Transcript:President Donald Trump fired Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on Thursday — and now his fellow Republicans exult at the idea that her alleged lover and aide, Corey Lewandowski, is on the way out along with her.“The end of Corey Lewandowski’s reign represents a return to responsible and accountable governance,” an anonymous administration official told The Post. “The nation welcomes Senator [Markwayne] Mullin’s nomination.”Another White House official said they believe Lewandowski will lose his job once Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Ok.) replaced him, explaining that they “don’t know who would want him.”Lewandowski is rumored to have been in a long-term affair with Noem, including living with her and serving as a power behind the throne in the department. He controlled contract approval, made critical staffing decisions and was widely reputed to be vindictive and ruthless. Lewandowski himself says he does not know his future at the White House.“I haven’t made that decision,” Lewandowski said when asked about his career plans.Asked earlier this week about the alleged affair with Lewandowski, Noem did not outright deny it but said the question was offensive."Secretary Noem, at any time during your tenure…have you had sexual relations with Corey Lewandowski?" U.S. Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA) asked Noem.Noem replied, "That is garbage and it is offensive that you have brought that up.”Kamlager-Dove responded, "It is about your judgment and decision-making.”Trump himself was allegedly aware of the affair, as he is reported to have “frequently” told people he saw Noem and Lewandowski drink from the same soda can."You can’t do that, it’s pretty obvious!” Trump remarked. “You can’t do that, everyone’s going to know!" Trump reportedly said.He added, “That’s his go-to story. He says that frequently about them.”The two have been rumored to be involved in an affair for years before joining the Trump administration. According to the Daily Mail, Noem “won the governorship in 2018 promising to uphold the wholesome family values that she said South Dakotans have ‘long embraced.’ Defending ‘traditional marriage’, which she defined as ‘a special, God-given union between one man and one woman’, was particularly important to her,” and “was the foundation for her beliefs, policy priorities and the ideals she lives by, said Noem, who has a son and two daughters with her husband Bryon who she married in 1992.”According to NBC News, Noem was not fired for any one reason but due to a number of reasons."An administration official told NBC News that the president decided to fire Noem due to 'a culmination of her many unfortunate leadership failures including the fallout in Minnesota, the ad campaign, the allegations of infidelity, the mismanagement of her staff, and her constant feuding with the heads of other agencies, including CBP and ICE," NBC News reported.Our Analysis:The Tangled Webs of Power: Unpacking the Noem-Lewandowski SagaIn a dramatic turn that reads more like a screenplay for a political thriller than the sober reality of governance, President Donald Trump's firing of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has exposed the convoluted and scandal-ridden underbelly of his administration. At the heart of this political saga are allegations of an affair between Noem and her aide, Corey Lewandowski, which have rippled through the corridors of power, leading to whispers of Lewandowski's imminent departure. Let's dissect this narrative with the precision it begs for, revealing not just the personal failings it highlights but the systemic rot it symbolizes.The Fall of Noem and Lewandowski's Looming ExitThe statement from an anonymous administration official to The Post, celebrating the end of Lewandowski's "reign" as a return to "responsible and accountable governance," is drenched in irony. It insinuates that Lewandowski's tenure was anything but responsible or accountable. Yet, this "celebration" masks a deeper issue: why was such an individual allowed to wield significant influence in the first place? Lewandowski's alleged control over contracts and staffing, paired with a reputation for vindictiveness, points to a governance style that prioritizes loyalty and power over competence and integrity.The Affair Allegation: A Reflection of Poor JudgmentWhile the personal lives of political figures should remain personal, the alleged affair between Noem and Lewandowski transcends gossip. It becomes a matter of public interest when it affects decision-making and governance. Noem's refusal to deny the affair, branding the inquiry as "garbage," does little to quell concerns. Instead, it highlights a potential lapse in judgment. The affair, rumored for years and allegedly known to Trump, paints a picture of an administration where personal relationships intertwine dangerously with official duties.Trump's Involvement: More Than a BystanderTrump's role in this saga cannot be understated. His alleged comments about Noem and Lewandowski sharing a soda can seem trivial at first glance but reveal his awareness and possible tacit approval of the situation. Trump's leadership style, marked by chaos and loyalty tests, creates an environment where such scandals are not just possible but likely.The Hypocrisy of "Wholesome Family Values"Noem's rise to the governorship on a platform of "wholesome family values" and "traditional marriage" adds a layer of hypocrisy to the scandal. It's a stark reminder of the often wide chasm between the public personas political figures craft and their private realities. This discrepancy between preached values and practiced realities undermines public trust and highlights the performative nature of much political positioning.The Real Victim: Responsible GovernanceNBC News reports that Noem was not fired for any single reason but due to "a culmination of her many unfortunate leadership failures." These words should echo as a damning indictment of not just Noem but the system that elevated her. Her alleged affair with Lewandowski, while salacious, is merely a symptom of the broader dysfunction within the Trump administration.The narrative unfolding around Noem and Lewandowski is more than a political scandal; it's a case study in the dangers of prioritizing loyalty and personal relationships over competence and ethics in governance. As the dust settles, one can only hope that this saga serves as a cautionary tale for future administrations. However, if history is any guide, this hope may be in vain. The systemic issues at play—cronyism, lack of accountability, and the blurring of personal and professional boundaries—are not unique to the Trump administration but are endemic within American politics. The real systemic error here is not just in who gets fired or hired but in the very structures that allow such dramas to unfold at the highest levels of government.

