Occupy Space, and Insult the Patience of a Universe That Deserved So Much Better.” It’s blistering. Spread it around.

There are villains, and then there are monsters, and then there are creatures so cosmically, transcendently, almost admirably terrible that language itself recoils from the task of describing them. Grammar buckles. Syntax weeps. The thesaurus slams itself shut and refuses to cooperate. He is this thing. He is the thing past the thing past the thing. He is the sub-basement of the human condition, the moldy crawlspace beneath that sub-basement, and the writhing centipede beneath that.

To call him despicable is to call the sun “a little warm.” To call him hatable is to say that the Black Death was “somewhat inconvenient.” He does not merely inspire hatred. He manufactures it, industrializes it, ships it wholesale to people who had never previously experienced a single negative emotion in their lives. Buddhists who have spent forty years meditating toward unconditional love have encountered him briefly and immediately relapsed into pure, screaming fury. Pacifists clench their fists. Quakers throw things. He has caused more apostasy, more broken vows, more abandoned philosophies than any theological crisis in recorded history, simply by existing in the same zip code as decent people.

He has no morals. Not a single one. Not even the bad morals that at least imply a moral framework: the corrupt cop who loves his dog, the mob boss who goes to church. No. He exists in a morality vacuum so total that ethicists have proposed naming it after him. Philosophy departments around the world now use him as a thought experiment: “Imagine a being entirely without moral content. Not evil, because evil requires intention. Simply absent of the entire apparatus.” He is the null set of conscience. A moral negative space shaped vaguely like a man.

He has no empathy. Scientists have confirmed this. They put him in a brain scanner and watched his amygdala just sit there, inert, like a raisin, unmoved by footage of suffering, by crying children, by injured animals, by literally anything. The researchers wept. He asked if there were snacks.

He has no sympathy either, which is worse, because sympathy doesn’t even require feeling. It only requires pretending. He cannot manage the performance. He cannot fake it. When people around him suffer, his face rearranges itself into an expression that experts have described as “a beige wall trying to look interested.” He is incapable of the most basic social theater that even sociopaths manage. He makes sociopaths look like Florence Nightingale.

His regard for human life is so nonexistent that physicists have theorized it may be negative. He is somehow subtracting regard from the universe’s fixed supply, leaving decent people fractionally less capable of caring about one another, because he is consuming their collective empathy like a moral black hole, bending the very fabric of human decency around his grotesque gravitational pull.

He takes without asking. He takes everything without asking. He takes things that aren’t takeable. He takes the goodwill of strangers. He takes credit for things he didn’t do. He takes years off the lives of people who have to deal with him. He takes the oxygen out of rooms. He took someone’s lunch once, a sad and modest lunch that a tired person had been quietly looking forward to all morning, and he didn’t even enjoy it. He took it on principle. The principle being: I can.

He steals right out in the open with the brazen, unembarrassed confidence of a man who has never once considered that other people are real. He doesn’t steal in the dark. He doesn’t steal furtively. He steals the way you pick up your own mail: casually, boredly, without a single spike of adrenaline or guilt. Guilt would require believing that the person he’s stealing from has standing, has claims, has feelings that matter. He does not believe this. He has never believed this. He was not built to believe this.

He is stupid in a way that is almost majestic. His stupidity is not the ordinary kind, the forgivable, relatable kind that all of us carry in patches and compartments. His is total. Unified. A stupidity that has achieved something like integrity. There is not one chamber of his mind operating at even a remedial level of insight. He has been wrong about everything, always, without exception, without a single accidental correct answer slipping through, which statistically should be impossible and yet here he is, a living rebuke to probability. If you put him in a room with a hundred doors and told him the exit was behind one of them, he would find the ninety-nine wrong ones first, in sequence, and then stand in front of the last door and walk into the wall beside it.

He is callous the way concrete is callous: not through malice, not through choice, but through an utter material inability to register the soft pressure of another person’s pain. You could hand him a book of tragedies, and he would complain about the font. You could show him the face of grief, and he would wonder aloud if there was parking nearby. He does not process human suffering as data. It does not reach him. It never has.

