HINDSIGHT - WRITE SOMETHING WORTH READING ABOUT OR DO SOMETHING WORTH WRITING ABOUT
Friday, March 27, 2026
Trump reminds us why we are rallying on Saturday
[Note: Because of No Kings Day 3.0 protests, I will not host my usual Saturday morning livestream. But I will record and release a brief video statement on Saturday morning—to join you in solidarity on No Kings Day 3.0.]
At this point, few of us need reminding why we will be in the streets defending the rule of law on Saturday. But if we needed any further motivation, we received plenty on Thursday. In normal times, several of the stories below would have prompted calls for immediate impeachment, conviction, and removal—or for a comprehensive cognitive exam with the results made public.
Part of what makes reporting on Trump so difficult is that developments that receive scant media attention are norm-shattering, Constitution-breaking, never-before-in-the-history-of-the-republic scandals.
Let’s take a look.
Trump says he will sign an executive order to pay TSA agents.
[Last-minute update: As I was putting the final touches on this newsletter, I received a news alert saying that the Senate had agreed to a deal to fund the DHS and TSA. Per Politico, “Senate Republicans accepted what Democrats have been offering for weeks — cash for all of DHS except for ICE and part of Customs and Border Protection.” See Politico.]
Per the Constitution, Congress appropriates money, and the president disburses it as instructed by Congress.
For 40 days, Congress has refused to appropriate money to the Department of Homeland Security, the parent agency of TSA. On Thursday, Trump said he would simply sign an executive order to pay TSA agents—despite the explicit refusal of Congress to do so.
Most of the media nodded their heads in agreement and credulous acceptance, dutifully reporting that Trump would pay TSA agents without bothering to discuss whether (a) he had the authority to do so; and (b) if so, what constitutional or statutory provision granted him that authority.
If Trump uses federal funds to pay TSA agents without a congressional appropriation, that would violate Article I of the Constitution and the Anti-Deficiency Act.
To its credit, the Wall Street Journal included a nod to the illegality of Trump’s actions in its story entitled “Trump Announces Plan to Pay TSA Agents.” The WSJ included the following paragraph at the very end of its lengthy article on Trump’s proposed executive order:
The planned effort by Trump to temporarily pay TSA employees could be challenged in court. The Antideficiency Act prohibits federal spending without an appropriation by Congress.
Under the Anti-Deficiency Act, it is a felony to spend money not appropriated by Congress. See 31 U.S.C. § 1350.
Curiously, congressional Democrats have decided to take Trump at his word, arguing, “See? Trump used the long security lines at the airport as a negotiating tactic! He could have paid TSA agents any time he wanted!”
Democrats should insist that Trump follow the law, rather than arguing that he had the power to pay TSA agents all along. He did not; that is why the government has been shut down for 40 days. If he has the authority to declare an emergency to pay TSA, why can’t he just claim emergency powers to fund all of DHS, thereby circumventing Congress’s role in the appropriations process?
In short, Democrats must stick to the rule of law, even if it means giving up some political points in trolling Trump.
Coda
Trump claims he can fund TSA by executive order. But even as he claims the unilateral authority to do so, he is urging Senate Republicans to end the filibuster—to fund DHS and pass the SAVE Act. See Democracy Docket, Frustrated by filibuster, Trump and MAGA allies eye nuking it to pass SAVE America Act.
Trump said,
When is ‘enough, enough’ for our Republican Senators. There comes a time when you must do what should have been done a long time ago, and something which the Lunatic Democrats will do on day one, if they ever get the chance. TERMINATE THE FILIBUSTER and get our airports, and everything else, moving again. Also, add the complete, all five items, SAVE AMERICA ACT items. Go for the Gold!
But as Democracy Docket noted,
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has repeatedly shot down proposals to gut the filibuster, saying the idea would be a GOP own goal. “Throughout history, it’s protected Republicans and conservative priorities and principles a lot more often than it’s protected Democrats.”
