Transcript:News that President Donald Trump had fired Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem from her job and demoted her to "Special Envoy for The Shield of the Americas" caused a wave of reactions online Thursday. Following two tough days of grilling by congressional leaders who pressed Noem about her leadership and spending, including multiple luxury planes, a blanket incident, and a 220 million dollars ad campaign that Trump confirmed with GOP lawmakers he did not authorize — the president announced Thursday that he was replacing her with former MMA fighter and MAGA Senator Markwayne Mullin (R-OK). Noem has also faced increased questions over her long-rumored romantic relationship with Corey Lewandowski and his role at the agency. She was confronted directly about it Wednesday under oath, with her husband sitting behind her during the hearing. The internet had strong responses to the updates. "Kristi Noem is gone. Pam Bondi is next. Keep the pressure on these extremists," House minority leader Representative Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) wrote on X. "Kristi Noem has been fired and replaced by the dumbest US Senator," Ron Filipkowski, MeidasTouch editor in chief, wrote on X. "Don’t let the door hit you on the way out, Kristi Noem," Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker wrote on X."Breaking: Kristi Noem is out. Minnesotans stood up for Alex and Renee and so many others. And if anyone ever asked why we have committee hearings and demand answers…" Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) wrote on X."Kristi Noem will go down as one of the most disgraceful cabinet members of all time," environmental attorney Mike Levin wrote on X."Kristi Noem has Sad Mar-A-Lago Face," author Tom Bradley Junior wrote on Bluesky. "Kristi Noem isn't being fired because she was a danger to US citizens and disruptive to communities. She's getting fired because Trump thought she made him look bad. And then he's going to put someone even stupider and worse in. Hence the rumors about Markwayne Mullin taking her place," TJ Denzer, Shacknews senior news editor, wrote on Bluesky.

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 insisting that he must be personally "involved" in choosing Iran's next leader, and social media users wondered exactly how that would work. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was assassinated at the start of the joint U. S.-Israeli Operation Epic Fury, and the 79-year-old president told Axios that he would not accept the assassinated supreme leader's son Mojtaba Khamenei as a replacement."They are wasting their time," Trump said. "Khamenei's son is a lightweight.""I have to be involved in the appointment, like with Delcy [Rodriguez] in Venezuela," he added. Trump's demand set off speculation about his choice for Iran's postwar leader and how he would make that decision."Congratulations, Ayatollah Lee Greenwood," joked producer and writer Alex Gradet."Congratulations to future Iranian Supreme Leader Kushner," speculated political analyst Parker Molloy."Sounds like he’s already graduated from King of America to King of the World," opined Bluesky user The CenterTrail. "The arrogance is breathtaking!""Senate Republicans quietly pushing for Trump to consider Ted Cruz," laughed astronomy professor Mike Boylan-Kolchin."In our country, people with a similar syndrome are called 'directors of the globe' and usually spend their time in a mental institution," noted Bluesky user Pan Bloumal."He has no control over it," added Bluesky user Vergogna. "The protocol for the assassination of the Ayatollah has already taken care of this. This is another display of Malignant Narcissistic Personality Disorder. He needs a rubber room, not the White House."Among other things, it's very very funny to imagine Trump having granular knowledge and strong opinions about various obscure Iranian regime figures possibly in the running," imagined MS NOW's Chris Hayes."We've been through this before with the US installing the Shah," reminded X user James Flippin."The Iranian[s] just announced that they don’t want trump as America president and he should be removed immediately," posted X user Adel Alawi."Being serious for a moment, is it a bit of a tell that he’s desperate for them to appoint someone so that they can get on with cutting a deal to end it? A new Ayatollah isn’t regime change," noted podcaster Arthur Snell. "Lovely. He couldn't pick a good candidate to run in NC senate race much less Iran," observed X user Guesserofgolf. "His entire 2nd half of this term will be dodging impeachment and doing nothing for the middle class. What a waste of opportunity."