He is vicious without the interesting parts of viciousness. Without cunning, without strategy, without even the cold competence of a true predator. He is vicious the way a blunt instrument is vicious: through sheer, undirected force, through the momentum of his own awfulness carrying him forward into collisions that leave damage everywhere and leave him untouched, unmarked, unaware. Animals that bite have reasons. He does not have reasons. He has trajectory.

He is physically unhealthy in ways that feel karmic, as though his body is attempting to file a formal complaint against his soul. His constitution has mutinied. His own biology is staging a protest.

He is untempered. He has never been tempered. He came out of whatever process produced him without the crucial step: the cooling, the shaping, the refinement that turns raw material into something useful. He is still raw. He will always be raw. He is smelted fury with no purpose, unforged, unbent, uselessly molten.

He is, in the final and most complete assessment, a disgusting anomaly. A statistical outlier so extreme that evolution seems to be embarrassed by him, a glitch in the long project of civilization, a misprint in the human genome so catastrophic that it somehow achieved sentience and got a driver’s license. He is proof that the universe has no quality control. He is what happens when the worst possible combination of traits clears every filter, slips through every gate, and arrives, blinking and unconcerned, into a world that never prepared for anything quite like him.

And the most horrifying part, the detail that keeps philosophers up at night, staring at the ceiling, reconsidering everything, is that he will never know any of this. He will never know what he is. He will go to his grave certain that he was, in fact, pretty good. Maybe even great.

That is the final insult. That is the thing that cannot be forgiven.

Calling Trump a TV Batman villain is too kind.

OnionWars

Blood of the Foresaken Edition

“As far as the world is concerned, Infowars is dead. Everybody knows that,” said Mark Bankston on Thursday after Alex Jones won a court-ordered delay in liquidation of InfoWars assets. Bankston, a lawyer for some of the Sandy Hook victims’ relatives, added, “He’s trying to keep the bloated corpse of a media organization alive. It’s all a joke. Everybody knows where this is going.”

The satirical site, The Onion, in April entered into an agreement to take over Jones’s go-to website for conspiracy theorists. The new owners plan to turn the website into a parody of itself. It has already replaced the “o” in Infowars with the Onion’s logo. The Onion shed no tears for Jones’s conspiracies-and-nutrional-supplements business model. It proceded to drink its blood.

Rolling Stone:

An emergency motion by Alex Jones didn’t stop The Onion from turning over control of the new InfoWars to Tim Heidecker, who made his debut as host and creative director on Friday via a surprise livestream.

“Lot of turmoil the past couple days on our road to total victory. We have just won a major battle, folks. Alex and his gang of liars and scoundrels have been cast out into the street, they have lost InfoWars, InfoWars.com, and their various platforms,” Heidecker said in his pitch perfect Alex Jones impression.

“They have been cast out, ladies and gentlemen, and make no mistake, we will be the new InfoWars. Now we got to go through the machinations of the court, we’ve had some setbacks over past couple days, but that is not stopping us, that is not tempering our resolve. Over the next couple days or weeks, you will see much more coming out of this.”

The Onion got right to fake-selling fake crap.

Just A Mopping-up Operation

The “dead letter” VRA and the elimination of dignity

Vann R. Newkirk II writes a “Requiem” for the Voting Rights Act in The Atlantic (gift link):

The best things shine bright, but never long. So it was for the Voting Rights Act, the 1965 legislation that protected Black suffrage by neutralizing voter suppression in southern states, and became the foundation for equal ballot access for all Americans. Of the 250 years since the country’s founding, less than a quarter unfolded under the aegis of universal suffrage. Color television, credit cards, and Barbie dolls arrived earlier than the VRA and will survive longer. The reign of Queen Elizabeth II lasted a decade longer than the guarantor of democracy in America.

The ruling SCOTUS handed down its Callais decision this week “renders Section 2 all but a dead letter,” wrote Justice Elena Kagan in her dissent.

