Transcript:Maybe Donald Trump can publish another bestseller, an updated rewrite of Dale Carnegie's 1936 "How to Win Friends and Influence People."After all, since his years as the "You're Fired" guy on "The Apprentice" television show, Trump has managed to bamboozle, cheat, directly insult and generally offend even his own Art of the Deal ways into a remarkable series of off-putting strategies that are consistent only in the result of throwing pretty much everyone with whom he has dealt under the nearest bus. It's bad enough that he hates his enemies, yesterday rudely cheering the death of former FBI Director and Special Counsel Robert Mueller for deigning to investigate him, but Trump regularly now turns on his allies. Just as Trump rewrote dealmaking as an artform based on cleverness in finding mutually agreeable trades for belligerence and threats, perhaps his new rewrite of friendships could exploit economic blackmail and military dominance as courtships to lasting relationships. In this year back in the White House alone, Trump has managed single-handedly and without pressure ruined decades of personal and official ties to European allies and set off a hemispheric panic. He has breathed new life into failing enemies like Russia's Vladimir Putin and set off chasms within his own domestic political alliances. This week, Trump managed to offend G-7 and NATO partners whose help he simultaneously was demanding to re-open the Strait of Hormuz . despite being unable himself to have avoided the predicted Iranian response to preemptive war. He called them "cowards," even while demanding they commit warships to a fight he decided to start alone, shunning their advice. He said clearing the Strait was "easy," wanting them to do it, but threatened to withdraw from attacking Iran without the U. S. doing the clearing work itself. Whether the target is Ukraine's leader or the Japanese Prime Minister sitting in that Oval Office chair while Trump preens, the visitor waits expectantly now for a Trump remark that makes clear that "diplomacy" with an ally involved insult. Apart from all else, Trump has confused friends of the U. S. with constantly changing policies and justifications for the war. By week's end, he even was showing discord with his one seemingly true international friend, Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu, over whether there is a way out of this war. Netanyahu clearly sees a continuing war as helping him domestically. Trump Cracked Base RemainsYet, despite disagreements even within his base of supporters, Trump still owns Republican legislators who fear his reelection wrath for themselves. And Trump was still holding approvals from a third or more of the polled public who seem willing to swallow anything in the name of breaking government and making anti-trans and anti-immigrant sloganeering the nation's highest priorities. For whatever reasons, his supporters continue to find his words, however contradictory, more comforting than his deeds, willing to overlook attitudes that touch racism, divisiveness, dictatorial power and now even war as justifiable towards some larger goal of breaking the status quo. Millions of words have been spilled over the Trump magic of holding supporters close during one of his "transactional deals," only to stab them in the back soon thereafter. The skeletons of former Vice President Mike Pence, former attorney generals, chiefs of staff, defense figures, generals and such rigid Republican senators as Mitch McConnell or Kevin McCarthy line the entry way into the Oval Office. Apparently, the only thing worse than having Trump as a sworn enemy is to have him as a vocal friend – only to find the enemy is a scratch comment away. The idea that Trump stands for nothing other than an image of strength, for ideals that last only long enough to complete an impatient transaction, are now cemented into the Trump legacy. In his name, Americans who do not kneel to him get hurt, and even political or international "friends" are always on trial with him. Trump has insisted for decades now that only he alone can recognize and solve problems, that he needs no advice and counsel, and that, in fact, he hates systems of rules and traditions – including from the Constitution . that might block acting on his often-uninformed gut. In recent weeks, this isolationist decision-making has been on display with a series of nasty congressional hearings that feature his Cabinet members unable to explain even the most basic contradictions in Trump's utterances and departmental policies affecting national security, immigration, justice, health or environment. Trump has embraced personal, national, even moral uncertainty as a weapon in winning friends and seeking global influence. It's not what we have taught our kids.s

