Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
LetMyPeopleVote
LetMyPeopleVote's Journal
LetMyPeopleVote's Journal
June 24, 2025
https://www.borowitzreport.com/p/trump-accuses-biden-of-violating
The Borowitz Report-Trump Accuses Biden of Violating Ceasefire
Trump Accuses Biden of Violating Ceasefire
— (@mercybenz.bsky.social) 2025-06-24T13:22:34.559Z
open.substack.com/pub/borowitz...
https://www.borowitzreport.com/p/trump-accuses-biden-of-violating
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In an angry outburst Tuesday morning, Donald J. Trump lashed out at Joe Biden for violating the fragile Middle East ceasefire.
“The ceasefire was working perfectly and beautifully until Joe Biden broke it,” Trump said. “This should never be allowed to happen in this country.”
Trump refused to disclose precisely how Biden had violated the ceasefire, but darkly hinted that “people are saying it can be done with a laptop.”
He also blasted the “far left lunatic media” for refusing to cover Biden’s violation of the ceasefire, warning, “This better be in Tapper’s next book.”
“The ceasefire was working perfectly and beautifully until Joe Biden broke it,” Trump said. “This should never be allowed to happen in this country.”
Trump refused to disclose precisely how Biden had violated the ceasefire, but darkly hinted that “people are saying it can be done with a laptop.”
He also blasted the “far left lunatic media” for refusing to cover Biden’s violation of the ceasefire, warning, “This better be in Tapper’s next book.”
June 24, 2025
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-drops-f-bomb-israel-iran-face-accusations-ceasefire-violations-rcna214698
Maddow Blog-Trump drops f-bomb as Israel and Iran face accusations of ceasefire violations
The president is getting a timely lesson in “Middle East crises are complicated,” which seems like the sort of thing he should’ve already known.
Trump, last night: Israel/Iran ceasefire will likely “go foreverâ€
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2025-06-24T12:49:55.436Z
Trump, this morning: Israel/Iran “don’t know what the f--- they’re doingâ€
He’s getting a timely “the Middle East is complicated†lesson, which seems like the sort of the thing he should’ve already known. www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddo...
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-drops-f-bomb-israel-iran-face-accusations-ceasefire-violations-rcna214698
Soon after, Trump spoke briefly to reporters at the White House, where his frustrations appeared to boil over. NBC News reported:
Trump said that both Iran and Israel violated the ceasefire he announced yesterday. ‘I think they both violated it,’ he said. ‘I’m not sure they did it intentionally. They couldn’t reign people back. I don’t like the fact that Israel went out this morning at all, and I’m going to see if I can stop it.’
The Republican added, “We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f--- they’re doing. Do you understand that?”
https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:aunpu65mdrhwfie7ynymlzeh/post/3lsdyzwk6p225
https://x.com/BulwarkOnline/status/1937472358370927055
As part of the same Q&A, Trump accused both countries of behaving in a “ridiculous” way.
So to summarize, roughly half a day after the American president said the Israel/Iran ceasefire would likely “go forever,” and there was no reason to believe Israel and Iran “will ever be shooting at each other again,” Trump was reduced to dropping an f-bomb on the White House South Lawn as his frustrations boiled over.
The point is not to chide the president for having a potty mouth. Rather, the point is that he really ought to understand by now that premature triumphalism is folly, and assuming the complexities of Middle East conflicts can be resolved through the force of his will is absurd.
Trump said that both Iran and Israel violated the ceasefire he announced yesterday. ‘I think they both violated it,’ he said. ‘I’m not sure they did it intentionally. They couldn’t reign people back. I don’t like the fact that Israel went out this morning at all, and I’m going to see if I can stop it.’
The Republican added, “We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f--- they’re doing. Do you understand that?”
https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:aunpu65mdrhwfie7ynymlzeh/post/3lsdyzwk6p225
https://x.com/BulwarkOnline/status/1937472358370927055
As part of the same Q&A, Trump accused both countries of behaving in a “ridiculous” way.