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:The Republican Party is in for a rude awakening in the Texas elections, irrespective of which candidate they put forward, Mary Trump has claimed.The president's niece claimed the GOP will fare worse than the Democratic Party candidate at the midterms, whichever way they turn in the primaries. Neither John Cornyn nor Ken Paxton received the required 50% vote in the primaries, meaning a decision on a representative will not be made until May. Writing in her Substack, Mary Trump weighed up the current options the Republican Party can choose between, and believes neither option is going to work for the party. She wrote, "How to describe Ken Paxton? Corrupt, depraved, and essentially a sociopath. In other words, very much in the mold of many people currently operating within the Trump regime."Shockingly, considering Cornyn is an incumbent who has served in the Senate for a very long time, he received only 41.9 percent of the vote to Paxton’s 40.7 percent. The man who came in third, Congressman Wesley Hunt, received 13.5 percent."There is no way to know in a runoff between Cornyn and Paxton who benefits most from Hunt leaving the race. But the fact that an incumbent failed to win his primary outright should raise alarm bells for Cornyn and for Republicans more broadly. Talarico now has the potential to be a strong Democratic candidate in the general election, and Paxton carries enormous baggage."Paxton may energize the most rabid faction of the Republican base, but it is unlikely he would perform as well in a general election as the bland, milquetoast Cornyn. That leaves Republicans in a dilemma. If Paxton becomes the nominee, it may make the race easier for Democrats, but it also risks putting someone as unhinged as Paxton into the United States Senate."Despite the MAGA-adjacent rhetoric of Paxton, it appears Cornyn is now attempting to appeal to the same voter base and has praised his alignment with Donald Trump on most votes. Mary Trump added, "Cornyn himself recently posted what he apparently considers a selling point. He proudly announced that he has voted with Donald Trump 99 percent of the time, fighting for border security, law enforcement, conservative leadership—and, though he did not say it, fascism."Trump, in classic game show fashion, announced today that he will soon issue an endorsement in the Texas Republican Senate runoff. He even suggested that whichever candidate he does not endorse should simply drop out, because apparently Donald Trump believes he is the boss of everyone in the Republican Party."

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 is trying to alter how college sports are played — and is being called out for what one columnist called a “dog and pony show.”In an editorial headlined “Trump college sports meeting turns into dog and pony show with no real answers, Matt Hayes from USA Today argued that “if universities receive the antitrust exemption, the first thing implemented is a return to restricting player movement. (That voice you just heard was Trump announcing, ‘Go back to the wonderful system.’)” This would make it difficult for players to pursue better financial and educational opportunities at competing schools and instead lock them into a single institution.“SEC commissioner Greg Sankey says his conference wants one free transfer, and that’s it,” Hayes wrote. “You know, the old days.”Although the SEC commissioner and others who met with Trump on Friday insist that free player movement leads to structural and financial instability, Hayes observed that “the ‘old days’ were awful for players, the financial equivalent of traversing a long, lonely desert — only to have someone eventually offer you a box of cotton balls to quench your thirst.”Despite the financial hardships that the old system imposed on players, Trump said he is issuing an executive order within a week that will make it harder for players to effectively advocate for their own careers. While Hayes acknowledged that the existing college sports system “is an unwieldy mess,” he added that “the only body on the planet that’s more tribally dysfunctional than the NCAA” is Congress. Hayes also noted sarcastically that one of the college sports figures who visited Trump, disgraced ex-football coach Urban Meyer, does not have a “spotless reputation” and yet offered a “gift to the day.”“Get rid of collectives. That’s cheating!” Hayes quoted Meyer as saying before adding, “Cheating. Imagine that.”Hayes is not alone among commentators in slamming Trump’s involvement in college football. Conservative pundit George F. Will wrote for The Washington Post in August that he had no sympathy for universities fleeing the “terrors” of “athletes being paid their market value” and of “antitrust litigation resulting from the cartels collaborating to stifle this.” To counter this, the colleges are calling for “federal price controls, lest athletes in some states be able to earn more than those in other states — a nightmare for recruiters. And lest too much money flows to the athletes the money-spenders pay to see."Will later continued, "Trump, who cannot see a parade without jumping in front of it, has issued (what else?) an executive order, saying that federal action is needed to 'restore order.' Translation: to suppress the disorder that results when society's lower orders (here, athletes suddenly allowed serious compensation) acquire rights and aspirations. This has happened now that athletes with lucrative skills enjoy free agency, the ability to sell their services to the highest bidder."Similarly Slate journalist Alex Kirshner argued in June that Trump, despite claiming to care about women’s sports when it gives him an opportunity to insult transgender athletes, does not show the same interest when it comes to fairly compensating them."Trump's dedication to the cause did not last long," Kirshner wrote. "In the time since signing the anti-trans order, the president has ensured that hundreds of millions of dollars that might have gone to female athletes will go to men instead. On July 1, college sports will shift to a new economic model. This is an attempt to correct for a few years of a messy system. Since 2021, players have been allowed to earn money from third parties in marketing and endorsement deals."Kirshner later continued, "In practice, though, the system has meant that donor “collectives” just pool money to pay athletes to play for their favorite teams, under the thin guise that the deals are somehow for appearances or endorsements."In fact, after Trump insulted the US women’s hockey team following their gold medal victory, they declined to visit the White House.“We are sincerely grateful for the invitation extended to our gold medal–winning U.S. Women’s Hockey Team and deeply appreciate the recognition of their extraordinary achievement," a USA Hockey spokesperson said in a statement to NBC News. "Due to the timing and previously scheduled academic and professional commitments following the Games, the athletes are unable to participate. They were honored to be included and are grateful for the acknowledgment.”