Senator Thune speaks the truth: Republicans have maintained minority control of Congress, in part, because of the filibuster. Republicans know that if they eliminate the filibuster, Democrats will pass voter protection legislation that will eliminate partisan gerrymandering—effectively ending their ability to lock in an unfair electoral advantage in state legislatures and the House of Representatives.
But—here’s the important point—when Democrats next control the Senate, they should abolish the filibuster, for the very reasons that John Thune is desperate to preserve it.
Trump plans to invade Iran as he says that Iran is “begging for a deal.”
On Thursday, angry Republicans stormed out of a briefing by the administration regarding the war in Iran. Per reports, the administration discussed three options, all of which involved a dramatic escalation of the war. See Daily Mail Online, Furious Republicans storm out of secret Iran briefing as new objective sparks ground invasion panic.
Although the Daily Mail’s story was an “exclusive,” other media outlets confirmed much of the Daily Mail’s reporting. See, e.g., NBC, Tensions flare during Iran briefing for members of Congress, and CNN, GOP lawmakers vent frustration over Trump administration’s lack of info on Iran war.
Per the Daily Mail, the lawmakers were presented with shifting goals for the war:
Nancy Mace walked out early, venting that ‘we were misled,’ while pro-Trump committee chair Mike Rogers warned ‘we’re not getting answers’ as Pentagon chiefs briefed the House Armed Services Committee, sparking fireworks on Capitol Hill.
Now, a Daily Mail source inside the room has revealed stark new details, including a shifting set of objectives separate from those publicly touted by the administration.
‘We were told nukes were not a military objective,’ they said, noting how the Pentagon has repeatedly stated they were. [¶]
The lawmaker, speaking on condition of anonymity, urged the White House to answer questions about Kharg Island, Iran’s crucial oil export hub; its nuclear material; and regime change.
The lawmaker said that the White House must answer for its plans, particularly regarding Kharg Island and troops on the ground.
The alarm raised by congressional Republicans was validated late Thursday as the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump is considering sending an additional 10,000 ground troops to the Middle East. A supplemental deployment of 10,000 troops would bring the total number of US troops in the Middle East to approximately 60,000 (a total that includes crews on ships). See WSJ, Pentagon Weighs Sending 10,000 More Ground Troops to the Middle East and Al Jazeera, US-Israel war on Iran, (“CENTCOM confirmed there are now more than 50,000 US troops in the Middle East, a deployment that includes two aircraft carriers, 200 combat aircraft, and thousands of arriving forces such as the 82nd Airborne and Marine Expeditionary Units.”)
So, as Republicans are angry and alarmed by Pentagon briefings and Trump considers sending another 10,000 troops, Trump claims that Tehran is “begging for a deal.” Meanwhile, Trump extended his “deadline” for Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz by 10 days, to April 6, 2026. Trump claimed that Iran asked for the extension, a claim that Iran repudiated immediately. See CBS News, Trump calls off Strait of Hormuz ultimatum as Iran receives U.S. message from mediators. (“Trump “retreated” from his deadline “out of fear of Iran’s response.”)
It is difficult to know where Trump’s war against Iran is headed—in large part because he seems to be making it up as he goes along. That is the most dangerous place for the U.S. to be.
For the record, five ships transited the Strait of Hormuz on March 26—as compared to a historical daily average of 100. See Strait of Hormuz Live Tracker — Real-Time Shipping & Oil Crisis Monitor. War risk insurance is available at 50 times the normal premium. (For comparison, imagine if your auto insurer raised your annual premium by a factor of 50.)
Federal judge issues preliminary injunction against the Defense Department's designation of Anthropic AI as a supply chain risk.
The AI company Anthropic refused to license its products to the Department of Defense unless the DOD agreed not to use the AI for mass surveillance of US citizens or for autonomous guidance of missiles. Trump and Pete Hegseth attacked Anthropic and its CEO, claiming that they were disloyal for refusing to bend to the will of the Defense Department. They then designated Anthropic as a “supply chain risk,” which prohibits companies that do business with the DOD from doing business with Antropic. That order was the effective equivalent of a “corporate death sentence.”