So to summarize, roughly half a day after the American president said the Israel/Iran ceasefire would likely “go forever,” and there was no reason to believe Israel and Iran “will ever be shooting at each other again,” Trump was reduced to dropping an f-bomb on the White House South Lawn as his frustrations boiled over.
The point is not to chide the president for having a potty mouth. Rather, the point is that he really ought to understand by now that premature triumphalism is folly, and assuming the complexities of Middle East conflicts can be resolved through the force of his will is absurd.
June 23, 2025
Deadline: Legal Blog-The Trump administration's MS-13 case against Kilmar Abrego Garcia crumbled in court
A federal judge rejected the government’s claim of Abrego’s gang membership while denying the broader effort to detain him pretrial.
https://x.com/HarleyGal54/status/1937268818239173028
https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/kilmar-abrego-garcia-ms-13-trump-administration-rcna214530
Before the Trump administration finally returned Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the U.S. this month, officials kept claiming he belonged to the deadly MS-13 gang. Even if true, that wouldn’t have been a valid reason for the government to avoid compliance with a court order for his return after illegally sending him to El Salvador in March.
But in any event, it shouldn’t escape notice that a federal judge just picked apart the gang claim that the Justice Department has continued to push since his return.
That picking-apart came in Sunday’s ruling that rejected the DOJ’s bid to detain Abrego ahead of trial on criminal charges the government had waiting for him upon his return. He pleaded not guilty to allegations of illegally transporting undocumented immigrants. (U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes’ opinion Sunday noted that his preferred surname is “Abrego,” after he has been consistently referred to in court documents and reports as “Abrego Garcia.”)
Abrego’s criminal charges don’t hinge on whether he’s a gang member. But the issue arose in Holmes’ detention ruling because the government argued that his alleged gang membership supported his detention. “The Government’s investigation has revealed that the defendant has a long history and association with MS-13,” prosecutors wrote ahead of a June 13 hearing.
But in her ruling following the hearing, Holmes said the government’s evidence of Abrego’s MS-13 membership “consists of general statements, all double hearsay, from two cooperating witnesses.” She said those statements, in turn, are contradicted by another witness who, the judge wrote, said that “in ten years of acquaintance with Abrego, there were no signs or markings, including tattoos, indicating that Abrego is an MS-13 member.” Given the conflicting evidence, the judge wrote, “the government’s evidence of Abrego’s alleged gang membership is simply insufficient.”
So, after months of the administration insisting on Abrego’s gang membership (again, not that it would excuse failing to return him as required by court order issued in April), there was a clear chance to prove it in court. The government failed to do so......
But the failure to support the MS-13 claim is indicative of an amateurishness that has marked the government’s conduct throughout this sordid affair. If it’s a sign of things to come, it could bode well for Abrego’s legal fight.
But in any event, it shouldn’t escape notice that a federal judge just picked apart the gang claim that the Justice Department has continued to push since his return.
That picking-apart came in Sunday’s ruling that rejected the DOJ’s bid to detain Abrego ahead of trial on criminal charges the government had waiting for him upon his return. He pleaded not guilty to allegations of illegally transporting undocumented immigrants. (U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes’ opinion Sunday noted that his preferred surname is “Abrego,” after he has been consistently referred to in court documents and reports as “Abrego Garcia.”)
Abrego’s criminal charges don’t hinge on whether he’s a gang member. But the issue arose in Holmes’ detention ruling because the government argued that his alleged gang membership supported his detention. “The Government’s investigation has revealed that the defendant has a long history and association with MS-13,” prosecutors wrote ahead of a June 13 hearing.
But in her ruling following the hearing, Holmes said the government’s evidence of Abrego’s MS-13 membership “consists of general statements, all double hearsay, from two cooperating witnesses.” She said those statements, in turn, are contradicted by another witness who, the judge wrote, said that “in ten years of acquaintance with Abrego, there were no signs or markings, including tattoos, indicating that Abrego is an MS-13 member.” Given the conflicting evidence, the judge wrote, “the government’s evidence of Abrego’s alleged gang membership is simply insufficient.”