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit paulstsmith.substack.com

Transcript:This week, Trump said that he’d do whatever is necessary to ease the oil crisis. He also assured America that the crisis “will be over soon.” Bull----. The problem isn’t just that Iran has blocked the Strait of Hormuz. It’s also that Iran, Israel, and the United States have all inflicted . and continue to inflict . serious damage to the oil and gas infrastructure of the Middle East. This damage will take months if not years to repair. At one point on Thursday oil prices jumped to 119 dollars a barrel before falling back to around 111 dollars a barrel . all but guaranteeing that the price of gas at the pump will continue to rise, as will the prices of many other products and services indirectly affected by oil prices. What we are now witnessing is one of the grossest military and political blunders in modern history. It’s not hard to understand why Trump is trapped in Iran. He doesn’t listen to anyone outside his small circle of sycophants who tell him what he wants to hear. But there’s something else. Iran has adopted an asymmetric war strategy that’s working. I’m indebted to Marty Manley for uncovering a fascinating historical fact that sheds light on what Iran is doing. During the Korean War, U. S. Air Force Colonel John Boyd came up with a theory of competitive decision-making that shaped American military doctrine for a generation. He called it the OODA loop: Observe, Orient, Decide, Act. Boyd found that victory doesn’t go to the side with more firepower. It goes to the side that cycles through the OODA loop faster . observing what’s changing, orienting to its meaning, deciding what to do, and acting before its adversary does. Get inside your opponent’s loop, Boyd reasoned, and you don’t just outpace him. You break his ability to form a coherent picture of the war he’s fighting. Manley observes that Iran has adopted Boyd’s approach. Iran hasn’t needed to match American firepower. it’s needed only to generate economic and political problems for Washington that outrun Washington’s ability to orient, decide, and act. Iran has gotten inside Trump’s OODA loop because Iran has responded to U. S. airstrikes by widening the war horizontally . attacking tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, launching drones and missiles at Gulf state oil and gas infrastructure, provoking the U. S. and Israel to destroy even more of that infrastructure, hitting Amazon data centers in the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain (causing regional outages for banking, e-commerce, and cloud services), and squeezing other choke points that the global economy depends on. Iran’s leaders . veterans of asymmetric wars in Iraq and Syria . are applying the same asymmetric logic to Trump’s war. Inexpensive drones, short-range missiles, and sea mines can have the same effect that IEDs had in Iraq . only with far greater strategic impact, because they disrupt global supply chains. What has Washington done? Dropped more bombs and launched more missiles. On Wednesday Israel struck at the crown jewel of Iran’s energy industry . the giant South Pars gas field that Iran shares with Qatar and is by far the largest in the world. (Israel says Trump gave the attack his blessing. Trump says he didn’t.) Iran quickly retaliated with an attack on Qatar’s Ras Laffan Industrial City, the world’s largest liquefied natural gas facility. The attacks have sent the global oil benchmark soaring and prompted a mad scramble in Washington. Trump threatens “to blow up the entirety” of Iran’s South Pars gas holdings if Iran attacks Qatar again. His treasury secretary says the U. S. will consider lifting sanctions on millions of barrels of Iranian oil. Since he and Israel began bombing Iran, Trump’s strategy has been entirely reactive. Iran is generating problems for Washington faster than Washington can contain them . a clear sign that Iran is inside Trump’s OODA loop. Trump and Israel assumed that overwhelming airpower would either compel Iran to surrender or trigger regime change. But neither has happened. The regime seems more entrenched and bellicose than ever. As Iran continues to block the Strait of Hormuz and attacks its Gulf neighbors’ oil and gas infrastructure, the cost-benefit ratio continues to shift against Trump: Economic and political pressures are mounting on Washington faster than they are on Tehran. Sure, Iran is hurting . but, as Manley argues, Iran can sustain its counteroffensive more easily and longer than the U. S. can sustain economic damage to Iran. An Iranian Shahed drone made of styrofoam and powered by a motorcycle engine, for example, costs orders of magnitude less than the precision missiles sent to intercept it or the economic havoc it causes when it ignites a tanker, data center, or desalination plant. In addition, the longer Trump’s OODA loop stays broken, the more bad consequences occur that no one in the Trump regime anticipated. Trump’s war in Iran is now being led by Israel rather than the other way around, and Trump has no easy way to alter this power imbalance. The war has also shifted the power balance between Russia and Ukraine, with Russian oil revenues potentially doubling as U. S. weapons stocks become depleted. So what’s next for the U. S.? Is there any way out for Trump? He could put “boots on the ground” in Iran and attempt to seize Iran’s stockpile of approximately 970 pounds of 60 percent enriched uranium . enough to produce multiple nuclear weapons if further enriched. If he could pull this off, a major feat. But this would be a particularly dangerous move in terms of American lives lost. It could even risk an accidental nuclear explosion. Moreover, no one knows where the enriched uranium is being stored. In the wake of U. S. and Israeli strikes last June, it’s likely in deep underground tunnels near Isfahan and other secure locations, but the International Atomic Energy Agency can’t verify the exact locations or status of the stockpile due to lack of access to bombed sites. What about returning to the diplomatic table? As Richard Haass points out, Trump hardly gave diplomacy a chance before launching his war. U. S. envoys Witkoff and Kushner blended maximal positions . effectively demanding an end to Iran’s nuclear program, ballistic missile force, and support for proxies . with minimal time for negotiation. Haass notes the stark contrast between this process and the administration’s apparently endless willingness to give Russia the benefit of the doubt and compromise Ukraine’s interests. If Trump returned to negotiations now, from a position of demonstrated military capability rather than exhaustion, Iran might be forced to reorient and respond to an adversary that did something unpredictable. The problem is that the Trump regime has repeatedly reneged on his promises to Iran, so Tehran has no reason to believe any offer Trump makes. So, presumably for the foreseeable future, Iran will remain in Trump’s OODA loop, Trump will remain trapped in Iran, and American consumers will be trapped by soaring energy prices. Robert Reich is a professor of public policy at Berkeley and former secretary of labor. His writings can be found at https://robertreich. substack. com/.s