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:With Texas Republicans facing the prospect of a bruising battle between Sen. John Cornyn and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton for the nomination for the seat Cornyn now holds, longtime political advisor Mark McKinnon said the GOP in Texas may have a bigger problem.Appearing on MS NOW’s “The Weekend,” McKinnon noted that he has been historically skeptical about enthusiasm for rising political stars, but Democratic nominee James Talarico seems to have tapped into something and voter turnout this past week should make the GOP leadership sit up and notice.McKinnon, who has worked for Republicans including ex-President George W. Bush and the late Senator John McCain (R-AZ) told host Jonathan Capehart, “They're really freaked out about James Talarico. This guy is a once-in-a-generation talent. He's got a message and a style that really appeals to not only Democrats, but independents and soft Republicans, and obviously, particularly if the runoff, if the Republicans nominate Ken Paxton, who's very unpopular, has tons of ethics problem, there's a real shot here.““I’m the guy that usually taps the brakes every few years when people come to me and say, ‘Oh, Texas turning, turning blue, turning blue And I'm saying, ‘Now wait a minute, wait a minute. You know, just because there's more Hispanics doesn't mean they're voting Democratic,” he conceded.He then pointed out, “Democrats saw, by the way, the highest early vote,” adding, “This is the first time the Democrats have exceeded Republican early vote in 20 years — so there's something going on.” - YouTube youtu.beOur Analysis:Texas GOP's Internal Struggle: A Prelude to Democratic Surge?In an era where political landscapes are as stable as quicksand, the unfolding drama within the Texas Republican Party, as narrated by Mark McKinnon on MS NOW’s “The Weekend,” serves as a testament to the shifting sands beneath the GOP's feet. McKinnon, with his extensive background in political advising, casts a long shadow over the Texas GOP's internal discord, highlighting a potential seismic shift in Texan politics that could see the emergence of Democrat James Talarico as a formidable challenger.The GOP's Bruising Battle: Cornyn vs. PaxtonThe looming specter of a messy nomination fight between Senator John Cornyn and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is painted as nothing short of a Shakespearean tragedy for the Texas Republicans. The internal strife is not just a matter of choosing the party's standard-bearer; it's an existential crisis. Paxton, with his “tons of ethics problem”, as McKinnon delicately puts it, could inadvertently hand over the keys to the kingdom if he becomes the nominee. The choice between Cornyn and Paxton isn't just about policy; it's about survival.James Talarico: A Democratic Beacon?Enter James Talarico, the Democratic nominee who, according to McKinnon, could very well be the GOP's worst nightmare. Described as a “once-in-a-generation talent”, Talarico appears to transcend traditional political boundaries, appealing to not only Democrats but also independents and “soft Republicans”. This isn't just another Democrat trying to make inroads in a staunchly Republican state; this is a candidate who seems to resonate on a different frequency altogether.McKinnon's acknowledgment of Talarico's appeal, coupled with the historic Democratic turnout in early voting, signals a change that could upend the conventional wisdom about Texas politics. For the first time in two decades, Democrats have outpaced Republicans in early voting. This isn't just a blip on the radar; it's a clarion call.The Myth of the Monolithic Hispanic VoteMcKinnon's candid admission about the evolving political leanings of Hispanic voters in Texas is particularly revealing. The old calculus that more Hispanic voters automatically equals more Democratic votes is being challenged. The demographic shift isn't just numerical; it's ideological. As Texas becomes more diverse, the political affiliations of its residents are becoming more nuanced, complicating the GOP's strategy in the state.Conclusion: A Storm on the HorizonWhat we're witnessing, through McKinnon's insights, is not just a potential upset in a single state. It's a microcosm of the larger, more profound changes sweeping across the American political landscape. The Texas GOP's internal battle and the rise of James Talarico point to a broader trend of political realignment and the increasing unpredictability of voter behavior.The GOP, traditionally seen as an indomitable force in Texas, now finds itself at a crossroads. The choice between Cornyn and Paxton is more than just a nomination battle; it's a referendum on the party's future in the state. Meanwhile, Talarico's ascendancy represents not just a challenge to the GOP's dominance but a possible harbinger of a new political era in Texas.In the end, the Texas GOP's biggest problem isn't James Talarico; it's the party's inability to reckon with the changing dynamics of its electorate. As McKinnon astutely points out, there's something going on in Texas. Whether the GOP is ready to face that reality remains to be seen.