So, after months of the administration insisting on Abrego’s gang membership (again, not that it would excuse failing to return him as required by court order issued in April), there was a clear chance to prove it in court. The government failed to do so......
But the failure to support the MS-13 claim is indicative of an amateurishness that has marked the government’s conduct throughout this sordid affair. If it’s a sign of things to come, it could bode well for Abrego’s legal fight.
June 23, 2025
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/dhs-issues-security-warning-team-trumps-counterterrorism-record-raises-rcna214529
Maddow Blog-As DHS issues security warning, Team Trump's counterterrorism record raises concerns
We’re overdue for a conversation about the Trump administration’s capacity to deal with what Homeland Security called a “heightened threat environment.”
As DHS issues a bulletin warning of a “heightened threat environment,†we’re overdue for a national conversation about the administration’s capacity to deal with this.
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2025-06-23T17:16:22.477Z
Because its latest counter-terrorism moves are ... problematic. www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddo...
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/dhs-issues-security-warning-team-trumps-counterterrorism-record-raises-rcna214529
It’s difficult to predict the scope of Iran's possible retaliation against the United States in the wake of Saturday’s military strikes against Iranian nuclear targets, but the day after the U.S. offensive, NBC News reported on a new domestic security warning.
NBC News’ report added that U.S. officials have long considered Iran to be among our top cyber adversaries in the world — which is notable in part because the Trump administration has made significant cuts in recent months to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, as well as Donald Trump’s decision in April to fire Air Force Gen. Timothy Haugh, who led U.S. Cyber Command.
And therein lies the point: As the Department of Homeland Security raises new domestic security concerns, it highlights an unsettling context to the White House’s recent agenda, especially in areas of counterterrorism......
The Justice Department’s counterintelligence and export control section — “which tracks foreign espionage in the U.S. by Iran and other foreign rivals” — has lost roughly a third of its workforce since Trump returned to the White House.
That came on the heels of a related report in The Washington Post that noted, “President Donald Trump’s sweeping freeze on U.S. foreign assistance has threatened programs intended to counter al-Shabab bombmakers, contain the spread of al-Qaeda across West Africa and secure Islamic State prisoners in the Middle East, according to U.S. officials and aid workers.”
The Post added that some of the cuts to foreign aid would affect programs designed to respond to national security threats and that their suspension “could endanger the United States and its international allies.”
And then, of course, there’s Joe Kent, the man the president tapped to serve as the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, despite his connections to right-wing extremists, his associations with white nationalists, his weird conspiracy theories, and his stated belief that the FBI — an agency he’d presumably be working with — is “corrupt” and needs to be brought “to heel.” (The Senate has not yet confirmed Kent’s nomination.)
It wasn’t too surprising to see the Department of Homeland Security issue a new bulletin over the weekend warning of a “heightened threat environment,” but perhaps we’re overdue for a national conversation about the Trump administration’s capacity and wherewithal to deal with this heightened threat environment?
The Department of Homeland Security issued a new bulletin [on Sunday] warning of a ‘heightened threat environment’ following the U.S. strikes on nuclear facilities in Iran. The bulletin warns that ‘low-level cyber attacks against US networks by pro-Iranian hacktivists are likely, and cyber actors affiliated with the Iranian government may conduct attacks against US networks.’ DHS also warns of possible violence by independent actors.
NBC News’ report added that U.S. officials have long considered Iran to be among our top cyber adversaries in the world — which is notable in part because the Trump administration has made significant cuts in recent months to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, as well as Donald Trump’s decision in April to fire Air Force Gen. Timothy Haugh, who led U.S. Cyber Command.
And therein lies the point: As the Department of Homeland Security raises new domestic security concerns, it highlights an unsettling context to the White House’s recent agenda, especially in areas of counterterrorism......
The Justice Department’s counterintelligence and export control section — “which tracks foreign espionage in the U.S. by Iran and other foreign rivals” — has lost roughly a third of its workforce since Trump returned to the White House.