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit paulstsmith.substack.com

Transcript:President Donald Trump and his supporters describe liberals as “radical” and “extreme,” an accusation that one comedy writer describes as “epic-level gaslighting.”“Republicans have made it abundantly clear, from behind the presidential seal and in the halls of Congress and on all manner of news networks, that the extremists in America are liberals like me,” wrote humor columnist Rex Huppke for USA Today on Sunday. “We are, in the oft-repeated words of President Donald Trump, ‘radical left lunatics.’ We are agitators. Insurrectionists. Thugs. Our ideas are extreme, always. ‘Radical left climate extremism.’ ‘Extreme gender ideology.’”Yet Huppke pointed out that Trump supporters “all kneel at the altar of a narcissistic conman who eviscerates every democratic norm he comes across and slaps his name on things like a dollar-store Mussolini,” making it ludicrous for them to accuse people who merely want a clean planet and equal rights for all gender identities of being extremist or dangerous.“As the Republican Party has morphed into an averse-to-democracy cult of personality – 63% of Republicans now identify as part of Trump’s MAGA movement – their labeling of the left as radicals has had to keep pace,” Huppke wrote. “It’s the ‘No I’m Not, YOU ARE!’ approach honed throughout history by bullies and abusers.”Huppke went on to point out that Trump has failed to solve the myriad problems his administration blamed on the supposed radicalism of President Joe Biden (rising prices, a ballooning national debt, lawfare against political opponents). Additionally, one of Trump’s first acts as president was to pardon the insurrectionists who attempted a coup on Jan. 6, 2021 so that Trump could steal the 2020 presidential election.“Promoting mass deportation, Trump and his party have proudly dispatched squads of masked and warrantless federal immigration agents across the country, resulting in the killing of U. S. citizens and repeated acts of transparent inhumanity,” Huppke added. “Without any form of approval, Trump had the historic East Wing of the White House demolished to make way for a ballroom funded by corporate and private donors, opening a door for shameless influence peddling.”He then pointed out, “War, cruelty and racism. Isn't that all a bit extreme?”Huppke also described as “extreme” Trump waging war against Iran without congressional approval, allowing a Christian nationalist pastor to lead a Pentagon worship service and creating a party in which Young Republican leaders in Arizona, Kansas, New York and Vermont “were found to be swimming in racist and antisemitic chats, saying things like ‘I love Hitler’ and casually using slurs for Black people.” He also mentioned the party’s Islamophobia, proposed 1 dollars Trump coin in circulation and use of a neo-Nazi anthem (By God We’ll Have Our Home Again’) to recruit for the Department of Homeland Security.“Frankly, I don’t ever want to hear the term ‘radical leftist’ again,” Huppke said. “At least not as long as Republicans are okey doke with a man whose every utterance is radical, a man who has subjugated an entire party and brainwashed them to obey his every whim.”Huppke, despite being best known as a humorist, is also frequently scathingly critical of Trump. In December he claimed Trump had reached a “new low” after a “decade of Trumpian loathsomeness” because Trump applauded the murder of director/actor Rob Reiner, another frequent Trump critic. In November Huppke urged Americans to confront their Trump-supporting relatives at Thanksgiving, arguing that “at this moment in history, I wholly reject avoiding a subject that, thanks to Trump’s extremism and unquenchable thirst for attention, envelops virtually every aspect of our lives.”Further into the article he added “not talking politics with your MAGA relatives is letting them off the hook. When a president is routinely bombing boats in international waters, ordering masked federal agents to round up hardworking immigrant families and sidestepping Congress while slapping tariffs on countries willy-nilly, those who disagree with such things have a responsibility to speak up.”s

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit paulstsmith.substack.com

Transcript:President Donald Trump may not have the resources to finish what he started in Iran, judging by how deep down into the military’s pocket he’s having to dig for change. Stars and Stripes reports Trump’s military administration is now recommissioning a discontinued slate of planes that were grounded after high expenses and vulnerabilities in the evolving landscape of modern combat.“The Air Force has been trying to divest the aircraft for years, citing maintenance costs and its vulnerability to modern air defense systems,” reports Stars and Stripes. Nevertheless, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff mentioned the A-10C Thunderbolt II at a Pentagon briefing Thursday three weeks into the war in Iran.“The A-10 Warthog is now in the fight across the southern flank and is hunting and killing fast attack watercraft in the Strait of Hormuz,” said Air Force Gen. Dan Caine. But the planes are big and loud, and particularly vulnerable to high-resolution radar and surface-to-air missiles due to its lack of stealth features. Sources report the aircraft's “simplistic design … [is lacking] some features necessary to compete against other modern forces.” “The A-10 Warthog is anything but stealthy or quick, which is a problem when sending this aircraft against an adversary utilizing state-of-the-art air defenses,” reports Jalopnik, adding thatthe cost of maintaining the bird was “eye-watering.”“There aren't enough dollars left over to keep the Warthog going, with cost per flight hour sitting between 19 dollars,000 and 22 dollars,000, per National Security Journal,” said Jalopnik.s

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit paulstsmith.substack.com

Transcript:President Donald Trump’s belligerent foreign policy can be understood by his “abusive, impulsive narcissist relations with women,” says the associate editor of a prominent Washington DC magazine. Describing Trump’s statement last week that he plans on “taking Cuba in some form” because he can “do anything I want with it,” the bottom line is that “Trump’s megalomania continues to grow because he is so rarely punished for it,” wrote Washington Monthly associate editor Gillen Tener Martin in a Sunday editorial. From winning the 2016 presidential election despite the "Access Hollywood” tape leaking (in that tape he bragged about sexually assaulting women) to getting reelected in 2024 even though he was found liable by a civil jury for the sexual assault of E. Jean Carroll, Trump has learned that he can harm others with impunity . and that translates into his policy choices.“But, of course, ‘I can do anything’ isn’t just Trump’s modus operandi with women,” Martin wrote. “It’s his mantra. how he moves through life: selfishly, chaotically, with little forethought and no expectation of consequences. And we’ve seen how that translates into policy. from tariffs to vaccines to DOGE, from Minneapolis to Venezuela to Iran.”Martin added, “Turns out, if you’re an abusive, impulsive narcissist in your relations with women, you tend to be one in other areas of life, too. Who would’ve thought?”There is good news for anti-Trumpers in that Trump’s attitude of invincibility does not translate into actual invincibility, Martin pointed out. He failed to repeal Obamacare, contain the COVID-19 pandemic, steal the 2020 presidential election or convince America’s former allies to back his reckless military venture in Iran.“Even a military superpower needs allies in war, and allies are hard to find when war is waged on specious grounds without a diplomatic endgame,” Martin concluded regarding the last point. “Under different circumstances, the president being forced to reckon with the consequences of his actions may have brought solace. even glee. to some. Alas, the repercussions of this mess will come for us all.”Martin’s concern over a possible US invasion of Cuba is based on Trump’s recent fixation on the Caribbean island country. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, whose parents are Cuban immigrants and who is a staunch opponent of that nation’s longstanding Communist regime, has long called for the island to be democratized. "There is a very personal and corrupt agenda that he is carrying out, which seems to be sacrificing the national interests of the U. S. in order to advance this very extremist approach," Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla told the AP in October about Rubio. In response to additional Trump threats in January, Cuba's President Miguel Diaz-Canel told Reuters that "Cuba is a free, independent, and sovereign nation. Nobody dictates what we do. Cuba does not attack. it has been attacked by the U. S. for 66 years, and it does not threaten. it prepares, ready to defend the homeland to the last drop of blood."s