“Like previous VRA-related decisions, Callais was “narrow,” in that it did not strike down the law itself, Newkirk writes. “But although the edifice built at great expense—by Fannie Lou Hamer, by John Lewis, by the bloodied limbs of Mississippi sharecroppers and Alabama marchers—has not been entirely bulldozed, only the facade remains.”

The rest of the essay you can read at the link. Newkirk reflects on the law’s impacts over the last 60 years, Republican efforts to subvert or neuter it, and how through legal “engineering, Roberts, Alito, and their allies have created a trap for voting-rights cases” that renders them dead on arrival.

The final two paragraphs carry meaning Newkirk may not have considered:

But representation in Congress was never the ultimate goal of the VRA, nor will that be the primary problem the country faces after its fall. The point of the Voting Rights Act, as stated by Lyndon B. Johnson, the president who signed it into law, was to force the opponents of liberty to “open the gates to opportunity” to all Americans. Voting rights were, to him, a matter of the “dignity of man and the destiny of democracy,” and the law itself was meant to be a proactive guarantor of that destiny. Without it, no American should consider their dignity to be secure.

This is something that Black voting-rights advocates, from Frederick Douglass to Kwame Ture, long understood; that no person’s rights could really be inalienable if any person’s rights were trampled. The Voting Rights Act was the true instantiation of the Declaration of Independence. For centuries, Black people fought for the ballot, not just to have a say in their government, but to demonstrate their own value, both to themselves and to others. And, for a while, they succeeded.

No offense meant to Newkirk, but what Americans and the world witnessed after Donald Trump and his merry band of brigands reoccupied the White House in January 2025 was the actual closing of the gates Johnson forced open. Not just Black people, but all nonwhite people, all undocumented residents, and all non-MAGA Americans began seeing their dignity stripped as soon as Trump 2.0 launched its ICE assault on city after city beginning in January 2025.

An America exclusively of, by, and for white, Christians was Stephen Miller’s obsession, Russell Vought’s Project 2025 blueprint, and a post-Constitutional Republican Party’s means to rule indefinitely over what they once smugly declared a republic, not a democracy. Trump simply wants subjects, and his name and his mug plastered everywhere. Trump 2.0 gave ICE agents carte blanche permission to ignore the Constitution and to brutalize and jail citizen and noncitizen alike. They signaled to Trump’s enemies/subjects via shock-and-awe that “no American should consider their dignity to be secure.”

The conservative Court majority rendering the Voting Rights Act a dead letter this week is just a mopping-up operation.

He Brought Prices Way Down!

And “terminated” the war he launched

An unnamed pollster told Joe Gallina that Donald Trump’s speech to The Villages in Florida on Friday marks the end for Trump. Trump mocked affordability as “one good line of bullshit.”

See for yourselves:

“It’s over,” the pollster texted.

No, it won’t be that speech.* But it could be pain at the pump. Trump and his sycophants seem to think they can Jedi mind-trick Americans into believing that these aren’t the gas prices they’re paying at the pump.

Average gas prices here have risen 20 cents over the last week. Nationally, the spike is much higher.

Over half of Republicans blame Trump for higher gas prices. Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe Trump’s Iran war is not worth the costs he expects them to bear on his say so.

CNN’s Harry Enten is back with polling:

War is ‘terminated’, saith Trump

Trump’s 60 days are up, explains The Washington Post:

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 requires presidents to remove U.S. forces from any conflict that Congress has not authorized within 60 days of the White House notifying Congress of hostilities — a deadline that Trump hit on Friday.

Trump wrote in his letter to lawmakers Friday that the conflict has been effectively over since the United States and Iran agreed last month to a ceasefire.

“There has been no exchange of fire between United States Forces and Iran since April 7, 2026,” Trump wrote in the letter, obtained by The Washington Post. “The hostilities that began on February 28, 2026, have terminated.”

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D) of New York for once said what you are thinking.