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 White House caused a social media stir on Wednesday by leaving the door open to a ground invasion of Iran. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stopped short of ruling out ground troops during the first briefing since the military campaign launched."I know there's many leaders in the past who like to take options off of the table without having a full understanding of how things could develop. So again, it's not part of the current plan, but I'm not going to remove an option for the president that is on the table," Leavitt said."The carefully worded statement suggests the administration is keeping all options on the table as airstrikes continue pummeling Iranian targets. Since Saturday, U. S. and Israeli forces have unleashed a devastating campaign against Iranian military infrastructure, targeting nearly 2,000 sites and killing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other senior officials. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth declared the campaign a decisive victory, telling Pentagon reporters: "I stand before you today with one unmistakable message about Operation Epic Fury. America is winning — decisively, devastatingly and without mercy." He later added that Iran was "toast" and if they didn't realize as such already, they would "soon enough."Leavitt's remarks led to immediate reaction on social media. Saba Hamedy of NBC News noted on X, "Trump, who campaigned against 'endless' wars, enters Iran with no end date."Alexander Clarkson, lecturer for European politics and history at King's College London, wrote on X, "This probably means that US special operations units are already there."Curt Mills, executive director of The American Conservative, chided on X, "Sneering intellectuals literally less than a week ago: 'no one is talking about boots on the ground.'"Columnist Peter Rothpletz mocked on X, "deploy ICE."Foreign policy reporter Laura Rozen wrote on X, "yes, there is an awful lot of 'not part of current plan' but is an 'option on the table' in this answer."Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, wrote on X: "Iran is nearly four times the size of Iraq. Its population is over 3.5 times that of Iraq’s when the US invaded in 2003. An invasion would be another costly and bloody quagmire. Lawmakers should vote to disengage US forces from the war and oppose any supplemental funding of it."Our Analysis:The Specter of Endless Conflict: Analyzing the White House's Iran StrategyIn a move that sparked immediate and broad concern, the White House has once again flirted with the ghost of prolonged military conflict, this time setting its sights on Iran. During a recent press briefing, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt refused to rule out the possibility of a ground invasion of Iran, a statement that has sent ripples through social media and the international community. This stance not only rekindles fears of "endless wars" but also showcases a troubling lack of strategic clarity from the current administration.The Administration's Ambiguity: A Dangerous GameLeavitt's comments, "it's not part of the current plan, but I'm not going to remove an option for the president that is on the table," highlight a dangerous ambiguity in US foreign policy. This calculated indecision is not a sign of strategic patience but rather a glaring indication of the administration's willingness to keep the specter of ground conflict alive, despite the catastrophic implications that may entail.Operation Epic Fury: A Prelude to Perpetual War?The operation, dubbed "Epic Fury," has seen US and Israeli forces launch a devastating campaign against Iranian military infrastructure, claiming the lives of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other senior officials. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth's declaration of America "winning decisively" and describing Iran as "toast" not only employs dangerously dehumanizing rhetoric but also grossly oversimplifies the complex geopolitical dynamics at play. Such bravado does little to assure a swift or peaceful resolution to the conflict.Social Media Reactions: A Mirror to Public SentimentThe response on social media platforms like X (formerly Twitter) has been swift and critical. Figures from various backgrounds, including Saba Hamedy of NBC News and Dylan Williams from the Center for International Policy, have pointed out the inconsistencies and potential pitfalls of the administration's approach. The comparison to the disastrous invasion of Iraq in 2003 by Williams is particularly poignant, reminding us of the long-term consequences of such military adventures.The Intellectual Dissonance of "Endless Wars"The irony of an administration, led by a president who campaigned against "endless wars," now potentially embarking on a new, indefinite military engagement cannot be overstated. This stark contradiction between campaign rhetoric and policy action underscores a concerning trend of political amnesia and moral flexibility that characterizes much of U. S. foreign policy.A Call to Action: The Need for Legislative OversightThe situation demands a robust response from lawmakers to ensure that the U. S. does not blunder into another protracted conflict. The call by Dylan Williams for legislators to vote to disengage U. S. forces and oppose any supplemental funding for the war is a measured and necessary step towards reasserting Congressional oversight on matters of war and peace.In Conclusion, the White House's refusal to rule out a ground invasion of Iran is a troubling indication of a potential escalation towards yet another endless conflict. The administration's approach, marked by strategic ambiguity and a cavalier attitude towards military intervention, raises serious questions about the lessons learned from past conflicts. It is imperative for both lawmakers and the public to demand clarity, accountability, and a commitment to peaceful resolution, lest we find ourselves mired in another unwinnable war.