That came on the heels of a related report in The Washington Post that noted, “President Donald Trump’s sweeping freeze on U.S. foreign assistance has threatened programs intended to counter al-Shabab bombmakers, contain the spread of al-Qaeda across West Africa and secure Islamic State prisoners in the Middle East, according to U.S. officials and aid workers.”
The Post added that some of the cuts to foreign aid would affect programs designed to respond to national security threats and that their suspension “could endanger the United States and its international allies.”
And then, of course, there’s Joe Kent, the man the president tapped to serve as the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, despite his connections to right-wing extremists, his associations with white nationalists, his weird conspiracy theories, and his stated belief that the FBI — an agency he’d presumably be working with — is “corrupt” and needs to be brought “to heel.” (The Senate has not yet confirmed Kent’s nomination.)
It wasn’t too surprising to see the Department of Homeland Security issue a new bulletin over the weekend warning of a “heightened threat environment,” but perhaps we’re overdue for a national conversation about the Trump administration’s capacity and wherewithal to deal with this heightened threat environment?
June 23, 2025
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/groups-organize-form-unbiased-independent-vaccine-panel-rcna212468
Outside groups organize to form unbiased, independent vaccine panel
Since Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired the members of the CDC’s esteemed vaccine advisory panel, medical organizations and experts are looking for alternatives.
"Insurance companies currently rely on ACIP’s guidance on which vaccines to cover. But if enough reputable public health groups come up with recommendations different from ACIP’s, Osterholm said, those groups could sway insurance companies on which shots to cover..."
— Rachel Maddow (@maddow.msnbc.com) 2025-06-23T18:44:53.620Z
www.nbcnews.com/health/healt...
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/groups-organize-form-unbiased-independent-vaccine-panel-rcna212468
In the wake of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s decision to shake up a key federal vaccine advisory committee, outside medical organizations and independent experts are looking for alternate sources of unbiased information and even considering forming a group of their own.
A leading contender is a new group led by Michael Osterholm, an infectious disease expert and the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota.
Osterholm is launching the Vaccine Integrity Project at CIDRAP as a potential alternative to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
“We’ve always just taken for granted that routine child immunizations and other vaccines would be readily available and that they would be supported by the public health system,” Osterholm said. “Now that’s in question.”.....
ACIP holds a significant amount of influence over vaccinations in the U.S.; the panel is responsible for setting the childhood vaccination schedule and determining what vaccines are given free of charge under the Vaccines for Children Program. Its recommendations guide what vaccinations are required for attending public school and what shots insurance covers.
“The real risk is that families and patients may not have access to vaccines” if the panel makes changes to their recommendations, said Dr. Molly O’Shea, a pediatrician in Michigan.
A leading contender is a new group led by Michael Osterholm, an infectious disease expert and the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota.
Osterholm is launching the Vaccine Integrity Project at CIDRAP as a potential alternative to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
“We’ve always just taken for granted that routine child immunizations and other vaccines would be readily available and that they would be supported by the public health system,” Osterholm said. “Now that’s in question.”.....
ACIP holds a significant amount of influence over vaccinations in the U.S.; the panel is responsible for setting the childhood vaccination schedule and determining what vaccines are given free of charge under the Vaccines for Children Program. Its recommendations guide what vaccinations are required for attending public school and what shots insurance covers.
“The real risk is that families and patients may not have access to vaccines” if the panel makes changes to their recommendations, said Dr. Molly O’Shea, a pediatrician in Michigan.
June 23, 2025
Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski said it's possible she will switch parties and become a Democrat
https://x.com/DemocraticWins/status/1937222530206441619
June 23, 2025
https://x.com/the7thsign/status/1936961513421783312
https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/kilmar-abrego-garcia-judge-orders-release-detention-trump-rcna212833
Deadline: Legal Blog-Judge stresses due process while rejecting bid to detain Kilmar Abrego Garcia pending trial
The judge noted that her ruling could be seen as an "academic exercise" if Abrego Garcia just winds up held in immigration custody, anyway.