“President Trump declaring the war with Iran ‘terminated’ doesn’t reflect the reality that tens of thousands of U.S. service members in the region are still in harm’s way, that the Administration continually threatens to escalate hostilities or that the Strait of Hormuz remains closed and prices are skyrocketing at home,” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (New Hampshire), the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in a statement. “President Trump entered this war without a strategy and without legal authorization and today’s announcement doesn’t change either fact.”

Trump’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz continues. How many Americans will buy his “terminated” claim and claims that the prices of gas and groceries have come down?

Americans can be pretty stupid sometimes — they elected Trump twice — but they’re not that stupid. H. L. Mencken famously wrote in 1926, “No one in this world … has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people.” What’s usually lost is Mencken’s next line: “Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.”

An awful lot of Republicans in Congress are about to see that proposition tested.

* And I hate when Democrats use the word “affordability.” It’s an abstraction, cold and bloodless.

Show, Don’t Tell

Earn back voters’ trust

Former congressional candidate Kat Abughazaleh, 26, appeared with The Ink’s Anand Giridharadas on “Morning Joe” to discuss what Democrats must do differently to win back the trust of working people. She built her campaign on aiding people in her district. After finishing second in a field of 16, she founded Kapow to keep her community together. Democrats need to show, not tell that they are fighting for working people. Create a home for them.

Abughazaleh spared no criticism of her party.

“We’re doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results, and that’s just not going to happen,” she told her hosts. “We have to do something different, and I think that should start with helping people.”

Some in her own party stand in the way of unity, she believes. Democrats have to be unified in their goal of fighting for the working class, a party of the New Deal and the Civil Rights Act.

I see the same. Democrats are reactive, not proactive. They don’t think outside the box. They built the box. It’s what prompted an exasperated Giridharadas a year ago to declare, “I feel so fucking undefended by these people. Like what are they doing, any of them?”

Riffing on that last year, I wrote:

I watched most of the DNC’s 12-1/2 hour winter meeting days earlier. Most of the speeches were dispiriting. They could have been written 30 years ago. Members said what they what they were expected to say as good lefties, what they learned to say years earlier then stopped learning.

It was speech after speech of Democrats saying what Democrats are expected to say to Democrats who expected to hear it.

Here in North Carolina in 2004, Democrats were 48 percent of registered voters. Republicans were 34 percent. Independents (“unaffiliated” here) were an afterthought at 18 percent. Twenty-two years later, independents are 39 percent, Republicans and Democrats are tied at 30. Democrats have lost 18 points in registration while independents have gained 21. Likely something similar has happened where you live.

Democrats as a party seem not to have noticed. They’ve certainly not changed their campaign formats over that time. A former campaign manager complained to me about that just yesterday. They update their software and adopt new digital tools, but in service to strategies as stale as those DNC speeches.

Yes, since 2004 we’ve seen big cultural and political shifts. Millennials and Gen Z especially see no reason to join parties seen as slipping into irrelevance. They’ve lived through Sept. 11 and the so-called War on Terror. They’ve experienced the Great Recession, a global pandemic, and the Jan. 6 insurrection as well as Trump’s war on immigrants, the Supreme Court’s war on civil and voting rights, and the resurrection of a fascist movement. Their economic prospects are shrinking. And yet Democrats keep plodding along as if nothing has changed. Not only do voters feel undefended, as Giridharadas does, but young people have “never really felt seen” by either major party.

It’s no surprise. Democrats have noticed neither them nor the political ground shifting beneath them. Much less make adjustments over the last two decades. They’ve lost people’s trust and we all have nearly lost our country. Democrats see Trump’s approval ratings falling like a rock, as Giridharadas notes in the video [timestamp 5:48]. But where has that historic unpopularity become support for Democrats? There has been no real reckoning with their disconnect from communities and with that loss of trust.

“Movements need to be homes, not just opinion factories,” Giridharadas says. People around the country may vote for the Democratic Party, but they don’t feel the party speaks to them.