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit paulstsmith.substack.com

Transcript:Unstable Tyrant Trump is running out of lies, fantasies, and promises to break. An NBC interview of a Pennsylvania woman next to a gas station signals the trend. The reporter asked her what she would say to President Trump. She answered: “You are a worthless pile of s---.” He then asked her how many times she voted for him. She replied: “Three times. That was my bad. Apparently, I’m an idiot.”Indeed, dozens of vendors are busily selling stickers showing Dangerous Donald pointing to the gas pump’s prices and saying, “I did this!” Further infuriating people is wealthy Trump’s irresponsible response to rapidly rising gasoline prices: “If they rise, they rise.”The cause, of course, is Trump waging illegal, unconstitutional wars. His Israeli-driven attack on Iran is like quicksand. His Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Joe Kent, wrote in his recent public resignation letter that: “Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby.”Iran is the tenth country Trump has militarily raided since Jan. 20, 2025. More MAGA supporters are increasingly angry about his broken promise, declared every day on his campaign trail, to “stop the endless wars” of his predecessors. They are also indignant over the illegal withholding of millions of pages of the Epstein files by his toady Attorney General Pam Bondi. Moreover, the corrupt TRUMP DUMP is shredding our federal government and its critical, statutory obligations to protect the health, safety, and economic well-being of the American people and rescue communities devastated by climate violence and the real threats of contagious diseases. With his war on science, on facts, and on truth, Trump is pushing America into a contemporary DARK AGES. His pathological hatred of wind power and solar energy and his crazed boosting of the toxic oil, gas, and coal companies (“beautiful, clean coal”) are relentless. Even in the Medieval Dark Ages, buildings were built to take advantage of passive solar energy. Looming is the TRUMP SLUMP, starting with an approaching recession. The GDP is already in decline. Inflationary consumer prices are rising. Unemployment is rising. By far most of the new jobs are coming from the healthcare sector, reacting to greater levels of illnesses and injuries brought about by Trump’s cutting enforcement against polluting corporate wrongdoers and cutting public health budgets and grants. TRUMP’S SLUMP is also reflecting the damage done by the closing of the Strait of Hormuz. This is tightening oil and gas supplies, helium, and nitrogen products needed by already hard-pressed American farmers trying to afford fertilizers. Dizzy Trump doesn’t know where he is going. His master, Netanyahu, is pleased to push zig-zag Donald into the Middle East quicksand. Like with his past backing of the Bush/Cheney criminal invasion of Iraq, Netanyahu wants an invasion of Iran by U. S. soldiers who should not be forced to obey illegal orders. Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) has long been interpreted to require military personnel to disobey clearly illegal orders that violate the Constitution or US federal statutes. Note, there is no quicksand for Israel, and no Israeli soldiers are slated to invade Iranian soil. (See, “Israel’s Manipulation of Trump on Iran” by Robert Kuttner.)Desperate Trump and diabolical Netanyahu are now moving to charge the American taxpayers, via an AIPAC-indentured bunch of ditto-head Senators and Representatives, for the cost of the illegal war on Iran. Trump wants a staggering 200 BILLION dollars more tax dollars for the Pentagon, and no doubt a chunk will go to the genocidal Israeli regime. Trump refuses to pay for it by asking Congress to raise taxes on the undertaxed corporations, especially the war corporations profiting immensely. Instead, as is his cruel bent, he is creating more skyrocketing deficits that will be paid for by our children and grandchildren. There is, however, rising opposition in Congress against this gross, lawless treachery, including some Republicans. Public opinion is sharply against Trump’s war government, and rising among Republican, Democratic, and independent voters. The Congressional GOP is reading the polls, which augur disaster in November, despite the feeble opposition by the Democratic Party leadership. According to a March 9th Quinnipiac University Poll, fifty-three percent of voters oppose the U. S. military action against Iran, while 40 percent support it. Democrats (89 – 7 percent) and independents (60 – 31 percent) oppose the U. S. military action against Iran, while Republicans (85 – 11 percent) support it. Seventy-four percent of voters oppose sending U. S. ground troops into Iran, while 20 percent support it. Democrats (95 – 3 percent), independents (75 – 19 percent), and Republicans (52 – 37 percent) oppose sending U. S. ground troops into Iran. All told, it will be the economy that will bring Trump down, setting the stage for his Impeachment and Removal from Office. This is how our Founders envisioned presidents who acted like monarchs being discharged. (See the Washington Post Letters to the Editor by Bruce Fein.)However, the people should not rule out desperation by Trump and his violence-touting extremists. False flag episodes here and abroad are well within their horizons of political survival, especially in an Internet and AI era. The sober sense of these realities by the American people is advanced by being prepared against being tricked and flummoxed by the Trumpsters and their accommodating mass media, such as Fox and Sinclair broadcasters. In the immediate meantime, it is those elected “deciders,” the 535 Senators and Representatives, who you must push to exercise their Congressional duties. The good ones can be prone to panic, apart from those already immersed in political bigotry, mindless jingoism or being bribed. Contact your Senators and Representatives through their local offices. If you can, go visit them there. Dangerous times invite courageous citizens. Remember, you greatly outnumber the destroyers of peace and democracy.(See also “Understanding the U. S. and Israel’s Illegal War on Iran” by Craig Mokhiber.)With Trump, it’s only going to get worse, much worse, here and abroad.s