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:After a lengthy delay, President Donald Trump released a national cybersecurity strategy on Friday afternoon — and, as one critic observed, it seems at odds with the reality of America “hemorrhaging cyber-talent.”Trump’s strategy is "impressively underachieving, even by the abysmal standards this Administration has set for itself,” said Homeland Security Committee Ranking Member Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) He then pointed out that the plan does not account for the most glaring issue facing the Trump administration.Thompson added, “Completely lacking is even the most basic blueprint for how the Administration will go about achieving any of its cybersecurity goals — an objective possibly hamstrung by the hemorrhage in cyber talent across all Federal agencies since Trump took office.”By contrast, Trump claimed his strategy “calls for unprecedented coordination across government and the private sector to invest in the best technologies and continue world-class innovation, and to make the most of America’s cyber capabilities for both offensive and defensive missions.” The federal workforce is experiencing a massive personnel shortage under the Trump era, both due to the president’s sweeping layoffs and because he has reportedly made it less comfortable to work for the government. Agencies like the U.S. Social Security Administration (SSA), the National Weather Service (NWS), the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are all bleeding quality staffers."Another abrupt departure of a high-ranking Food and Drug Administration official is raising alarm about a brain drain that could mean new drugs take longer to reach the public," reported Axios' Pete Sullivan in December. "Why it matters: Biotech and pharmaceutical companies rely on the FDA for dependable guidance as they spend huge sums developing new treatments. The American public needs the agency to ensure treatments are safe and effective…. Driving the news: The latest uproar surrounds the unexpected departure of Richard Pazdur, a respected oncologist who just three weeks ago became the fourth person to direct the FDA's drug center this year."He added, "Pazdur's appointment had helped calm nerves to some degree within industry after months of turmoil. But now, executives and even former FDA commissioners are publicly questioning the agency's direction."Trump’s policies are also causing brain drains from red states to blue states. Last year Common Dreams reported widespread dissatisfaction from individuals over restrictive abortion laws. Among 10,000 adults surveyed by Morning Consult, 1 in 5 of respondents who are planning on having children in the next decade either moved from an anti-abortion state to a pro-choice one or know someone who has. Notably, 14 percent of people with advanced degrees have either moved out-of-state or know someone who has over anti-abortion laws."Workers are not willing to trade their health and autonomy for a paycheck," Dr. Jamila K. Taylor, president and CEO of the Institute for Women's Policy Research (IWPR), told Common Dreams at the time.Trump is even pushing personnel out of his own party, albeit indirectly and perhaps unintentionally. Of the 62 lawmakers who have so far announced they will not seek reelection, 37 are Republicans.

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 fired Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on Thursday — and now his fellow Republicans exult at the idea that her alleged lover and aide, Corey Lewandowski, is on the way out along with her.“The end of Corey Lewandowski’s reign represents a return to responsible and accountable governance,” an anonymous administration official told The Post. “The nation welcomes Senator [Markwayne] Mullin’s nomination.”Another White House official said they believe Lewandowski will lose his job once Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Ok.) replaced him, explaining that they “don’t know who would want him.”Lewandowski is rumored to have been in a long-term affair with Noem, including living with her and serving as a power behind the throne in the department. He controlled contract approval, made critical staffing decisions and was widely reputed to be vindictive and ruthless. Lewandowski himself says he does not know his future at the White House.“I haven’t made that decision,” Lewandowski said when asked about his career plans.Asked earlier this week about the alleged affair with Lewandowski, Noem did not outright deny it but said the question was offensive."Secretary Noem, at any time during your tenure…have you had sexual relations with Corey Lewandowski?" U.S. Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA) asked Noem.Noem replied, "That is garbage and it is offensive that you have brought that up.”Kamlager-Dove responded, "It is about your judgment and decision-making.”Trump himself was allegedly aware of the affair, as he is reported to have “frequently” told people he saw Noem and Lewandowski drink from the same soda can."You can’t do that, it’s pretty obvious!” Trump remarked. “You can’t do that, everyone’s going to know!" Trump reportedly said.He added, “That’s his go-to story. He says that frequently about them.”The two have been rumored to be involved in an affair for years before joining the Trump administration. According to the Daily Mail, Noem “won the governorship in 2018 promising to uphold the wholesome family values that she said South Dakotans have ‘long embraced.’ Defending ‘traditional marriage’, which she defined as ‘a special, God-given union between one man and one woman’, was particularly important to her,” and “was the foundation for her beliefs, policy priorities and the ideals she lives by, said Noem, who has a son and two daughters with her husband Bryon who she married in 1992.”According to NBC News, Noem was not fired for any one reason but due to a number of reasons."An administration official told NBC News that the president decided to fire Noem due to 'a culmination of her many unfortunate leadership failures including the fallout in Minnesota, the ad campaign, the allegations of infidelity, the mismanagement of her staff, and her constant feuding with the heads of other agencies, including CBP and ICE," NBC News reported.Our Analysis:The Tangled Webs of Power: Unpacking the Noem-Lewandowski SagaIn a dramatic turn that reads more like a screenplay for a political thriller than the sober reality of governance, President Donald Trump's firing of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has exposed the convoluted and scandal-ridden underbelly of his administration. At the heart of this political saga are allegations of an affair between Noem and her aide, Corey Lewandowski, which have rippled through the corridors of power, leading to whispers of Lewandowski's imminent departure. Let's dissect this narrative with the precision it begs for, revealing not just the personal failings it highlights but the systemic rot it symbolizes.The Fall of Noem and Lewandowski's Looming ExitThe statement from an anonymous administration official to The Post, celebrating the end of Lewandowski's "reign" as a return to "responsible and accountable governance," is drenched in irony. It insinuates that Lewandowski's tenure was anything but responsible or accountable. Yet, this "celebration" masks a deeper issue: why was such an individual allowed to wield significant influence in the first place? Lewandowski's alleged control over contracts and staffing, paired with a reputation for vindictiveness, points to a governance style that prioritizes loyalty and power over competence and integrity.The Affair Allegation: A Reflection of Poor JudgmentWhile the personal lives of political figures should remain personal, the alleged affair between Noem and Lewandowski transcends gossip. It becomes a matter of public interest when it affects decision-making