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 has set “the world on fire,” according to a former Republican strategist who worked for President George W. Bush — and it’s entirely because of Trump voters. In a Wednesday Substack essay titled “Why the world is on fire,” political consultant Steve Schmidt argued that America is sending the planet toward World War III but is not “branding” it or using a “marketing campaign.” “There has been no debate, no plan, and no thought given by Donald, his stooges and politicized generals about the second-and third-order effects of their decisions,” Schmidt said. “This is escalating.”With 15 nations involved in combat, and Russia still at war with Ukraine, Schmidt concluded that we now “have war, chaos, economic crisis, corruption and insanity served up non-stop, extolling the wrong against the right, while abusing American citizens with violence, including murder.”As he summed it up earlier in the editorial, “We had peace, and we chose Trump.”Last month, Schmidt and former CNN anchor Jim Acosta blasted the Supreme Court for even allowing Trump to run for president and gain as much power as he has upon taking office.“Seems to me a part of this is … that the Supreme Court, under John Roberts, released this Frankenstein, and now they don’t know how to rein him in. They’ve tried to cut him off at the pass [on some things] but John Roberts is responsible for this mess,” Acosta said.“The Roberts court has destabilized our American society through partisan rulings,” Schmidt replied. “We have a corrupt Supreme Court with [Judge Samuel] Alito’s misconduct, Clarence Thomas’s misconduct, flying around with all these billionaire extremist doners from here to there and everywhere.”He added, “The court has lost its reputation for a reason, and now we have Trump’s visage looming down at the American people from the Department of Justice, which is a corrupt institution that can’t be trusted, filled with corrupt prosecutor who abuse their oath, abuse the Constitution, and abuse the American people in the name of power.”Also last month, Schmidt pointed out in a Substack post that the world’s billionaires like Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk and Tim Cook have decided to bend the figurative knee to Trump, but that doesn’t mean the rest of humanity must join them.“We recognize that the world's richest people of the most powerful corporations, the big media companies, the big tech companies, the big banks have made a decision for the privilege of resting their head on a Mar-a-Lago pillow,” Schmidt said in his Substack post. “They are satisfied to live on their knees, but we are not.”In September, Schmidt’s disgust with Trump made headlines when he threatened to rent a billboard attacking Disney CEO Bob Iger for capitulating to Trump’s demand that talk show host Jimmy Kimmel be suspended for criticizing the Trump movement."We will put billboards up in L. A. with Bob Iger's picture, a yellow stripe under it and the word 'COWARD,'" Schmidt said. "It's a billboard town and everyone can reflect on it as they drive by ... the cowardice is appalling."

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:In United States v. Hemani, the U. S. Supreme Court is examining a federal law that forbids gun ownership if one "is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance." The Hemani in the case is Texas resident Ali Danial Hemani, who is arguing that the law violates the U. S. Constitution's Second Amendment. During a 2022 search, FBI agents found a gun, marijuana and cocaine in Hemani's home. And he acknowledged that he uses marijuana roughly every other day. In an article published by the libertarian Reason on March 4, journalist Jacob Sullum notes that the case is uniting "strange bedfellows" from two different lobbies: conservative and libertarian critics of gun control, and liberal and progressive opponents of the War on Drugs."Under federal law," Sullum explains, "millions of Americans are committing felonies right now because they own guns and use marijuana — even if they live in states that have legalized the drug. There is nothing unconstitutional about that baffling situation, a Trump Administration lawyer assured the Supreme Court on Monday, (March 2), because cannabis consumers are analogous to 'habitual drunkards,' who historically, could be confined to workhouses or mental institutions. Most of the justices, including both Republican and Democratic appointees, seemed skeptical of that claim."Sullum continues, "Their agreement reflected the trans-partisan alliances inspired by this case, which illustrates the potential for common ground between right-leaning critics of gun control and left-leaning critics of the War on Drugs."Hemani, Sullum notes, was charged with illegal gun possession in 2023 after the FBI search of his home."The case never went to trial," according to Sullum. "The charge was dismissed based on a 2024 decision by the U. S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, which held that the Second Amendment bars such prosecutions when they are based on nothing beyond the elements specified by the statute. Those elements do not require any showing that the defendant's pattern of drug use disrupts his own life, let alone that it poses a threat to public safety. Yet the Trump Administration, despite its avowed commitment to 'protecting Second Amendment rights,' wants the Supreme Court to reject the 5th Circuit's logic and reinstate the case against Hemani."Sullum adds, "Counterintuitively, a bunch of blue states that have legalized marijuana are siding with the Trump Administration, condemning a decision in which the country's most conservative appeals court upheld the constitutional rights of cannabis consumers."The "strange bedfellows," according to Sullum, are showing up in legal briefs "urging the Supreme Court to uphold the 5th Circuit's ruling.""They include the Drug Policy Alliance, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as well as leading Second Amendment groups such as the National Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America, and the Firearms Policy Coalition," Sullum observes. "Even the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which has not previously shown much interest in defending the Second Amendment, is siding with Hemani…. The Trump Administration's argument hinges on equating even occasional or moderate cannabis consumers with people who would have been deemed 'habitual drunkards' at the Founding."Sullum adds, "As Justices Neil Gorsuch and Sonia Sotomayor noted during Monday's oral argument, that comparison makes little sense."