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit paulstsmith.substack.com

Transcript:President Donald Trump vowed Sunday to make good on his previous threat to deploy Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to airports nationwide in a fiery rant shared on social media.“On Monday, ICE will be going to airports to help our wonderful TSA Agents who have stayed on the job despite the fact that the Radical Left Democrats, who are only focused on protecting hard line criminals who have entered our Country illegally, are endangering the USA by holding back the money that was long ago agreed to with signed and sealed contracts, and all,” Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social. Trump’s threat comes amid the ongoing partial government shutdown, which began last month after Democratic lawmakers refused to fund the Department of Homeland Security without significant reforms to ICE in the wake of the agency’s violent immigration enforcement operations in Minnesota and elsewhere. The shutdown has led to long lines at airports as Transportation Security Administration officials – who work under DHS – have started to miss paychecks. Trump’s solution, he first proposed on Saturday, was to deploy ICE agents to help fill staff shortages.“But watch, no matter how great a job ICE does, the Lunatics leading the incompetent Dems will be highly critical of their work,” Trump continued. “THEY WILL DO A FANTASTIC JOB. The great Tom Homan is in charge!!!”Our Analysis:The Real Story Behind the Shutdown ShowdownIn a recent eruption on social media, President Donald Trump has announced plans to deploy Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to airports across the nation. This move, according to Trump, is a response to the ongoing partial government shutdown precipitated by what he describes as Democratic intransigence on funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which includes ICE. This decision, and the framing of the narrative surrounding it, requires a critical dissection to understand the dynamics at play, the decision-makers involved, and the accuracy of the blame being assigned.Institutional Power and Decision-MakingInstitutional Power: The President of the United States, as the head of the executive branch, holds the primary institutional power in this scenario. This position grants him the authority to direct federal agencies, including ICE, within the confines of existing legislation.Decision-Making: The decision to deploy ICE agents to airports is squarely a directive from President Trump. This action is presented as a solution to staffing shortages caused by the partial government shutdown. a shutdown that continues due to a standoff between the White House and Democratic lawmakers over funding for DHS.Dissecting the NarrativeThe Blame Game: President Trump's narrative frames the shutdown and its resultant issues squarely on the shoulders of "Radical Left Democrats," accusing them of prioritizing the protection of "hard line criminals" over national security. This framing simplifies a complex negotiation into a tale of good versus evil, ignoring the nuanced debate over immigration policy and the ethical considerations of ICE's operations.Misdirection of Responsibility?: To some extent, yes. The article’s framing suggests that Democrats are solely to blame for the shutdown and its cascading effects. However, it glosses over the fact that funding negotiations involve both executive and legislative branches. The refusal to fund DHS without significant reforms to ICE, in the wake of controversial enforcement operations, represents a legislative check on executive power. a foundational principle of American democracy.The Role of ICE: Deploying ICE agents to assist TSA may temporarily address staffing shortages, but it does not address the root causes of the shutdown. Furthermore, it potentially diverts ICE from its primary mission, raising questions about priorities and resource allocation.ConclusionWhile President Trump indeed holds the institutional power to direct ICE operations, the decision to deploy agents to airports amidst a government shutdown is a band-aid solution to a deeper political impasse. The narrative that Democrats are endangering the USA by demanding reforms ignores the legislative branch's role in oversight and the legitimate concerns raised about ICE's practices.Criticism of this decision should not be dismissed as mere partisan obstruction but understood as part of a broader debate on immigration policy, the use of federal resources, and the balance of power between branches of government. The simplification of this issue into a narrative of blame misleads the public and detracts from the urgent need for a comprehensive and humane approach to immigration reform.s