and governance. Noem's refusal to deny the affair, branding the inquiry as "garbage," does little to quell concerns. Instead, it highlights a potential lapse in judgment. The affair, rumored for years and allegedly known to Trump, paints a picture of an administration where personal relationships intertwine dangerously with official duties.Trump's Involvement: More Than a BystanderTrump's role in this saga cannot be understated. His alleged comments about Noem and Lewandowski sharing a soda can seem trivial at first glance but reveal his awareness and possible tacit approval of the situation. Trump's leadership style, marked by chaos and loyalty tests, creates an environment where such scandals are not just possible but likely.The Hypocrisy of "Wholesome Family Values"Noem's rise to the governorship on a platform of "wholesome family values" and "traditional marriage" adds a layer of hypocrisy to the scandal. It's a stark reminder of the often wide chasm between the public personas political figures craft and their private realities. This discrepancy between preached values and practiced realities undermines public trust and highlights the performative nature of much political positioning.The Real Victim: Responsible GovernanceNBC News reports that Noem was not fired for any single reason but due to "a culmination of her many unfortunate leadership failures." These words should echo as a damning indictment of not just Noem but the system that elevated her. Her alleged affair with Lewandowski, while salacious, is merely a symptom of the broader dysfunction within the Trump administration.The narrative unfolding around Noem and Lewandowski is more than a political scandal; it's a case study in the dangers of prioritizing loyalty and personal relationships over competence and ethics in governance. As the dust settles, one can only hope that this saga serves as a cautionary tale for future administrations. However, if history is any guide, this hope may be in vain. The systemic issues at play—cronyism, lack of accountability, and the blurring of personal and professional boundaries—are not unique to the Trump administration but are endemic within American politics. The real systemic error here is not just in who gets fired or hired but in the very structures that allow such dramas to unfold at the highest levels of government.

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:Three members of the Donald Trump administration have confirmed to the Washington Post that a classified document created by the National Intelligence Council poured cold water on the president’s hopes about regime change in Iran following his war launch.According to the Post, the warning was completed a week before the president gave the go-ahead for the Department of Defense, under Secretary Pete Hegseth to proceed with the bombings on February 28th.The classified report examined succession scenarios under two potential military scenarios: a targeted campaign against Iran's leadership or a broader assault on its government institutions. In both cases, intelligence analysts concluded that "Iran's clerical and military establishment would respond to the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei by following protocols designed to preserve continuity of power," according to those familiar with the findings.The National Intelligence Council comprises veteran intelligence analysts tasked with producing classified assessments representing the combined judgment of Washington's 18 intelligence agencies.White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly dismissed the implications in a statement to the Post, asserting: "President Trump and the administration have clearly outlined their goals with regard to Operation Epic Fury: destroy Iran's ballistic missiles and production capacity, demolish their navy, end their ability to arm proxies, and prevent them from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon. The Iranian regime is being absolutely crushed."Suzanne Maloney, an Iran scholar and vice president at the Brookings Institution, characterized the NIC assessment as credible, stating: "It sounds like a deeply informed assessment of the Iranian system and the institutions and processes that have been established for many years."You can read more here.Our Analysis:Dissecting the Follies of Wishful Thinking: Trump's Iran FantasyIn a revelation that should surprise exactly no one, members of the Trump administration have confirmed an inconvenient truth: a classified document from the National Intelligence Council (NIC) essentially threw cold water on then-President Donald Trump's dreams of regime change in Iran. This report, completed a mere week before the green light was given for the Department of Defense, under Secretary Pete Hegseth, to bomb Iran on February 28th, underscores a theme as old as time itself in American foreign policy: wishful thinking in lieu of strategic foresight.The Illusion of Easy VictoryThe NIC's assessment, drawing on the expertise of veteran intelligence analysts and representing the consensus of not one, not two, but eighteen intelligence agencies, examined succession scenarios under two military options aimed at Iran. Whether through a targeted campaign against Iran's leadership or a broader assault on its government institutions, the conclusion was stark. Intelligence analysts unanimously agreed that "Iran's clerical and military establishment would respond to the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei by following protocols designed to preserve continuity of power."This flies in the face of the simplistic fantasy that a decisive military strike could lead to a capitulation or a collapse of the Iranian regime. It's a narrative as threadbare as it is dangerous, ignoring the resilience of Iran's political structure and the likely rallying effect such attacks would have among its populace.The White House's Dismissive TuneIn what can only be described as a masterpiece of obfuscation, White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly waved away the implications of the NIC's findings. Her statement, a marvel of distortion, claimed that "President Trump and the administration have clearly outlined their goals with regard to Operation Epic Fury: destroy Iran's ballistic missiles and production capacity, demolish their navy, end their ability to arm proxies, and prevent them from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon. The Iranian regime is being absolutely crushed."This bald assertion stands in stark contrast to the realities on the ground and the NIC's analysis. It's a classic case of the administration's modus operandi: declare victory and hope nobody looks too closely at the details.A Credible Warning IgnoredSuzanne Maloney, an Iran scholar and vice president at the Brookings Institution, offered a dose of reality, characterizing the NIC assessment as "a deeply informed assessment of the Iranian system and the institutions and processes that have been established for many years." Her endorsement highlights a critical point: the analysts involved in the preparation of this report are not armchair commentators but experts deeply versed in the complexities of the Iranian state.Conclusion: A Systemic Error of JudgmentThe decision to proceed with Operation Epic Fury, in direct contradiction to the NIC's assessment, is emblematic of a systemic error in judgment that plagued the Trump administration. It's a stark reminder of the dangers inherent in dismissing the expertise of intelligence agencies in favor of politically expedient narratives.In the end, the saga of Trump's Iran policy is a cautionary tale about the pitfalls of hubris and the perils of ignoring the lessons of history. As we sift through the aftermath, one can only hope that future administrations heed these warnings, rather than consign them to the same oblivion Trump attempted for the NIC's inconvenient truths.