Maybe start with making them feel seen. Week after week, commuters honk, wave, and cheer for a dancing old man who struts around like Mick Jagger. He displays message signs that don’t bark about his pet political issues but address their lived experiences. It’s not a model for how Democrats should retool their campaigns, but at least it’s not the same old shit.

Update: And maybe not “take shit lying down.” And take no prisoners.

He’d Be Fired from ‘Presidential Apprentice’

Americans aren’t buying Trump’s war (The Washington Post):

President Donald Trump’s war in Iran is as unpopular among Americans as the Iraq War during the year of peak violence in 2006 and the Vietnam War in the early 1970s, according to a Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll, amid growing economic pain and fears of terrorism as a result of the military campaign.

Sixty-one percent of Americans say that using military force against Iran was a mistake, with fewer than 2 in 10 Americans believing that the U.S. actions in Iran have been successful. About 4 in 10 say it has been unsuccessful, while another 4 in 10 say it is “too soon to tell.” The polling numbers indicate a broadly unpopular war effort and growing economic fallout at a time when the White House has been trying to convince Americans that they are better off under Trump than under Democrats.

Um, nope. Nice try, Scalise.

How long will Americans tolerate having these people lie to their faces?

And yet on Earth 2, Trumpish Jedi mind tricks still work on the cult.

There’s almost no hope for them.

Janet Mills Suspends Campaign

No financial resources

This just broke (CNN):

Maine Gov. Janet Mills is suspending her Democratic primary campaign for US Senate, clearing the way for Graham Platner to challenge Sen. Susan Collins.

“While I have the drive and passion, commitment and experience, and above all else – the fight – to continue on, I very simply do not have the one thing that political campaigns unfortunately require today: the financial resources,” she said in a statement released Thursday. “That is why today I have made the incredibly difficult decision to suspend my campaign for the United States Senate.”

Democrats had been bracing for several more weeks of a contentious campaign before the June 9 primary in Maine – a must-win state if they want to have any chance at capturing the Senate majority in November.

No word yet on whether incumbent GOP Sen. Susan Collins is concerned.

Moves by the GOP suggest it already assumes Platner-the-Oysterman will oppose Collins. Platner told donors earlier this week that that the general election in Maine has already begun, reports The Maine Monitor.

My attention has been elsewhere and I have no informed opinion to offer on Platner, his tattoos or his chances.

As someone who wishes many among the Democratic gerontocracy past their “best by” dates would move aside and make room for younger blood and fresher ideas, this reflection on Mills is encouraging (The New York Times):

Her exit is a blow not only to the two-term sitting governor but also to Senator Chuck Schumer of New York and the Democratic Party establishment that he leads. Mr. Schumer, the minority leader, has for almost two decades chosen his party’s Senate candidates with little internal opposition.

That era may be coming to an end — and Ms. Mills’s ill-fated campaign is not the only evidence. In a year when Democrats have grown increasingly bullish about their chances to win back a Senate majority, several of Mr. Schumer’s handpicked candidates have struggled to gain traction in their primary contests.

In addition to Ms. Mills, Mr. Schumer and his political apparatus have backed Senate candidates in Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota who face formidable challengers in upcoming primary elections.

The DSCC backed Cal Cunningham, 37, for U.S. Senate from North Carolina in 2010 over NC SecState Elaine Marshall, then 65. (Too old, too female, and too independent, one supposes. Mills is 78.) Marshall won the nomination after a runoff primary. The DSCC cut her off without a nickel. She lost to Richard Burr in the general. The spouse tells the DSCC where it can go whenever a fundraiser calls.

The DSCC backed Cunningham again for Senate in 2020. Yes, that Cal Cunningham.

Schumer’s past his “best by” date.

Several of those challengers have made opposition to Mr. Schumer’s leadership central to their campaigns. Last month in Illinois, Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton won her state’s Senate primary while pledging to oppose a future Schumer bid to be party leader.

The rebuke will only grow stronger if those candidates do well in November, after which it is almost certain that Mr. Schumer would face a serious challenge to his leadership post in the Senate.