On Thursday, a federal judge in San Francisco issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the DOD from designating Anthropic as a supply chain risk. The opinion is here: Anthropic v. U.S. Department of War.
United States District Judge Rita F. Lin wrote,
The record supports an inference that Anthropic is being punished for criticizing the government’s contracting position in the press. In their announcements, the President and Secretary Hegseth called Anthropic “out of control” and “arrogant,” describing its “sanctimonious rhetoric” as an attempt to “strong-arm” the government. The Department of War’s records show that it designated Anthropic as a supply chain risk because of its “hostile manner through the press.” Punishing Anthropic for bringing public scrutiny to the government’s contracting position is classic illegal First Amendment retaliation.
In determining that the DOD and Trump sought to punish Anthropic, the court relied on public statements by Trump and Hegseth, proving—once again—that they are complete idiots who lack any sense of self-awareness.
A documentary on the resistance—and a boost before No Kings Day 3.0
Nine months ago, I received an email out of the blue from screenwriter and producer Bobby Roth asking if I would sit for an interview for a documentary about the resistance. (A reader who is a friend of Bobby’s suggested he interview me.) Without knowing anything more, I said, “Yes.” A week later, we met at my home and talked for about ninety minutes. And that, as they say, was that.
Today, I received a note from Bobby with a trailer for the documentary, which is called Lightworkers. The trailer is here: Lightworkers. To say the least, I was blown away by the trailer. It is a powerful, timely reminder of why we are members of the resistance—and why we are protesting on No Kings Day 3.0. (Full disclosures, I am humbled and a little embarrassed to be included in a documentary featuring so many leading politicians, political activists, and thought leaders.)
Although the documentary hasn’t been officially released, I asked Bobby if I could share the trailer in tonight’s newsletter—in advance of No Kings Day. The trailer includes video of difficult subjects (including the ICE/CBP killing of Renee Good and Alex Pretti), but is ultimately uplifting and affirming. It may give you the boost you need as you prepare for No Kings Day 3.0.
The documentary will be released soon and promoted to help the resistance preserve democracy and defend the Constitution. Details to follow!
Concluding Thoughts
As noted above, Senate Republicans agreed to the deal Democrats have offered for weeks: fund DHS, except for ICE and Border Patrol. See Politico. Senate Democrats stood firm and refused to fund ICE and CBP without meaningful reforms. That battle over ICE and CBP reforms must be fought and won, but Democrats have successfully maneuvered the battle lines in a way that favors them.
Of course, Trump could refuse to sign the deal, but then every minute of every hour standing in a TSA security line would belong to him.
There will be wrangling to come, but this is a significant moral and political victory for Democrats on the eve of No Kings Day 3.0!
We have the momentum! Let’s carry it into Saturday to create the largest single-day political protest in American history!
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
MARCH 26 - HEATHER
In an interview with Reuters on
Monday, Singapore’s minister for foreign affairs, Dr. Vivian Balakrishnan,
put in bald language the change in the world order instigated by President
Donald J. Trump. “For 80 years,” Balakrishnan
explained, “the US was the underwriter for a system of globalisation based on
UN Charter principles, multilateralism, territorial integrity, sovereign
equality.” That system “heralded an unprecedented and unique period of global
prosperity and peace. Of course there were exceptions. And of course, the
Cold War was still in effect for at least half of the last 80 years. But
generally, for those of us who were non-communists, who ran open economies,
who provided first world infrastructure, together with a hardworking
disciplined people, we had unprecedented opportunities. “The story of Singapore, with a per
capita GDP of 500 US dollars in 1965. Now, [it is] somewhere between 80,000
to 90,000 US dollars. It would not have happened if it had not been for this
unprecedented period, basically Pax Americana and then turbocharged by the reform and opening of
China for decades. It has been unprecedented. It has been great for many of
us. In fact, I will say, for all of us, if you look back 80 years. “But now, whether you like it or
not, objectively, this period has ended…. Basically, the underwriter of this
world order has now become a revisionist power, and some people would even
say a disruptor. But the larger point is that the erosion of norms, processes,
and institutions that underpinned a remarkable period of peace and
prosperity; that foundation has gone.” In its place, as scholar of
authoritarianism Timothy Snyder said to me in a YouTube conversation
yesterday, Trump is aligning himself with international oligarchs like
Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, Saudi Arabia’s Mohammad bin
Salman (MBS), and China’s Xi Jinping. Because of his position as the
president of the United States of America, this means he is aligning the
United States of America with this oligarchical axis as well, abandoning the
country’s democratic principles and traditional allies. On February 28, Michael Birnbaum,
John Hudson, Karen DeYoung, Natalie Allison, and Souad Mekhennet of the Washington Post reported that
Trump initially launched the strikes on Iran at the urging of MBS and
Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, despite the assessment of U.S.