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 is a “practical primitive” as he wages war against Iran, a veteran journalist warned on Saturday — and the world is not catching up to that fact.“All of the many textbook reasons for war—historical, military, political, economic, defensive or aggressive—are less than relevant because he has only limited awareness of them,” journalist Michael Wolff wrote in The Daily Beast regarding Trump’s foreign policy. “What any world leader, ally, enemy, diplomatic expert, pundit, or political pro thinks about war is absent—because it’s Trump. Sometimes he even seems to have an amount of self-awareness about this strange vacuum, proudly proclaiming that nobody knows what he’s going to do because he doesn’t know what he’s going to do, which gives him quite an advantage over everybody else.”He added, “Beware the crazy man.”Wolff pointed out that, although foreign policy commentators keep trying to analyze Trump’s motives, “the world has simply never faced this kind of situation. All the mandarins, bureaucrats, and consultants in it, who have made their careers on greater and greater spreadsheets of complexity, are face-to-face with a practical primitive.”Within this context, the only consistent theme in Trump’s foreign policy is that he wishes to financially profit from it. To illustrate this point, Wolff pointed to the growing influence of Trump’s adviser and son-in-law, Jared Kushner.“Jared was the guy to whom Trump farmed out most of the details, deal-making, and general foreign-policy mindshare—all things that bore the president—during the first administration,” Wolff wrote. “It was Kushner’s invitation that made MBS, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Trump’s first foreign visitor to the White House. After that, Persian Gulf wealth became a consistent focus. The UAE, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, were the crescent of opportunity.Wolff added, “And while Trump was personally p------ off that his son-in-law snagged a $2 billion payoff from the Saudis without him benefiting, it also fortified his acumen in Trump’s eyes.”Even though Trump describes Kushner’s and investment partner Steve Witkoff’s involvement in the Middle East as a “portfolio,” Wolff speculated that in Trump’s mind this is as much a financial portfolio as a diplomatic one.“‘Jared can really work the Arabs. They like Jews to handle the money,’” Wolff quoted Trump as saying, adding that he was “likely unaware of his head-smacking antisemitism.”Wolff concluded, “Always, the best way to understand Trump is to focus on what’s in it for him. In any endeavor, however misguided and seemingly inexplicable, there will be an eye-on-the prize calculation of how he personally can come out ahead. His world, random, disorganized, undisciplined, mercurial, make-it-up-as-you-go-along, has, over decades, always had a consistent focus on his piece of the pie.”Last month The Wall Street Journal reported that the National Security Agency (NSA) intercepted a conversation in which two subjects named Kushner as the Trump administration’s made decision-maker for Iran and helping Trump develop Middle Eastern policy. It also found that Trump worked closely with Kushner and Witkoff on other foreign policy issues; Witkoff, for example, was put in charge of dealing with the Russia-Ukraine war. Yet outsiders in the Republican Party are worried that the Iran war, as pushed by an erratic Trump and his advisers, will ultimately hurt the party politically.“The longer this goes on, the worse it is politically, full stop,” Republican strategist Matthew Bartlett, who worked for Trump during his first term, told The Wall Street Journal.

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:On Friday morning, March 6, National Public Radio (NPR) reported that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) had published "additional Epstein files related to allegations" that President Donald Trump "sexually abused a minor[,] after an NPR investigation found dozens of pages were withheld." That includes "16 new pages that cover three additional FBI interview summaries with a woman who accused Trump of sexual abuse decades ago when she was a minor," according to NPR reporters Stephen Fowler and Saige Miller.MS NOW legal analyst Lisa Rubin discussed these developments during a Friday afternoon conversation with host Chris Jansing, arguing that Trump-era DOJ's explanation is falling flat in light of the "salacious" allegations in the files."With respect to this Trump accuser," Rubin told Jansing, "she is now detailing, in these documents, how she came to meet Donald Trump — the assault that she says she experienced at his hands. And perhaps, maybe most importantly of all, we understand now why the FBI might have stopped talking to her in October of 2019. This woman told the FBI that she understood that the statutes of limitations with respect to her allegations against both Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump had long since passed. And therefore, she said to them, what's the point of my giving you any more detail?" Jansing asked Rubin if "we know why" the DOJ files in question are "just being released" — to which she responded, "No. I mean, I can tell you what the Department of Justice has said.""The Department of Justice's public explanation is that these are documents that were inadvertently marked as duplicates during their review and production procedure," Rubin told Jansing. "However, it's unclear to me, given some of the allegations here, whether that is a plausible or even a truthful explanation. As you and I were discussing before the segment started, there are some allegations in some of these other new documents that concern other public people."The MS NOW legal analyst continued, "That's not to say that the produced files don't contain allegations against public individuals. But given the vivid nature of some of these allegations and how salacious they are, it also seems like this might not be the story of what actually went down."Our Analysis:The DOJ's "Inadvertent" Oversight: A Convenient Excuse or a Systemic Failure?In a recent revelation that could only be described as both shocking and sadly predictable, National Public Radio (NPR) has brought to light the release of additional Epstein files by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) – files that detail allegations against former President Donald Trump of sexual abuse of a minor. This release, reportedly prompted by an NPR investigation that identified dozens of pages previously withheld, adds 16 new pages to the public domain, which include three additional FBI interview summaries with an accuser from decades ago.Let's dissect the narrative and the DOJ's explanation with the surgical precision it deserves.The