Mr. Schumer has also recruited candidates in Alaska, North Carolina and Ohio who are on glide paths to the general election.

Ahem. Schumer didn’t pick Roy Cooper in North Carolina. Roy Cooper picked Roy Cooper.

Outrageous Pretense

The worst ruling in a century

Poster from Unmasking (2019).

The Supreme Court handed down its Callais decision about the time I finished my morning posts on Wednesday. Written by Justice Samuel Alito, it is a blockbuster ruling, and not in a good way. Hours later, Rick Hasen called the 6-3 decision in a case from Louisiana “one of the most pernicious and damaging Supreme Court decisions of the last century.” Callais guts what the Roberts court had not already whittled away of protections for minority representation passed sixty years ago, Hasen writes, “while pretending they were merely making technical tweaks to the Act.” Of course. Alito wrote it.

Hasen’s assessment is blistering:

This decision will bleach the halls of Congress, state legislatures, and local bodies like city councils, by ending the protections of Section 2 of the Act, which had provided a pathway to assure that voters of color would have some rudimentary fair representation. It’s the culmination of the life’s work of Chief Justice John Roberts and Samuel Alito, who have shown persistent resistance to the idea of the United States as a multiracial democracy, and a brazen willingness to reject Congress’s judgment that fair representation for minority voters sometimes requires race-conscious legislation. It gives the green light to further partisan gerrymandering. It protects Alito’s core constituency: aggrieved white Republican voters. It’s a disaster for American democracy.

Hasan explains that under the original VRA, proving intent to discriminate under “vote dilution” schemes proved difficult:

Congress responded boldly to that ruling—it rewrote Section 2 of the VRA to allow minority voters to say that plans that had a racially discriminatory effect were vote dilution. And as it was doing this, John Roberts was a young Department of Justice lawyer in the Reagan White House who spearheaded the effort to scuttle a stronger Section 2 in Congress. He failed. The new Section 2 made clear that Congress wanted to increase minority representation and alleviate the burden on voters to win these cases by eliminating an intent requirement.

The new Section 2 was a tremendous success, leading to the election of scores of minority-preferred candidates in Congress and on the state and local level. In 1986, in Thornburg v. Gingles, the Supreme Court interpreted the revised Section 2 to require courts to apply a multi-part test to determine when a jurisdiction had to draw districts to give minority voters a fair chance to elect representatives of their choice. The result of these two efforts is why today about a quarter of Congress is represented by a person of color, but it is especially thanks to Section 2.

The Roberts Court consistently has whittled away at the Voting Rights Act. In 2013, for example, with the Shelby County v. Holder  which demolished the Section 5 requirement that states with a history of race discrimination receive federal approval for changing voting rules. “When the Court killed Section 5,” Hasen writes, the Court “assured us that there was always Section 2 to protect minority voters.”

Then in 2021, the Court took the first shot at Section 2. In Brnovich v. DNC, Justice Alito, who had always voted against expansive minority voting rights on the Supreme Court, considered how Section 2 applied to laws making it harder for people to register and vote. Rather than following the text of Section 2 or Congress’s intent, Alito imposed such a tough test that since Brnovich there has not been a single successful Section 2 case aimed at these voting restrictions.

And now comes Callais. Let’s not sugarcoat things: Alito’s opinion eviscerates Section 2 as applied to redistricting. He throws out the Gingles test—while denying he is doing so—and has restored a requirement that plaintiffs prove discriminatory intent when challenging district lines. Only if a computer algorithm would protect minority voters by chance do they have a chance to win such a case. What’s worse, the state can defend their maps by claiming that they were merely engaging in partisan gerrymandering. This move is thanks to what the Supreme Court wrote in the 2019 Rucho case—that though partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional, it is out of the Court’s realm to fix.

Meaning that when Louisiana’s white Republicans redistrict away black opportunities for representation, they merely need argue that they’ve drawn districts to help Republicans, not whites. Hasan calls the transparent nonsense “outrageous.”