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:White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt directly attacked CNN's Kaitlan Collins on Wednesday during the first press briefing since the United States and its ally Israel launched military strikes against Iran. Leavitt had made several comments criticizing media coverage of the Trump administration and went after reporters at the White House, specifically Collins and CNN. The Trump administration has presented several different objectives since launching its military operation five days ago — with Cabinet members and even President Donald Trump giving conflicting information over what prompted the attacks and led to the regional conflict that has now left six American troops dead. "Is it the position of this administration that the press should not prominently cover the deaths of U. S. service members?" Collins asked Leavitt. "No, it's the position of this administration that the press in this room and the press across this country should report on the success of Operation Epic Fury and the damage it is doing to the rogue Iranian regime that has threatened the lives of every single American in this room," Leavitt said. "If the Iranian regime had their choice, they would kill every single person in this room, and so we can all be very grateful that we have an administration, that we have men and women in our armed forces who are willing to sacrifice their own lives for the rest of us in this room and for every American across the country, and for every troop that is based in the Middle East."Collins pushed back on what Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had said earlier Wednesday. When Leavitt started to clash with her, things became personal. "But Secretary Hegseth was complaining that it was front-page news about these six service members who were killed," Collins said. "That's not what the secretary said, and that's not what he meant, and you know it!" Leavitt said, appearing visibly upset by Collins' statement. "You are being disingenuous. There is not — we've never had a secretary of defense who cares more..." Collins then interjected and read the statement directly from Hegseth, who had claimed that the press had purposefully tried to speak badly about Trump."The press only wants to make the president look bad," Leavitt said. As you know, the press, the deaths of U. S. service members under every president. The press does only want to make the president look bad. That's a fact. Especially, you know, listen to me, especially you, and especially CNN, and the secretary of defense cares deeply about our warfighters and our men and women in uniform. He travels all across this country to meet with them, to connect with them. And your network has hardly ever probably reported on that." Collins responded again to Leavitt's attacks — pointing out that covering the slain military members was not an attempt to attack Trump."That's not making the president look bad, that's showcasing that," Collins said. "And I just told you that the president of the United States will be attending their dignified transfer. So please. So, please," Leavitt said. "We expect you to cover that as you should, Kaitlan. But you and your network know that you take every single thing this administration says and tries to use it to make the president look bad. That is an objective fact."Collins pushed back again. "I don't think covering troop deaths is trying to make the president look bad," Collins said."If you're trying to argue right now that CNN's overwhelming coverage is not negative of President Donald Trump, I think the American people would tend to agree, and your ratings would tend to disagree with that as well," Leavitt said.

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:Yet another Republican lawmaker is refusing to seek reelection in 2026, when President Donald Trump’s second term experiences its likely-costly midterm elections. Representative Burgess Owens (R-Utah) told reporters on Wednesday that he will not seek reelection, saying in a statement that “after prayer, reflection, and many long conversations, I have decided that I will not seek reelection in 2026. I will complete this term fully committed to my work in Washington, DC, and then step away from elected office.”He added, “I began this political journey over six years ago with a simple question: Can I do more to advocate for our at-risk children? That question led me into public service, with a focused passion on education where the cancer of hopelessness and training for ‘social advocacy’ has taken hold in too many of our public schools.”Owens, who has served in the House since 2021, joins a total of 53 US House members and nine US senators who have announced they will not seek reelection this year. Of this group, 37 of the retiring lawmakers are Republicans. Also seeing the writing on the wall, the conservative magazine The Bulwark argued last month that voters are connecting higher prices with Trump’s unpopular tariffs.“Voters are rarely able to connect policy to outcomes, but they have done so in the case of tariffs,” wrote The Bulwark’s Mona Charen. “Back in 2024, Americans were about equally divided on the question of trade, with some favoring higher tariffs and roughly similar numbers opting for lower tariffs. Experience has changed their views.”Robert Kagan, a conservative historian with an extensive history writing about foreign policy, warned CNN’s Christiane Amanpour last month that Trump is planning on rigging the midterms because his Republican Party is likely to do poorly in them.“The U. S. Congress — both parties — are unwilling to really fight Trump,” Kagan told Amanpour, later continuing that “I am worried, as I have said and others have been pointing out, about whether we will even have free and fair elections in 2026, let alone in 2028. I think Trump has a plan to disrupt those elections, and I don't think he's willing to allow Democrats to take control of one or both houses as could happen in a free election.”White House spokeswoman Abigail T. Jackson told AlterNet in response to these criticisms that the administration is only trying to root out voter fraud.“President Trump is committed to ensuring that Americans have full confidence in the administration of elections, and that includes totally accurate and up-to-date voter rolls free of errors and unlawfully registered noncitizen voters,” Jackson told AlterNet. “The President has also urged Congress to pass the SAVE Act and other legislative proposals that would establish a uniform standard of photo ID for voting, prohibit no-excuse mail-in voting, and end the practice of ballot harvesting. Noncitizen voting is a crime. Anyone breaking the law will be held accountable.”