1/4
— Lola Gayle (@lolagaylec.bsky.social) 2025-06-23T12:15:40.055Z
MSNBC - Deadline: Legal Blog - Judge stresses due process while rejecting bid to detain Kilmar Abrego Garcia pending trial
The judge noted that her ruling could be seen as an "academic exercise" if Abrego Garcia just winds up held in immigration custody, anyway.
https://x.com/the7thsign/status/1936961513421783312
https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/kilmar-abrego-garcia-judge-orders-release-detention-trump-rcna212833
A federal judge on Sunday rejected the Justice Department's bid to detain Kilmar Abrego Garcia pending his federal criminal trial in Tennessee, citing the importance of due process while noting that he could still separately be held by immigration authorities.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes began her 51-page ruling by observing that the only thing the government and Abrego Garcia might agree on is the likelihood that he will stay in custody regardless of her detention ruling, given the government's intention to separately detain him in U.S. immigration custody. While that could make her ruling an “academic exercise,” Holmes stressed that she needed to give the defendant “the due process that he is guaranteed.”
A judge saying that she is going to enforce the Constitution might have been an obvious statement hardly worth writing before President Donald Trump’s second inauguration. But today it calls to mind the administration’s failure to provide that baseline guarantee in multiple cases, perhaps none more infamous than Abrego Garcia’s.
So, regardless of the outcome of this criminal case and any subsequent deportation efforts by the government, it’s remarkable that merely mentioning the necessity of due process stands as a rebuke against the administration that fought to avoid providing it in this case and is still fighting to avoid providing it in others.....
In her ruling on Sunday, Holmes said the government failed to make its case that Abrego Garcia is enough of a flight risk or danger to the community to warrant holding him ahead of trial. She said that she would set a hearing for Wednesday to review the conditions of his release.
But the DOJ quickly filed a motion to a U.S. District Court judge in Tennessee on Sunday, arguing that Holmes’ impending release order should be halted. The motion notes that Abrego Garcia “has an immigration detainer lodged against him by the Department of Homeland Security,” adding that “he will remain in custody pending deportation and Judge Holmes’ release order would not immediately release him to the community under any circumstance.”
The success of that government motion and any further appeal on the detention issue in the coming days could derail Abrego Garcia’s release in the criminal case, regardless of any separate immigration detention.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes began her 51-page ruling by observing that the only thing the government and Abrego Garcia might agree on is the likelihood that he will stay in custody regardless of her detention ruling, given the government's intention to separately detain him in U.S. immigration custody. While that could make her ruling an “academic exercise,” Holmes stressed that she needed to give the defendant “the due process that he is guaranteed.”
A judge saying that she is going to enforce the Constitution might have been an obvious statement hardly worth writing before President Donald Trump’s second inauguration. But today it calls to mind the administration’s failure to provide that baseline guarantee in multiple cases, perhaps none more infamous than Abrego Garcia’s.
So, regardless of the outcome of this criminal case and any subsequent deportation efforts by the government, it’s remarkable that merely mentioning the necessity of due process stands as a rebuke against the administration that fought to avoid providing it in this case and is still fighting to avoid providing it in others.....
In her ruling on Sunday, Holmes said the government failed to make its case that Abrego Garcia is enough of a flight risk or danger to the community to warrant holding him ahead of trial. She said that she would set a hearing for Wednesday to review the conditions of his release.
But the DOJ quickly filed a motion to a U.S. District Court judge in Tennessee on Sunday, arguing that Holmes’ impending release order should be halted. The motion notes that Abrego Garcia “has an immigration detainer lodged against him by the Department of Homeland Security,” adding that “he will remain in custody pending deportation and Judge Holmes’ release order would not immediately release him to the community under any circumstance.”
The success of that government motion and any further appeal on the detention issue in the coming days could derail Abrego Garcia’s release in the criminal case, regardless of any separate immigration detention.