As outrageous as convicted felon and twice impeached Donald Trump swearing an oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” then cozying up to dictators and behaving as if the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are meaningless. As outrageous as the sycophants standing with him who took similar oaths that they “will bear true faith and allegiance” to a constitution born in reaction to monarchy, then making obeisance to a would-be king. As outrageous as the disingenuous behavior of six Supreme Court justices led by Roberts who took the same oath plus this one:

“I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”

But that’s the America we live in. For now.

The Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act passed under the Johnson administration overturned the hundred-year-old Jim Crow system whites erected to resist the Reconstruction Amendments. The CRA and VRA helped define the last 60 years as much as the conservative movement that arose to resist them tooth and nail. They increased opportunities for minority citizens to register and vote and, over time, led to legislatures that more resembled the whole of America, a multicultural America. But like the Reconstruction Amendments before them, those laws did not change many hearts, any more than World War II drove a stake through the heart of fascism. Racists, fascists, and — as I’ve long argued — royalists, simply conceal their true selves when fortune turns against them. They learn to speak in dog whistles and whispers. They bide their time, marshal their resources, and organize until it is time again to unmask. Like now under Trumpism.

Dems Are Playing War Games

Getting ready for 2026, 2028 election disruptions

The difficulty in anticipating Republican ploys for subverting elections, I’ve said repeatedly, is that it almost takes a criminal mind to counter one.

TPM this morning reports on efforts by Democrats’ “Red Team” to game out possible Republican moves for which Democrats need a counteroffensive plan ready. Rep. Joe Morelle (D-NY), the top Democrat on the House Administration Committee, is a key player:

The task force has identified “about 150 threats,” he said, adding, “So, each one of those we go through and we have sort of a matrix — what we think the likelihood is of this, whatever it is, happening, and then … what’s the damage that it could cause?” 

“So, some things could be very low likelihood, but a high impact. Other things could be highly likely that they’ll happen, but we think are relatively low impact,” Morelle explained. “Then of course, what you want to do is figure out how do we prevent that from happening and then, if it does happen, how do we respond to it?”

Morelle discussed his work on war-gaming potential election disruption scenarios for the midterms and planning an aggressive response in a TPM Special Report podcastYou can watch the interview in full here. Our conversation, which took place earlier this month, is the most in-depth look thus far at House Democrats’ efforts to confront threats to the vote. 

Some of the scenarios Morelle listed “include: intimidation by federal agents near polling places; misinformation being spread to voters; executive branch agencies trying to purge voter rolls or seize local election infrastructure; interference with state certification of congressional races; and even a potential floor fight on Jan. 3, 2027.”

But all of that we’ve seen before. What concerns me (not having a criminal mind) is the kind of cleverly devious schemes Republicans hatch that catch me blindside. Like trying to void 60,000 votes after the election is over. Frankly, I’d expect the Red Team to avoid public discussion of crafty shit like this that they’ve considered Republicans might roll out. Don’t want either to give them ideas or tip them off that we’ve anticipated their moves.

Morelle agrees, saying, “I don’t want to give the Trump administration any more ideas, nor do I want to, you know, signal what we’re doing in response to it.”

But it’s nice to know that they’re on it:

“We really started several months ago planning for the midterms. And again, you know, when the president says some of the things that he says, that sends off alerts. I mean, you cannot help but pay attention to someone who says, ‘I should have called out the National Guard,’” said Morelle. “That’s jarring. I mean, never before has a president of the United States said that, or … at one point he said, ‘I’m not even sure why we need an election. Why do we need a midterm election?’ Like, wow, no one ever says these things, but you can’t, by the same token, you can’t sleep on it.”

They’re preparing a toolkit for members and local officials, Morelle said, outlining “local procedures, deadlines, and issues in their districts to help them alert voters on how to register and get their ballots in early.”

“One of those strategies in my mind that helps us deal with intimidation at polls is, tell people, ‘vote early, mail in your ballot,’” Morelle said. “Do it as soon as you can. Check your registration status to make sure that the Department of Homeland Security hasn’t purged you or anybody else has tried to purge you and check your registration status in the first available moment. Mark your ballot, put it in the mail and send it in because they can’t intimidate people if they’re not there at the polling place.”