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit paulstsmith.substack.com

Transcript:President Donald Trump’s demand Saturday that Iran “fully open” the Strait of Hormuz by Monday night was rebuffed Sunday morning by Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, who not only appeared to dismiss Trump’s open threat, but issued one of his own. Following the United States’ surprise attack on Iran last month, the Middle East nation has denied U. S.-aligned ships access to the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial shipping route through which a fifth of the world’s oil trade flows, sending oil prices soaring and reportedly sparking panic within the Trump administration. On Saturday, Trump took to social media to demand Iran allow U. S.-aligned ships to pass through the shipping channel “within 48 hours,” warning that if his demand was not met, the United States would “obliterate their various power plants, starting with the biggest one first” – a potential war crime. Despite the gravity of Trump’s threat, Ghalibaf appeared to dismiss the warning, and went on to issue one of his own.“Immediately after the power plants and infrastructure in our country are targeted, the critical infrastructure, energy infrastructure, and oil facilities throughout the region will be considered legitimate targets and will be destroyed in an irreversible manner, and the price of oil will remain high for a long time,” Ghalibaf wrote in a social media post on X Sunday morning, according to a translation of the original post written in Farsi.“And throw down what is in your right hand. it will swallow up what they have made.”Increasing oil prices have reportedly led to Trump looking for a way out of the conflict he initiated, however, such an off-ramp may not exist according to at least one former Trump security advisor. Iran has also vowed to keep fighting in response to the U. S.-Israeli attack.Our Analysis:The Strait of Hormuz Standoff: Unpacking the Blame GameIn the recent escalation between the United States and Iran over the vital Strait of Hormuz, the stakes are high, with global oil prices hanging in the balance. The situation demands a nuanced analysis to sift through the layers of rhetoric and identify where the responsibility truly lies.Institutional Power and Decision MakingFirst, let’s address the elephant in the room: Institutional Power. In this scenario, two primary actors wield significant power: the U. S. government, spearheaded by President Donald Trump, and the Iranian government, represented by Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf. Both are key decision-makers on their respective sides, with the ability to influence and enact policies that have far-reaching consequences.President Trump’s decision to demand the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, coupled with the threat of military action against Iranian infrastructure, is a clear exercise of power. It’s an attempt to leverage the United States' military dominance to enforce its will. On the other side, Ghalibaf’s response, which includes a threat to target infrastructure across the region, signifies Iran’s refusal to be coerced, emphasizing its sovereignty and capability to retaliate.Misdirected Responsibility?The article’s framing suggests a tit-for-tat escalation with Trump’s administration seeking to alleviate the consequences of its own aggressive policies by placing the onus on Iran to de-escalate. This narrative oversimplifies the dynamics at play, potentially misdirecting responsibility towards Iran for the standoff and the resultant spike in oil prices.However, the context provided. specifically the mention of a “surprise attack on Iran last month by the United States”. is critical. This preemptive action by the U. S. set the stage for the current standoff, making it the catalyst for the subsequent denial of access to the Strait of Hormuz by Iran. This sequence of events points to a situation where the U. S., under Trump’s directive, initiated a cycle of aggression, to which Iran is responding. It’s a classic case of cause and effect, where the initial aggressive act by the U. S. is the root cause of the ensuing crisis.Conclusion: Beyond False EquivalencesIt’s facile to draw false equivalences or to oversimplify the scenario as merely a dispute between two nations with a history of animosity. The reality is that the U. S. wielded its power first to alter the status quo, prompting a defensive response from Iran. While neither side’s rhetoric nor actions are beyond criticism, it’s misleading to frame the situation as Iran’s intransigence in the face of a reasonable demand from the U. S.The Trump administration’s strategy, marked by a surprise attack and threats of further unilateral military action, not only escalates tensions but also risks significant collateral damage in the global economy through rising oil prices. This approach, far from being a justified or reasonable demand for the reopening of the Strait, is a gambit that disregards the potential for catastrophic consequences in favor of short-term tactical gains.In the final analysis, responsibility for the current standoff and its implications rests primarily with those who initiated the cycle of aggression. namely, the Trump administration. The framing of the article, while capturing the immediate tit-for-tat, fails to critically assess the sequence of actions and decisions that led to this juncture, thereby misdirecting responsibility toward actors with limited control over the situation’s genesis.s