intelligence that Iran did not pose an imminent threat to the U.S. and would
not for at least a decade. Both countries see Iran as a threat to their power
and want it weakened. Netanyahu has been eager to get rid of the Iranian
regime for decades and has urged previous U.S. presidents to attack without
success. On Tuesday, March 24, Julian E.
Barnes, Tyler Pager, and Eric Schmitt of the New York Times reported that MBS
sees a “historic opportunity” to remake the Middle East and so has been
pushing Trump to continue his war against Iran. MBS, the journalists report,
has urged Trump to use troops to seize Iran’s energy infrastructure and drive
the regime out of power. He has assured Trump that the jump in oil prices
will be temporary, although most observers disagree. Judd Legum of Popular Information notes
that the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) controlled by MBS invested $2
billion in the private equity firm of Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, one
of Trump’s volunteer Iran negotiators, before the war. A report by Democrats
on the Senate Finance Committee and House Oversight Committee released on
March 19 says that “since 2021, Mr. Kushner has collected more than $110
million from the government of Saudi Arabia for investment management
services that have reaped little to no return.” The fallout from the Iran war has
also benefited Russia’s Vladimir Putin. Despite reports that Russia is aiding
Iran in the fight, the Trump administration dropped sanctions on Russian oil
that was already at sea, giving Russia an injection of up to $10 billion a
month into its cash-strapped war effort against Ukraine. Today Trump reposted Russian
propaganda claiming that Ukraine discussed funneling money to Biden’s
reelection campaign. Also today, four Russian lawmakers arrived in
Washington, D.C., for the first such visit since Russia invaded Ukraine in
2022 to talk with lawmakers and officials, “part of the normalization of
relations with the United States of America,” as one of the Russians told the
Russian press. Trump declared he was determined to
achieve peace between Russia and Ukraine, but this week, according to Ukraine
president Volodymyr Zelensky, administration officials said the U.S. would
not guarantee Ukraine’s security unless Ukraine withdraws from its own land
in Donbas. Ceding the region to Russia would essentially give Putin what he
launched the war to grab. It is the same region that was at stake in 2016,
when Russian operatives told Trump’s 2016 campaign manager they would help
Trump’s presidential candidacy if he would look the other way as Putin
installed a puppet over the region. This afternoon, Noah Robertson and
Ellen Francis of the Washington Post reported that the Pentagon is considering diverting
weapons intended for Ukraine to the Middle East. They also noted that on
Monday, Pentagon officials told Congress that it was going to divert about
$750 million in funding provided by NATO countries for Ukraine to restock
military weapons in the U.S. instead. About allocating weapons, Trump told
the reporters, “we do that all the time. We have them in other countries,
like in Germany and all over Europe. Sometimes we take from one and we use
for another.” Last week, the U.S. eased sanctions
on banks in Russia’s ally Belarus, and today Trump announced he would ease
further sanctions on Belarus to try to get fertilizer into the U.S. since
Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz has stopped the transportation of
about 20% of the world’s fertilizer. Also today, Belarus’s president
Alexander Lukashenko signed a treaty with another of Putin’s allies, North
Korea’s president Kim Jong Un, announcing a “fundamentally new stage” of the
relationship between the two countries as they “oppose undue pressure on
Belarus from the West.” Both Belarus and North Korea support Russia in its
war on Ukraine. Trump has openly endorsed Orbán for
reelection in Hungary’s April 12 elections, posting on social media
yesterday: “Relations between Hungary and the United States have reached new
heights of cooperation and spectacular achievement under my Administration,
thanks largely to Prime Minister Orbán. I look forward to continuing working