Overall, Morelle believes civic engagement and voter participation is crucial to confronting threats to democracy. He invoked the work of historian and author Heather Cox Richardson, who has written extensively about how apathy and disengagement have enabled the rise of fascism. 

It’s like a zombie, isn’t it?

Give Me Ballroom Or Give Me Death

Gas under $3, not so much

Some of us are not so Trump-addled that we don’t remember how Donald Trump promised his MAGA drones that he’d build a wall on the 2,000-mile southern border to keep out brown-skinned undesirables. It was an obsession. Mexico would pay for it, Trump promised again and again. It wouldn’t cost taxpayers a dime. Instead, he diverted billions from the defense budget, declaring the need for the wall a national emergency and “in the national interest.” We know how that worked out. Mexico never paid a dime.

This season’s national emergency/obsession is his bunker/ballroom (or ballroom/bunker). After the aborted White House Correspondents’ Association dinner attack on Saturday, Trump immediately insisted that the security breach represented another national emergency. He insisted that construction on his vanity project move forward with all speed as a matter of national security. MAGA drones immediately swarmed, as another Republican president once put it, to “catapult the propaganda.

Congressional Republicans joined the chorus, singing with “give me ballroom or give me death” fervor.

One Trump drone, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) of South Carolina, now wants Congress to allocate $400 million in taxpayers funds for the project.

Wait. Trump’s ballroom project was not supposed to cost taxpayers a dime either. First, the estimate jumped from $200 million to $300 million to $400 million. Trump claimed to have raised over $300 million from corporations and tech billionaires, money allegedly donated to the nonprofit Trust for the National Mall. Trump told reporters in October that his ballroom would be “paid for 100% by me and some friends of mine.” Don’t you worry. “The government is paying absolutely nothing.” (Neither has Trump, records show.)

The Trump Justice Department “filed a remarkable motion late Monday,” demanding in “Trump’s recognizable online voice” that The National Trust for Historic Preservation drop its lawsuit that resulted in a court injunction against construction. The National Trust declined in a letter to the Justice Department (The New York Times):

“What Saturday’s awful event does not change is that the Constitution and multiple federal statutes require Congress to authorize construction of a ballroom on White House grounds, and that Congress has not done so,” the letter said.

As for Graham, he copped to Trump’s obsession with the project:

The senator said Mr. Trump constantly brings up the ballroom to him “all the time,” even in unrelated conversations about golf or how he’s feeling.

“Like, ‘How you doing?’ ‘Where’s the ballroom?’ ‘How you playing?’ ‘I don’t know. I’d play better if you built the ballroom,’” Mr. Graham said of his conversations with the president. “It’s all the time.”

While the MAGA champion obsesses over his ballroom, he can’t extricate himself from the unsanctioned Iran war he started. He demands $1.5 trillion for the Pentagon in fiscal 2027, a 40 percent increase. The national price of gasoline is now $4.23/gallon, “stretching household budgets, with the greatest impact on lower-income consumers,” per a recent Bank of America report. Trump has no room in his addled brain for them. “Rising grocery prices in the U.S. as the result of the Iran war could be among the most politically damaging outcomes of the conflict just months before a critical U.S. election,” CNBC reported at the beginning of April. Trump’s ballroom is a national priority. Republicans’ constituents are not.

One more thing.

Not being a lawyer, I’m not qualified to sniff out all potential loopholes in the 14-page “Philanthropic Support Agreement” for the ballroom disclosed on April 22 and reported by Public Citizen. But like what happened to the $50,000 in cash White House border czar Tom Homan accepted in a bag from the FBI, I’d like to know what happens to the over $300 million Trump accepted from donors if taxpayers end up footing the tab for his gilded ballroom.

We’ve seen this movie before. As Loki said to Thor in The Avengers (2012), “Are you ever NOT going to fall for that?” The question now is: Will Americans fall for it again?