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 attempt to exact vengeance against his political enemies has been a “Keystone Cops effort,” according to a prominent conservative journalist’s accounting.“Another big loss for the Trump Justice Department in their Keystone Cop efforts to go after their political foes,” observed Tim Miller of The Bulwark. “For all of you know, the awful fascist advances of this administration, the one thing that continues to bring us joy is just the utter incompetence and failure in their effort to weaponize the Justice Department to get revenge against their political foes.”Mentioning that Trump and his attorney general, Pam Bondi, vowed to prosecute former President Joe Biden for using an autopen (which he did do, although it is not illegal) and stealing the 2020 presidential election (which he did not do), Miller pointed out that all of those supposed prosecutions have been busts.“Remember all those? Has anybody gone to jail for any of those yet?” Miller said in his podcast. “Supposedly Joe Biden stole the election in 2020. It's interesting that some of the biggest proponents of that case — Donald Trump, [FBI Director] Kash Patel, Pam Bondi — haven't been able to find any of the ‘perpetrators.’ So nobody's in jail for that.”Miller focused on Bondi, whose prominence in the case is especially notable because she has been harshly criticized for her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. Trump, who had a decades-long friendship with the convicted child sex trafficker and was accused of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old in the 1980s, denies any wrongdoing. Bondi testified before Congress last month on Trump’s behalf and controversially refused to apologize to the Epstein victims."Attorney General Bondi, you apologized to the survivors in your opening statement for what they went through at the hands of Jeffrey Epstein. Will you turn to them now and apologize for what your Department of Justice has put them through with the absolutely unacceptable release of the Epstein files and their information?" asked Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) at the time. Bondi declined to answer the question, instead pivoting to other subjects."Bondi repeatedly criticized the administrations of Joe Biden and prior presidents for their handling of Epstein," former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele said later. "She accused Democrats of focusing on the files to distract from Trump’s criminal justice agenda and in one bizarre instance even cited the performance of the stock market to defend the president."Similarly, New York Times opinion columnist and former Republican David French heavily criticized Bondi’s performance.“The most telling moment [in her testimony] was when she tried to stop questioning about Epstein, which was ostensibly the subject of the testimony, by saying the Dow was at 50,000 … which is about as relevant as saying, ‘Why are we talking about Epstein when the Knicks won last night?’” French said. “ … [H]e really is putting in front of Pam Bondi: ‘Hey, Pam, here is your job in one corner. And here in the other corner is reason, logic, morality, and decency. You have to give up all of those things. But if you do, you can continue to be the attorney general of the United States.’ And this is the test he’s putting in front of basically everyone in Republican politics right now.”