June 23, 2025
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/defiance-courts-texas-put-ten-commandments-public-schools-rcna214514
Maddowblog-In defiance of courts, Texas to put Ten Commandments in public schools
The Supreme Court has already ruled against Ten Commandments in classrooms. Republicans in several states are approving new laws anyway.
Republicans apparently believe they can ignore court orders because they have a criminal president and a corrupt Supreme Court to back them up.
— @jimrissmiller.bsky.social 2025-06-23T17:06:03.687Z
In defiance of courts, Texas to put Ten Commandments in public schools www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddo...
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/defiance-courts-texas-put-ten-commandments-public-schools-rcna214514
Soon after signing the proposal into law, Republican Gov. Jeff Landry bragged about the measure at a fundraiser, declaring, “I can’t wait to be sued.” He got his wish — and at least for now, he has lost. As NBC News reported, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the state law from taking effect, unanimously ruling that Louisiana’s state-sponsored-religion law was “facially unconstitutional.”
One day later, Greg Abbott, Texas’ Republican governor, signed into law a related measure to do basically the same thing. The Texas Tribune reported:
In case this isn’t obvious, Texas falls under the jurisdiction of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The governor ignored the ruling anyway, less than 24 hours after a relevant decision reached the public.
Time will tell whether the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear an appeal of the Louisiana case, but in the interim, it’s worth appreciating why policies like these are legal, political and theological messes.....
So why would Republicans in several states — most notably Louisiana, Texas and Arkansas — take a step that the Supreme Court has already rejected? It’s probably because they’re confident that the newly politicized high court and its dominant far-right majority will simply overturn the Stone precedent, doing fresh harm to the wall that’s supposed to separate church and state in this country.
These GOP officials are almost certainly aware of the First Amendment, just as they’re almost certainly aware of the Supreme Court precedent that says they cannot legally do what they’re trying to do.
But since the high court has moved sharply to the right over the course of the last 45 years, Abbott and others are counting on Republican-appointed justices to clear the way for more government-imposed religion in public schools. Watch this space.
One day later, Greg Abbott, Texas’ Republican governor, signed into law a related measure to do basically the same thing. The Texas Tribune reported:
Come September, every public school classroom will be required to display the Ten Commandments — part of a larger push in Texas and beyond to increase the role of religion in schools. On Saturday, Gov. Greg Abbott signed Senate Bill 10, despite a federal court ruling that a similar Louisiana law violated a constitutionally required separation of church and state.
In case this isn’t obvious, Texas falls under the jurisdiction of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The governor ignored the ruling anyway, less than 24 hours after a relevant decision reached the public.
Time will tell whether the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear an appeal of the Louisiana case, but in the interim, it’s worth appreciating why policies like these are legal, political and theological messes.....
So why would Republicans in several states — most notably Louisiana, Texas and Arkansas — take a step that the Supreme Court has already rejected? It’s probably because they’re confident that the newly politicized high court and its dominant far-right majority will simply overturn the Stone precedent, doing fresh harm to the wall that’s supposed to separate church and state in this country.
These GOP officials are almost certainly aware of the First Amendment, just as they’re almost certainly aware of the Supreme Court precedent that says they cannot legally do what they’re trying to do.
But since the high court has moved sharply to the right over the course of the last 45 years, Abbott and others are counting on Republican-appointed justices to clear the way for more government-imposed religion in public schools. Watch this space.
June 23, 2025
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/exactly-6-years-later-trump-approves-iranian-strikes-called-first-term-rcna214485
MaddowBlog-Exactly 6 years later, Trump approves the Iranian strikes he called off in his first term
In the president's second term he’s doing many of the same things he wanted to do in his first term, but didn’t. Take strikes in Iran, for example.
June 21, 2019: Trump calls off a plan to attack three Iranian targets.
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2025-06-23T15:21:17.379Z
June 21, 2025: Trump approves a plan to attack three Iranian targets.
He keeps doing things he wanted to do in his first term, but didn’t. www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddo...