Allegations: Old Wounds ReopenedThe accuser's account, as revealed, isn't just another story; it's an excruciating reminder of the power dynamics and predatory behavior that has been all too common in the echelons of power. She describes an encounter with Donald Trump that not only left scars but also a sense of futility, especially when considering the statutes of limitations. Her account raises significant questions about why the FBI ceased communication in October 2019. Was it a mere procedural endpoint, or does it suggest a more disconcerting disinterest in pursuing allegations against powerful individuals when legal outcomes seem improbable?The DOJ's "Duplication" Excuse: A Facade of Incompetence?Lisa Rubin's conversation with Chris Jansing on MS NOW peeled another layer off this already complex issue. The DOJ claims that these documents were "inadvertently marked as duplicates" during their review, leading to their initial withholding. This excuse is as flimsy as it is convenient. In the realm of high-stakes legal documentation and review processes, the term "inadvertent" does not instill confidence but rather signals a concerning level of negligence or, worse, a deliberate obfuscation.Given the salacious and vivid nature of these allegations, the idea of these files being accidentally overlooked stretches the bounds of credibility. It's more plausible to consider that these documents were buried, perhaps not with a shovel, but through a bureaucratic oversight that served the same purpose: keeping damning allegations away from public scrutiny.The Unanswered Questions and the Path ForwardRubin rightly points out the lack of clarity on why these documents are only now seeing the light of day. The DOJ's public explanation leaves much to be desired, hinting at either a systemic failure to properly manage critical information or a more sinister reluctance to expose allegations against high-profile individuals.Moreover, the mention of other public figures in these newly released documents raises an alarm. Who are these individuals, and what have they been accused of? The implications are vast and deeply troubling, suggesting a network of power and abuse that extends beyond Trump and Epstein.Conclusion: A Mere Tip of the Iceberg?This development is not just about the allegations against Donald Trump; it's a glaring spotlight on the systemic issues within our justice and investigative systems. The "inadvertent" mishandling of such explosive documents suggests either a gross incompetence or a deliberate attempt to protect the powerful at the expense of justice.As we peel back the layers of this sordid tale, one can't help but wonder: what else is buried beneath the surface? How many other documents, marked as duplicates or lost in the bureaucracy, contain stories waiting to be told? The release of these files should not be the end but the beginning of a thorough re-examination of how allegations of abuse are handled, especially when they involve individuals with significant influence and resources.In a just world, these revelations would prompt immediate action and reflection. Yet, as history has shown us, justice often comes too late for the victims of powerful abusers. It's incumbent upon us, the public, to demand better, to hold our institutions accountable, and to ensure that no allegation is buried under the guise of bureaucratic error. The truth must come out, however inconvenient or salacious it may be.

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 press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the controversial Iran War to AlterNet, arguing that it was “ground in a truth.”“President Trump’s courageous decision to launch Operation Epic Fury is grounded in a truth that presidents for nearly 50 years have been talking about, but no president had the courage to confront: Iran poses a direct and imminent threat to the United States of America and our troops in the Middle East,” Leavitt said in a statement to AlterNet. “The rogue Iranian Regime under the evil hand of the Ayatollah has killed and maimed thousands of American citizens and soldiers over the years – and that ends with President Trump.”Leavitt was responding in part to a recent comment by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a fierce critic of the Iran War who on Thursday argued to Fox News that the lack of congressional approval renders the entire operation illegal.“The people have been robbed of a public debate,” Paul wrote. “Let me inform the public that this evasion is intentional.”He added,”The congressional leadership — resigned to their own irrelevance — will gladly hand the president the power to initiate war in exchange for plausible deniability. Congressional leaders want to make the case to voters that they are not to be held accountable at the ballot box because they played no role in the decision to go to war. That is not statesmanship. That is shameful.”Former Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill,), who was once so loyal to Trump he vowed to use “muskets” if he lost to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election, argued in February that Trump supporters are in a “cult” if they still back him despite his warmongering.“I thought you wanted him to end wars all over the world,” Walsh declared. “You said you wanted him to end American entanglement in conflicts and wars around the world. America shouldn’t be involved in these wars, you said. That’s why you’re voting for Trump, you said.” For this reason, Walsh said Trump’s belligerence toward Greenland, Venezuela and Iran should discredit him to those supporters — but for the most part, it has not.“And you don’t like when people call you a cult, Trump voters?” Walsh asked. “What else are people to think when you voted for Trump to get us the hell out of wars around the world, and instead he gets us involved in wars around the world and starts new wars, and you still sing his praises and support him? What are we to think, MAGA, but that you are a cult?”On Thursday, referring back to his 2016 post about grabbing a “musket,” Walsh said that opposing Trump’s unconstitutional behavior has kept him “at war” so continuously, he is exhausted.