closely with him so that both of our Countries can further advance this
tremendous path to SUCCESS and cooperation.” Urging Hungarians to vote for
Orbán, Trump continued: “He is a true friend, fighter, and WINNER, and has my
Complete and Total Endorsement.… I AM WITH HIM ALL THE WAY!” The framers of the Constitution
tried to set up a system that would make it impossible for a president to go
to war for private interests or the benefit of other countries, establishing
that Congress alone can declare war. The framers wanted the American people
to weigh in on whether they wanted to dedicate their lives and their fortunes
to a war. But Trump simply began the Iran war
without consultation with Congress, and administration officials have refused
to appear at hearings, instead briefing Congress behind closed doors. At an
annual fundraising dinner for Republican members of Congress, Trump appeared
to acknowledge he was violating the Constitution. He spoke of the “tremendous
success” of what he called his “military operation” in Iran. He continued: “I
won’t use the word war ’cause they say if you use the word war, that’s maybe
not a good thing to do. They don’t like the word war because you are supposed
to get approval. So I will use the word military operation.” Now, as the war costs at least $1
billion a day and Trump’s declarations fluctuate wildly from saying the war
is over to suggesting he is considering deploying ground troops to posting
this morning that Iranian negotiators “better get serious soon, before it is
too late, because once that happens, there is NO TURNING BACK, and it won’t
be pretty!” even Republicans are starting to have misgivings. The war has
pushed Trump’s approval rating down to just 36%, while a new Reuters poll
shows that only 25% of Americans approve of how Trump is handling the cost of
living. Today the stock market, which has generally trended downward since
the invasion, dropped sharply as traders apparently recognized that the cost
of oil is not coming down anytime soon. Yesterday, after a classified
briefing, House Armed Services Committee chair Mike Rogers (R-AL), who backed
the Iran strikes, told reporters that Congress members “want to know more
about what’s going on, what the options are, and why they’re being considered,”
adding, “And we’re just not getting enough answers on those questions.” Chair
of the Senate Armed Services Committee Roger Wicker (R-MS) commented: “I can
see why he might have said that.” In an in-depth interview with Hunter
Walker and Josh Kovensky of Talking Points Memo yesterday, Representative Joe Morelle (D-NY), who
sits on the House Appropriations Committee, explained how Trump’s Iran
incursion has become a “mess” for the president. The administration has
suggested it is going to ask for $200 billion for the war, and Morelle noted
that we are already closing in on $30 billion in spending on it and that“when
you consider all the things that Trump rejects or the Republicans reject as
too costly, the fact that they have now spent $30 billion in effectively the
span of a month without even talking to Congress about this expenditure is
really somewhat staggering.” Morelle noted that even if the White
House or the Pentagon did start to provide specifics, “I’m not sure it would
matter anyway because the president changes his mind so frequently. He might
say something and literally without exaggeration, a half hour later say
something completely different, or even sometimes within the same press
conference, give two wildly different answers.” Morelle told Walker and Kovensky:
“They fight us on things that will help American families be able to pursue
dreams, take care of the food, housing, and healthcare needs of millions of
families that they can’t afford”—precisely the things that, as Minister
Balakrishnan noted, the post–World War II international order enabled people
around the world to attain. “But,” Morelle said, “they can go into an
ill-conceived military action that has neither the support of Congress nor
the support of American families, which has no clear objectives, shifting
goals, and has alienated our allies and made us less safe.” |
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)