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 Justice Department wants the American people to know that the still-unreleased files of the late Jeffrey Epstein contain “sensationalist claims against Trump.”The Justice Department officials previously said some files included fake or false materials that were sent to the FBI by the public and may “contain untrue and sensationalist claims against President Trump.”“The US justice department [sic] is to release nearly 50,000 ‘missing’ Jeffrey Epstein files this week,” reported The Times on Wednesday. “The documents, which are referred to in the tranche released in late January but appear to have been withheld by the department, potentially contain unverified claims about President Trump, including FBI reports detailing a woman’s unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct against him.”Specifically, the files are supposed to contain FBI memos summarizing an interview with a woman who came forward after Epstein was arrested in 2019. During that conversation, the woman said she had been sexually assaulted by both Epstein and Trump in the mid-1980s when she was a minor. Despite these allegations, a White House spokesperson told The Times that “just as President Trump has said, he’s been totally exonerated on anything relating to Epstein.”Even some of Trump’s fellow Republicans have turned on him on the issue of the Epstein files, including Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky and former Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia.“Release the documents,” Senator John Kennedy (R-La.), a member of the Judiciary Committee, said in a statement. “Redact the names of the victims. Don’t release photographs, naked or otherwise, of minors. Release the documents. This is not going to go away until there is full disclosure.”Kennedy continued, “This is not going away until there’s full disclosure and the American people want to know, and they’re entitled to know, who if anyone, did Epstein traffic these women to … and why they weren’t prosecuted.”Trump’s relationship with Epstein goes back to 1985, when the former purchased his Mar-a-Lago estate near Epstein in Florida. By 1989, Trump was attending a party on a yacht called Lady Ghislaine after Epstein’s associate and billionaire Robert Maxwell’s daughter, Ghislaine Maxwell. In 1992 Trump and Epstein were recorded by NBC News partying with Buffalo Bills cheerleaders and other guests, including many young girls. At one point Trump and Epstein stare at girls on the dance floor and Trump appears to say “Look at her, back there.... she’s hot.” They continued to regularly socialize through the 1990s and 2000s. According to CNN’s Aaron Blake, Trump’s attempts to bury the scandal have only elevated its profile.“In a statement, the White House called the allegations against Trump ‘false and sensationalist’ and pointed to a previous DOJ statement that ‘some of the documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims against President Trump,’” Blake wrote. “But the plausibility of the woman’s claims isn’t the main point; the point is that an increasingly politicized Justice Department — one where a massive banner of Trump was hung last week — did not release documents containing allegations about the president.”He added, “In a vacuum, that would be problematic. But next to everything else, it’s really bad.”

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:“I can’t deny it: I’m enjoying the tumult on the right,” said Dispatch co-founder Jonah Goldberg, referring to MAGA’s civil war as factions come to terms with Trump finally turning his lies upon them.“Let’s start with poor J. D. Vance,” said Goldberg, a former senior editor at the National Review. “He has spent the last few years grounding his support for Donald Trump in Trump’s wise rejection of ‘forever wars,’ ‘stupid wars,’ ‘regime change wars,’ et cetera Now, he’s stuck trying to explain why this war on Iran is not — and cannot possibly be — any of the above without looking exactly like what he is: a guy who reinvented himself as a Trump vassal for political power.”Goldberg recalls with glee Vance telling the Wall Street Journal that he gave his support to Trump “because I know he won’t recklessly send Americans to fight wars overseas.” In fact, the op-ed title of Vance’s article was “Trump’s Best Foreign Policy? Not Starting Any Wars.” Now Goldberg concedes that a non-negotiable attribute required of every vice president is a “willing appetite for … eating a healthy portion” of biological waste “365 days a year.” Currently, for example, Goldberg said Vance is spinning so hard for reporters trying to justify his change of heart that he's tying himself in knots. But the net effect is that he spends his days taking “huge bites of the ‘that’s not-Shinola!’ sandwich Trump is serving.”The problem for MAGA, said Goldberg, is that normal presidents have somewhat coherent worldviews and ideological commitments for their supporters to follow, but Trump has no such qualities. So, Vance and Trump’s other defenders “end up holding the bag.”“I’ve been making the point that Trump offers no intellectually and ideologically coherent safe harbor for the intellectuals and politicians who attach themselves to him for a decade now,” said Goldberg, who is also a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. “Love him because he’ll lower taxes? Great — now explain how tariffs aren’t taxes. Support him because he’ll end lawfare, fight corruption, revere the Constitution, resist foreign adventures? Bahahaha. Look at you now.”Some MAGA stalwarts appear to be belatedly catching on to what Trump has been feeding them all these years, said Goldberg, citing right-wing entertainer Megyn Kelly confessing to her audience that “I’ve got serious doubts about what we’re doing [in Iraq.]“I support the president. I voted for the president. I campaigned for the president, as you know. But that doesn’t mean — being a conservative or being a Trump supporter or being part of MAGA does not mean you have to accept another Middle East war without questions,” said Kelly after nearly a decade of supporting Trump. “And anybody who tells you that can s---- it.”

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