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/exactly-6-years-later-trump-approves-iranian-strikes-called-first-term-rcna214485
Exactly six years to the day later — on June 21, 2025 — the public heard the opposite news. Whereas Trump abandoned a plan to attack three Iranian targets in 2019, the president approved a plan to attack three Iranian targets this year. Instead of taking deliberate steps to de-escalate, Trump and his team chose to open the door to a new and prolonged conflict in the Middle East.
The dangers, significance and potential consequences of this decision are obviously of dramatic geopolitical importance, but it’s also worth appreciating the burgeoning political pattern. The Washington Post’s Philip Bump recently noted:
In Trump’s first term, he was talked out of deploying U.S. troops onto American streets. He would occasionally follow the advice of his party’s “establishment” when making key personnel decisions. He held off on launching political wars against his own country’s institutions of higher learning. He nearly approved strikes on Iranian targets, but reversed course at the last minute.
In Trump’s second term, in other words, he’s doing many of the same things he wanted to do before his 2020 defeat, but didn’t.
Just a couple of days before Election Day 2024, John Mitnick, who was general counsel of the Department of Homeland Security under Trump, wrote a memorable thread via social media. The conservative Republican and Heritage Foundation veteran, who pleaded with voters not to return his former boss to power, explained that the United States did not go “completely off the rails” during Trump’s first term because “there were just enough senior officials who served as ‘guardrails.’”......
In 2018, outgoing House Speaker Paul Ryan talked about his private efforts to prevent Trump from making enormous mistakes. “I can look myself in the mirror at the end of the day and say, ‘I avoided that tragedy, I avoided that tragedy, I avoided that tragedy,’” the Wisconsin Republican said on his way out the door.
Now, no one is killing “crazy stuff.” No one is speaking up to “avoid that tragedy.” Instead of steering clear of disasters, the president is aiming for them — without voices of dissent.
There was some talk before Trump’s second inaugural that Americans should expect a different kind of Republican presidency upon his return to power, because he’d learned lessons during his first four years that he’d now apply in his second term.
What much of the public might not have appreciated is the degree to which he’d learned the wrong lessons, clearing the way for worse decisions.
The dangers, significance and potential consequences of this decision are obviously of dramatic geopolitical importance, but it’s also worth appreciating the burgeoning political pattern. The Washington Post’s Philip Bump recently noted:
A lot of things happened in 2020 that Donald Trump didn’t like. During the first six months of 2025, he has expended a lot of energy and presidential power on reversing those things or trying to make it the policy of the federal government that they didn’t occur.
In Trump’s first term, he was talked out of deploying U.S. troops onto American streets. He would occasionally follow the advice of his party’s “establishment” when making key personnel decisions. He held off on launching political wars against his own country’s institutions of higher learning. He nearly approved strikes on Iranian targets, but reversed course at the last minute.
In Trump’s second term, in other words, he’s doing many of the same things he wanted to do before his 2020 defeat, but didn’t.
Just a couple of days before Election Day 2024, John Mitnick, who was general counsel of the Department of Homeland Security under Trump, wrote a memorable thread via social media. The conservative Republican and Heritage Foundation veteran, who pleaded with voters not to return his former boss to power, explained that the United States did not go “completely off the rails” during Trump’s first term because “there were just enough senior officials who served as ‘guardrails.’”......
In 2018, outgoing House Speaker Paul Ryan talked about his private efforts to prevent Trump from making enormous mistakes. “I can look myself in the mirror at the end of the day and say, ‘I avoided that tragedy, I avoided that tragedy, I avoided that tragedy,’” the Wisconsin Republican said on his way out the door.
Now, no one is killing “crazy stuff.” No one is speaking up to “avoid that tragedy.” Instead of steering clear of disasters, the president is aiming for them — without voices of dissent.
There was some talk before Trump’s second inaugural that Americans should expect a different kind of Republican presidency upon his return to power, because he’d learned lessons during his first four years that he’d now apply in his second term.
What much of the public might not have appreciated is the degree to which he’d learned the wrong lessons, clearing the way for worse decisions.
Profile Information
Member since: Mon Apr 5, 2004, 04:58 PMNumber of posts: 165,179