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit paulstsmith.substack.com

Transcript:Conservative analyst Bill Kristol was floored on Saturday after President Donald Trump unleashed his "most grotesque" outburst yet. Trump posted on Truth Social that he is "glad" former FBI Director and Special Counsel Robert Mueller had passed away over the weekend. Mueller, who had been battling Parkinson's disease, led the 2016 investigation into ties between Trump's presidential campaign and the Russian government, and issued a report that concluded the Russians favored Trump to win, even though it stopped short of calling the efforts "collusion." "Robert Mueller just died. Good, I’m glad he’s dead. He can no longer hurt innocent people! President DONALD J. TRUMP," Trump wrote. Kristol, editor-at-large for The Bulwark, discussed Trump's comments on a new episode of the "Bulwark Takes" podcast with host Tim Miller. "Nothing's unimaginable, obviously, in the era of Trump and in the character of Trump, but it is on the edge of the worst things he's said and the most grotesque," Kristol said. He noted that it seems unlikely Trump will face any pushback from the Republican caucus. "Will there be anyone who attempts to preserve any sense of dignity and respect for people who serve their country in public life?" Kristol asked.Our Analysis:The Grotesque Dance of Power and Decorum: Trump, Mueller, and the Republican ResponseIn the latest episode of political theater that seems to defy even the most elastic boundaries of decorum, former President Donald Trump's comments on the passing of Robert Mueller, the former FBI Director and Special Counsel, have ignited a firestorm of criticism and reflection. As dissected in the article detailing conservative analyst Bill Kristol's reaction, the situation is layered, complex, and demands a nuanced analysis beyond the surface-level shock and awe.Who Holds the Institutional Power?At first glance, the power dynamics might seem straightforward: Trump, a former president and a towering figure in the Republican Party, wields significant influence both within the party and among the public. Yet, his current position is one of an outsider looking in, having lost the institutional power of the presidency. Conversely, the Republican caucus, as part of the legislative branch, holds tangible legislative power but appears reticent or powerless to counter Trump's influence. This apparent power imbalance is at the heart of the issue.Decision-Makers and OutcomesThe decision in question is Trump's unfiltered expression of gladness at Mueller's death, an action solely attributable to Trump. The outcome is multifaceted: it has exacerbated the polarization within American politics, further eroded the norms of public discourse, and spotlighted the Republican Party's internal conflict regarding how to manage Trump's provocations.Misdirected Responsibility?The article's framing primarily casts Trump as the provocateur and Kristol as the critic, questioning whether the Republican caucus will act against Trump's incendiary rhetoric. This framing, while accurate in its depiction of events, perhaps inadvertently shifts the focus away from a more systemic issue: the broader political and media ecosystem that amplifies and rewards such outbursts.The responsibility for Trump's comments lies solely with him. However, the larger question of why such comments are made and publicized with little to no consequence speaks to a systemic failure that extends beyond an individual or party. It implicates the media, the political elite, and, by extension, the electorate itself.Analyzing the Republican ResponseKristol's skepticism about the Republican caucus's likelihood to push back against Trump is telling. It reflects a party deeply entangled with Trump's brand of politics, suggesting that the institutional power within the Republican Party is not leveraged to uphold decorum or accountability but is instead held hostage by the fear of political reprisal.The inaction or silence of the Republican caucus is not a sign of powerlessness but a deliberate choice, one that prioritizes political expediency over principle. The caucus, theoretically, has the means to censure or distance itself from Trump's remarks but chooses not to, indicating a tacit complicity or at least a calculated acquiescence.Conclusion: The Real CulpritsThe grotesqueness of Trump's outburst is undeniable. However, focusing solely on Trump or expecting the Republican caucus to act against their perceived self-interest misses the larger, systemic issue. The real story here is not just about one man's lack of decorum or another's expectation of decency. it's about a political and media landscape that fosters, amplifies, and rewards such behavior.In this light, misplaced criticism or expectations serve only to obfuscate the root causes. The responsibility rests not only on the shoulders of those who speak or remain silent but also on the very structure that grants them the stage and the microphone. To address the problem, one must look beyond individuals and consider the systemic reforms necessary to change the incentives and consequences within American politics.s

