Are We Seeing "Third Wave Trumpism"?
In the Mideast, Trump continues to flail, outmaneuvered by both Iran and Israel. Meanwhile, the president crashes out in a contentious “Meet the Press Interview,” where he revives election conspiracy theories and defends his $1.8 billion goon squad slush fund. And, tonight, he heads to New York to attend Game 3 of the Knicks-Spurs NBA finals. What could go wrong?
Happy Monday.
In today’s “Talking Feds Podcast,” I floated the idea that we have entered “Third Wave Trumpism.” I admit this is just a tentative notion and I’m prepared to revise and modify it.
But if feels like something is shifting, and maybe that’s because Trump has become a more virulent, corrupt and dangerous version of himself.
Trump, of course has always been Trump. But his first term — Trump 1.0 — had some rational folks.
As Trumpist as that first term may have felt, there were still grownups in the room — John Kelly, Jim Mattis, even Bill Barr — who would on occasion tell Trump “no.” Trump 2.0 has been far more radical: staffed with hard-core loyalists who are completely bonded with MAGA.
But loyalty is no longer enough.
With Texas Senate candidate Ken Paxton and Trump’s new acting Director of National Intelligence, Bill Pulte, and AG-designate, Todd Blanche, we are seeing figures who are not just loyal to Trump — but also willing (and eager) to abuse the powers of government to go after Trump’s enemies and critics, even if that means flouting the law.
Conceivably, some of the MAGA loyalists might’ve drawn the line at Trump’s most egregious corruption or (like Mike Pence) balked at Trump’ attempts to overturn a future election. (I admit that this might be naive on my part.)
But the Third Wave Trumpists are the whole package. They will go along with Trump no matter what.1 Blanche will indict the former director of the FBI over seashells; he will sign off on a deeply corrupt slush-fund and IRS immunity bargain. Pulte has abused his position as housing czar to target Trump’s political enemies; Paxton has already demonstrated his willingness to help Trump overturn elections. And Trump? He is not content merely with pardoning the J6 rioters; he still wants to pay them off. Some of rioters have even been given sensitive positions within the government itself.
Admittedly, the distinctions might feel subtle.
Pam Bondi was a through-going loyalist/lickspittle who was willing to torch her reputation by covering up the Epstein files. But she was not able or willing to give Trump all of the heads on a plate that he demanded. Now he has replaced her with his former personal attorney, who has made it clear that he is willing to do anything. (Up to and including sweet deals for Epstein’s co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell.)
If anything, Pulte may be even more willing to weaponize Trump’s campaign of retribution. The problem with Pulte is not just that he’s unqualified and will never say no to Trump. He’s made it clear that he will fire anybody. He will pull any strings. He may go where even Tulsi Gabbard feared to tread. And Gabbard was willing to do almost anything.
It’s hard to overstate how deplorable it was for the former DNI to show up in Fulton County Georgia, when ballots were being seized. She was signaling that she might interfere in local elections. But what is her replacement prepared to do with the resources of the entire national intelligence community at his disposal?
We keep saying that we’ve seen the worst of the worst. But Trump is saying “Hold my beer, I have people who are even more willing to be accomplices in my criming than ever before.”
**
**
In this context, you really need to read/listen to Trump’s interview with NBC’s Kristen Welker to get a real sense of just how deranged and extreme Trump has become. He has internalized the hairiest conspiracy theories about January 6 and the 2020 election— and seems to be laying the groundwork for similar fact-free challenges of the 2026 and 2028 elections. (And he is definitely going to try to find a way to revive the $1.8 billion “weaponization” slush fund in one form or another.)
Here’s just some of what he said yesterday, via Mediate:
“So let me explain what the fund is,” Trump said. “People have been hurt so badly by radical left lunatics that worked for the Biden administration and Sleepy Joe. They’re vicious. They’re violent, what they did to people. And of course they went after me more than anybody else. They raided Mar-a-Lago and all the other things. But people have been badly hurt. They’ve committed suicide. They’ve lost their jobs. They’re lost their families. They’ve lost their wives. They’ve lost everything. They’ve lost everything over a fake weaponization of government. Now, let me just tell you—”
“So are you looking for a way to revive it?” Welker asked.
“Well, look. If it was up to me, I’d pay them the kind of money that they deserve,” Trump said. He added, “So me, personally, I think the weaponization fund is a great idea, and so do many other Republicans. You have to get it approved. If they get it approved, that’s great. If they don’t get it approved, I’d be disappointed.”
Welker pressed.
“Do you think anyone who attacked police officers on January 6th should get taxpayer money?”
“I wouldn’t be inclined to say so, but I have to see it,” Trump replied. “I can tell you this: 97% of those people, you look at them, the FBI or whoever it was, cause you had a lot of crooked cops, you had dirty cops. Comey was a dirty cop. A guy like Bolton was a dirty cop.”
“But there is no evidence that people who—” Welker said, before Trump interjected.
“Wait a minute,” Trump said. “You think Comey was a straight cop?
“We had 170 people who pleaded guilty to assaulting police officers,” Welker replied.
“Comey was a dirty cop,” Trump said.
“But the people who assaulted police officers,” Welker shot back.
“Listen to me,” Trump said. “They had FBI agents ushering them into the building. They had FBI ‘Go into the building.’ Those people are walking around, they’re looking, “Oh, isn’t this nice?” … They were being ushered into the building.
“There’s no evidence of that, sir,” Welker said. “There’s no evidence of that.”
After riffing about “dirty cops,” Trump added, “Try looking at the tapes one time!”
Trump added, “I don’t know what’s going to happen with the weaponization fund. I love the idea, because people like you, the fake dirty press, the crooked press, people like stupid Biden, he’s not smart enough to know what’s going on, but people that surrounded him, surrounded his beautiful Resolute Desk in the Oval Office, what they did to the lives of people, they destroyed people. They sent people to jail who did nothing wrong.
Welker called out the president’s claims.
“Just to be very clear, there’s no evidence of what you’re saying,” she said.
“There’s a lot of evidence,” Trump said. “Listen to me…There’s tremendous evidence. There’s nothing but evidence.”
“Well, it’s not been presented in a court of a law,” Welker said.
“The election was rigged,” Trump claimed. “It was a dirty election. And it’s happening again right now in California.”
“Do you have evidence to support that?” Welker asked.
“All I have to do is look,” Trump said.
“But that’s not evidence,” Welker replied.
BONUS: NBC has compiled all the president’s lies: “Fact-checking Trump’s interview with NBC News’ ‘Meet the Press’”
Today’s Talking Feds Podcast
Harry talks with former Senator Barbara Boxer, Glenn Thrush, (and me) to make sense of the sudden Republican restiveness, Graham Platner's latest scandal, and Trump's "scariest” appointment yet. Is California’s slow vote counting giving the DOJ an opening to claim election abuses? Will Platner doom Democrats’ hopes of what Charlie says should’ve been a “layup” win over Susan Collins? Can Congress finish off Trump’s slush fund? And why is everyone ignoring Trump’s audit-free guarantee—the most obviously self-enriching part of his corrupt settlement?
I wrote about Ken Paxton here:
In the end, this was the qualification that mattered to Trump:
Ken Paxton would be willing to break the law for Trump; John Cornyn might not.
Ken Paxton would provide cover for any act of corruption Trump might commit; John Cornyn might not.2
And most important: If needed, Ken Paxton would join any Trump coup attempt; John Cornyn might not.
In other words, Trump was looking for a henchman, not a statesman. And he found the whole package in Paxton.