“Every day, I feel like I grab my musket and I walk out to that battlefield out there,” Walsh said. “And from eight in the morning till eight or nine at night, I'm just at war.”Observing the toll this has taken on his health, Walsh said that “I'm not a kid. It's exhausting. I'm tired every night.”Like Paul and Walsh, former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) used to support Trump but argued on Sunday that his attack on Iran violates his supposed anti-war principles."This b—— is celebrating the death of American military members and thanking their families for their blood sacrifice,” Greene wrote in response to a pro-war post by a Trump supporter, influencer Laura Loomer. “But this is who Trump takes late night calls from and laps up her praise and worship. … And now Americans are once again coming home in flag draped coffins from another stupid pointless foreign war for foreign regime change on behalf of Israel.”Tucker Carlson, a former Fox News host who remains influential in far right circles, outright accused Trump of being controlled by Israel, saying “this happened because Israel wanted it to happen. This is Israel’s war.” The Hodge Twins, a pair of popular MAGA influencers, also argued “we are at war for Israel.” On the other side of the ideological spectrum, University of St. Andrews strategies professor and historian Phillips Payson O’Brien told The Atlantic in March that Trump’s Iran invasion could presage a decline in America’s global military dominance.“When a complex system starts to decay, the first signs are usually subtle,” O’Brien said. “In the third century, after the Roman empire had reached its geographic maximum, literacy began to decline across Roman society. Education levels fell not only among soldiers, but among officers, aristocrats, and even emperors. The Roman army still looked formidable for years afterward. It had good equipment and could march well. Yet it was no longer as advanced relative to Rome’s enemies as it had once been. It fought as hard as ever, but less effectively.”The U.S. military remains still far superior to Iran’s, O’Brien added, but the American bombing campaign against Iran is showing signs of strain, such as the deaths of six U.S. soldiers (at the time of O’Brien’s interview) or an Iranian drone that destroyed the U.S. Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain. Confronting Leavitt about the soldiers’ deaths on Wednesday, CNN’s Kaitlan Collins asked her about a remark indicating that the “press should not prominently cover the deaths of U.S. service members?”“The press does only want to make the president look bad,” Leavitt replied. “That’s an objective fact. Especially you and especially CNN.”Speaking with this journalist for Salon in 2024 regarding a historian, the New School’s Federico Finchelstein, comparing Trump’s “rhetorical violence” to Adolf Hitler’s oratory, Leavitt replied that “it's been less 72 hours since the second assassination attempt on President Trump's life and the media is already back to comparing President Trump to Hitler. It's disgusting. This is why Americans have zero trust in the liberal mainstream media."Our Analysis:Dissecting the Rhetoric: The Fabric of Fallacy in Trump’s Iran Conflict DefenseIn the labyrinth of political discourse, the statements defending President Donald Trump’s Iran war decision, as conveyed through Karoline Leavitt, his press secretary, unfurl a tapestry of contentious fabrications and perilous precedents. The defense of Operation Epic Fury, as “grounded in a truth,” is a masterclass in the manipulation of narrative, a technique that has become all too familiar in the Trump playbook.The Illusion of Imminent ThreatLeavitt’s declaration that Iran poses a “direct and imminent threat” to the United States and its troops in the Middle East is a throwback to the justifications used for previous military entanglements that have embroiled the country in endless conflicts. The assertion sidesteps a fundamental question: Why now? The timing and the rationale behind this sudden escalation towards war with Iran seem more rooted in political expediency than in any clear and present danger.The Congressional SidestepThe critique from Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) underscores a glaring violation of the democratic process. The bypassing of congressional approval for the Iran war not only strips the American public of their right to a public debate but also sets a dangerous precedent for executive overreach. Paul’s assertion that congressional leaders offer “plausible deniability” rather than accountability is a damning indictment of the erosion of democratic norms.The Cult of PersonalityFormer Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) puncture the facade of Trump’s anti-war stance, highlighting the cognitive dissonance within the Trump supporter base. Walsh’s disillusionment and Greene’s outrage at the betrayal of Trump’s supposed anti-war principles expose a cult of personality, where support for the individual eclipses adherence to previously professed values.The Shadow of Foreign InfluenceTucker Carlson and the Hodge Twins’ accusations of the war being fought at Israel’s behest introduce an unsettling layer of foreign influence in American military decisions. This narrative, while speculative, raises questions about the autonomy of U.S. foreign policy and the potential for external entities to direct American military might.The Decline of American Military DominanceThe insights from University of St. Andrews' Phillips Payson O’Brien draw a parallel between the Roman Empire’s decline and the current state of the U.S. military. The strain shown by the American bombing campaign against Iran, highlighted by the deaths of U.S. soldiers and the destruction of the U.S. Fifth Fleet headquarters, signals a potential erosion of American military supremacy. This analogy not only serves as a cautionary tale but also challenges the perception of an invincible American military.The Media as the EnemyLeavitt’s attack on the media, accusing it of bias against Trump, especially in the context of covering U.S. service member deaths, is a classic deflection tactic. It attempts to shift the focus from the administration’s actions and policies to an alleged media agenda, undermining the essential role of the press in holding power to account.The Outrageous Hitler ComparisonFinally, Leavitt’s response to comparisons between Trump’s rhetoric and that of Adolf Hitler is both hyperbolic and indicative of the administration’s victimhood narrative. The invocation of a recent assassination attempt on Trump to deflect criticism is a manipulative strategy designed to elicit sympathy and distract from legitimate critiques of his policies and rhetoric.ConclusionThe defense of Trump’s Iran war decision is a convoluted web of justifications that range from questionable assertions of imminent threats to outright attacks on democratic processes and the free press. The discourse surrounding this decision not only reveals a troubling disregard for constitutional norms but also a deeper malaise within American political and military strategy. As the nation finds itself embroiled in yet another conflict, the words of critics and supporters alike paint a picture of a presidency and a supporter base at odds with the principles they once claimed to champion.

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