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit paulstsmith.substack.com

Transcript:Don’t give Joe Kent any kind of a pass just yet, because he’s still MAGA. And he’s about to become even more dangerous than he already was. The DNI was under a microscope on Wednesday in the wake of the unexpected resignation letter bombshell released by the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Joe Kent. Tulsi “Hillary Told Us All About You” Gabbard was being grilled by the Senate Intelligence Committee and lied under oath yet again when being questioned by my Senator, Ron Wyden , Democrat from Oregon. Senator Chutzpah here is the embodiment of “Speak softly and carry a big stick,” because he definitely stuck it to Tulsi. It’s been fascinating to watch the MAGA reaction to Kent’s resignation unfold on Twitter, because Joe Kent wasn’t even on their radar before they were told what to say about him in their tweets. The official message from the White House was, “Kent is a liar who was always weak on national security,” which is a weird thing to say about the person you hired to help oversee our national security. Another L for the world’s least successful businessmanBefore Tuesday, Kent had been a MAGA darling and special favorite of Trump’s ever since they met at Kent’s wife’s Dignified Transfer in 2019, one of the few times Trump met the coffins of service people killed in action during his first term. Kent soon joined the Trump 2020 campaign and was a full-on America First MAGA mouthpiece, whom I dubbed “Rand Paul Lite” early on thanks to their resemblance in both looks and disregard for the truth. After Trump lost the 2020 election, Kent positioned himself to run for Congress in Washington’s 3rd District . where I lived from 2001 until 2022 . to challenge then-Representative Jaime Herrera Beutler , Republican from Washington, who had fallen out of favor with Trump after she voted for his second impeachment. Herrera Beutler famously testified that she was with Representative Kevin McCarthy (R-FL, via Trump’s alimentary canal) in his office on January 6, 2021, when he called Trump at the White House and begged him to call off the MAGA crowd that was attempting to break into his office window. “Well, Kevin,” Trump told him, “I guess some people are more upset about the election results than others.” And then hung up on him. Ah, 2021, a time when Republicans quietly told the truth about Trump once he left office. That was a real thing that the media also fumbled back then. In September 2021, I was writing for the now-defunct website Hill Reporter when I heard that then-Representative Matt Gaetz , Republican from Florida was being dispatched to appear with Joe Kent in Vancouver to boost his campaign. The full story has been archived, and once you’re done here, I’d appreciate it if you could take the time. But I’ll give you the Cliff’s Notes version here. I’d arranged for an interview with both Gaetz and Kent for Labor Day via Kent’s campaign manager. We were set to meet at a coffee shop ahead of a planned private fundraiser, which would be followed by a rally at the Clark County Fairgrounds. The morning of the interview, I was told Gaetz wasn’t available, but Kent was still a go. I was fully prepared, but Kent wasn’t ready for my competence. Kent, his tattoo sleeves partially covered by shirtsleeves even in the warm weather (SUS!), told me everything I needed to know about him by not answering the questions I asked him during our 40-minute interview, in which I repeatedly nailed him with these pesky things I brought with me called FACTS. We were only a couple of minutes in before he remarked, “Wow, I usually get softball questions.”“Yeah, I don’t play softball,” I quipped. My questions were enough for his campaign manager, who was furiously texting during the interview. Before the promised hour I’d arranged had elapsed, our conversation was cut short by Matt Braynard, a MAGA strategist and devoted J6er. But I’d gleaned some very important info, mainly that there were already plans to challenge the results of the 2022 midterms, a full 14 months before a vote had been cast. The fundraiser had been moved from a skate park (Matt Gaetz + teenagers = Bad Optics) to a private residence. Even though Kent had denounced the violence of January 6th in our interview, these were the kinds of bumper stickers on the cars of those who were welcome inside--unlike myself and my pal/bodyguard, Eugene. There was also a heavy presence of Proud Boys and Oath Keepers at the very small rally, which wasn’t advertised, to both avoid protests as well as to keep the crowd to just “their” people--who threatened me. Matt Gaetz quote-tweeted this from his then-official Congressional Twitter account. He used MAGA virtue signaling words like “triggered” and “Karen,” and then took his harassment of an American citizen even further by doing a segment about me on his “Firebrand” podcast. A sitting member of Congress used his platform to encourage his followers to “seek out” my social media, which they definitely did. What followed were weeks of targeted harassment, both online and off. Aside from getting multiple rape and death threats via every platform, there were calls and texts. Someone used Facebook Messenger to claim someone was on the way to film themselves killing me. Two hours later, a car was parked outside my apartment, and someone was taunting me from a burner phone, screaming, “COME OUTSIDE, TARA!”Which I did not. Law enforcement did nothing, not then and not when I reported being followed around town. House Ethics did nothing. The Florida Bar did nothing. Those tweets and two Firebrand episodes are still live. Gaetz no longer has the protection of Congress, and I can only hope he’ll face charges for sex trafficking teenagers. As for Joe Kent, keep your eye on him. Watch his friendship with Tucker Carlson. He’s still got those Nazi tattoos. He’s still dangerous, thanks to what he knows and what he believes. I’ve seen how he operates, up close and all too personal.Our Analysis:The Misdirection of MAGA: Unpacking the Joe Kent SagaIn the recent uproar surrounding Joe Kent, a figure whose political trajectory has traced from a Trump 2020 campaign affiliate to a congressional candidate marked by controversy, the essence of the narrative isn't just about the individuals involved but about the institutional power dynamics at play. The article in question attempts to navigate these turbulent waters, but does it accurately pinpoint where responsibility and power lie?Institutional Power DynamicsFirstly, understanding who holds institutional power is paramount. In this saga, several layers of power dynamics are at play:The Trump Administration and MAGA Movement: Trump's influence over the MAGA movement and its key figures, including Kent, cannot be understated. This relationship bestows a form of power that is both political and cultural, extending beyond mere institutional control.Congress and the Senate Intelligence Committee: The legislative branch, particularly entities like the Senate Intelligence Committee, wield significant institutional power. Their ability to conduct oversight and hold individuals accountable, as demonstrated in the grilling of Tulsi Gabbard, showcases their central role in the political arena.Media and Public Opinion: The role of media, both traditional and social, alongside public opinion, acts as a form of soft power. It influences perceptions, sways political fortunes, and can even herald the rise or fall of political figures.Decision-Makers and OutcomesThe decision-makers in this context are multifaceted. Joe Kent's decision to resign, presumably under pressure due to the unfolding controversies, reflects the immediate power of public and political scrutiny. However, the broader decisions that led to this moment. ranging from Kent's original association with the Trump campaign to his subsequent actions and rhetoric. involve a broader network of actors, including Trump himself, MAGA strategists, and Kent's campaign team.The outcome, Kent's resignation and the fallout, cannot be attributed to a single decision-maker but rather a culmination of actions by these interconnected figures within the MAGA ecosystem.Framing and ResponsibilityThe article’s framing suggests a direct line of responsibility from Kent (and by extension, MAGA figures like Gaetz) to the controversies and threats faced by those opposing their narrative. While Kent and his affiliates certainly hold responsibility for their actions and the environments they foster, the article risks oversimplifying the narrative by not adequately dissecting the broader institutional failures at play.For instance, the failure of law enforcement and ethics committees to act in response to threats highlights a systemic issue that goes beyond individual actors. Similarly, the framing around Gabbard's interrogation by the Senate Intelligence Committee, while focusing on the immediate drama, skirts the larger question of how and why such figures are able to leverage institutional platforms to their advantage, often with little to no consequence.Conclusion: A Call for Nuanced AccountabilityThe story of Joe Kent and the ensuing political drama is a microcosm of the larger, more complex power dynamics that define American politics today. While Kent, his MAGA affiliations, and figures like Gaetz certainly warrant scrutiny and accountability, it's crucial to recognize the broader systemic and institutional failures that allow such narratives to unfold.The real danger lies not just in the individuals who exploit their positions and platforms for divisive or harmful ends but in the structures that enable them. Criticism, therefore, must be meticulously directed not just at the visible players but at the underlying systems that perpetuate these cycles of controversy, inaction, and harm.In navigating these stormy political waters, our discourse must evolve beyond the surface-level narratives and scapegoats to address the foundational issues at the heart of our systemic errors. Only then can we hope to dismantle the mechanisms that allow such dangerous dynamics to thrive.s

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit paulstsmith.substack.com