Politics

Politics

Trump Shows He’s Mentally Gone By Ranting About His Ballroom As US Troops Die

To people who did not vote for Donald Trump, the fact that this president doesn’t seem to care about other human beings is obvious. The second Trump presidency has shown how little Trump cares about every other person not named Trump. PoliticusUSA is non-partisan news and opinion that is 100% independent. Support us by becoming a subscriber. Subscribe now Whether it is people getting sick from RFK Jr.’s decisions at HHS, the suffering and death being caused by his immigration policies, the lack of concern about the increasing economic struggles of the American people, or the casual way that he and his administration dismiss the deaths of US troops, the message constantly being sent is that Trump doesn’t care. The American people have been waiting for days for the president to address the nation live and explain why he launched a war of choice against Iran at this moment. What the people got was a bored and nearly comatose-sounding president claiming that he wouldn’t get bored with war:  And we have from right from the beginning. We projected four to five weeks, but uh, we have capability to go far longer than that. We’ll do it. Whatever. Somebody said, uh, today, they said, oh, well, president wants to do it really quickly after that. He’ll get bored. I don’t get bored. There’s nothing boring about this. Do you agree with that, Peter? I don’t think there’s anything, Mr. General. I think there’s nothing boring about it. Somebody actually said. From the media. I think he’ll get bored after about a week or two. No, we don’t get bored. I never get bored. If I got bored, I wouldn’t be standing here right now. I guarantee you that to go through what I had to go through. Video: As you will see below, Trump showed how far gone he is later in his remarks. Story continues below. Read more

Politics

Pete Buttigieg in the Wilderness

Read more about the Democrats who might run for president in 2028 here. In May 2001, at Harvard’s Institute of Politics, a 19-year-old freshman named Peter Buttigieg asked David Gergen, a Harvard professor and horse whisperer to five presidents, a question that he might have reserved for himself, a couple of decades later. Peter (he had not yet transformed into “Pete,” let alone “Mayor Pete”) said he loved The West Wing but could feel the idealism reflected in the show slipping away from politics in real life. “The presidency has now devolved into what’s called ‘the MBA White House,’ or ‘the corporate model,’” he said, with the plaintive tone of a child asking about the spirit of Christmas. “Is that magic really gone forever?” Last summer, by the shore of the Grand Traverse Bay in northern Michigan, I told Buttigieg that I remembered that kind of fresh-faced idealism from my own time as a Harvard student. It was earnest; it was ambitious; it kind of made me want to barf. Lust for power—that, I understood, and I recognized it in many of our classmates. (We overlapped briefly, but I didn’t know Buttigieg.) But the combination of naked ambition, absence of cynicism, and a sunny disposition seemed awfully suspicious. I always felt there was something odd about the undergraduates who haunted the IOP, Harvard’s convalescent home for politicians recently defeated in politics or retired from it. How could you trust students who, rather than getting laid or drunk with their peers, spent their free time at office hours with former Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman?  Buttigieg said he knew what I was talking about. “It could be a Puritan, self-effacing thing,” he told me, “where you’re not supposed to admit that you view yourself as the person who would want to do that.” (Even the phrasing—do that—made politics sound like an unnatural act.) The students with aspirations to high office knew that idealism and ambition put off a lot of people. The Harvard Crimson, he remembered, called all of the IOP kids and asked why they wanted to be president someday. “Almost all the IOPers were savvy enough not to respond,” he said. “You’re supposed to act as if you never even dimly suspected that you might run for office, until the moment you announce your campaign.” (Of the students who answered the reporter’s call, only one has held elected office—a term on the Montana Public Service Commission.)  Friends who knew Buttigieg then told me they didn’t imagine him as a candidate—maybe a wonk or policy nerd, but not the guy on the ballot. He went back to the IOP in 2015, after he had become a rising Democratic star. He told the students that he knew just how torn they were, because he had felt the same way only a decade before. “Part of you is very anxious about how you could ever measure up” to the great politicians of history. “And then there’s another part of you,” he remembered saying. This other part “has had it at least cross your mind that, if by some catastrophic sequence of events, you were forced to immediately assume the presidency, you could somehow do it. And you know exactly what you would do first.” Whoever said that long-term planning is impossible in politics has never looked at the résumé of Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg. One of the lessons a budding young would-be politician can learn at the IOP is that if you want to run for higher office, then there are steps you have to take. The Roman republic had a cursus honorum, a defined track that led an aspirant from low office to high. If America and the meritocracy that ruled it for much of the past century has a similar path, Buttigieg has followed it with uncanny fidelity. Born in 1982, he grew up in South Bend, Indiana, where his mother taught linguistics and his father, a native of Malta and an expert on the Italian Communist Antonio Gramsci, taught critical theory at Notre Dame. As a high-school student, he entered an essay contest sponsored by the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library, and wrote an ode to the courage of Bernie Sanders. Sanders’s calling himself socialist, Buttigieg wrote, was the political equivalent of “a self-inflicted gunshot wound,” and wearing the label showed the senator’s integrity. But part of what made Sanders “courageous,” he wrote (and not a “crazy” radical), was that he had been willing to endorse Bill Clinton—to offer his grudging support to a centrist. It was a peculiar argumentative turn, and perhaps a preview of Buttigieg’s later pragmatism. Be principled, he seemed to be saying. But don’t get carried away. This type of pragmatism will take a bright young man far in the meritocracy. He was admitted to Harvard, and four years later he was a Rhodes Scholar. Another member of his Rhodes class, Senator Andy Kim of New Jersey, told me he and Buttigieg often talked politics late at night in Oxford pubs, “but one thing he never did was talk about running for office.” Mario Tama / Getty Senator Bernie Sanders addresses Buttigieg during a presidential-primary debate on February 19, 2020. As a high-school student, Buttigieg had written an essay praising Sanders’s courage and integrity. After Oxford, Buttigieg spent three years in Chicago, during a money-earning interlude as a consultant at McKinsey & Company. McKinsey was, at the time, the default apprenticeship for Rhodes Scholars who wished to learn the ways of the private sector. He said that he did not expect to do the job forever (“I couldn’t really do a great job on something that I was just paid to care about”), but that it taught him “how people and money and goods move around the world.” Management consulting has since suffered in reputation, especially among progressives, who view Buttigieg’s lubrication of the mechanisms of global capital as a major turnoff. In 2009, he was commissioned in the United States Navy Reserve, another

Politics

Trump’s Iran war is Alex Jones’ latest humiliation

Right-wing radio host, conspiracy theorist, and Trump cheerleader Alex Jones has found himself in yet another uncomfortable position after President Donald Trump launched an attack on Iran over the weekend.  Jones has spent decades arguing that past U.S. military actions were illegitimate and part of a wide-ranging conspiracy. But now he’s been silent about Trump’s war, bringing two competing sides of Jones’ public persona into conflict. Mediamatters Content During his show on Saturday, Jones noted reports of the bombing of a girls’ school in Minab, Iran, where 165 people were killed and another 96 were injured. “This is gonna rage the world against Israel and the United States,” Jones lamented. “Trump used the nineteen eighties bombing that killed 200 plus servicemen as the reason we’re doing this. Well, then what do they get to do because of this?” He argued that the bombing campaign betrayed what was “supposed to be America first.”  Alex Jones attends a rally in support of President Donald Trump ahead of the insurrection of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. “I don’t like the turn of events. I don’t like the direction we’re starting to go,” Jones said. “This is a big, big, big deal, and this is a gigantic problem.” Over the years, Jones has long argued that a dizzying array of world events were the work of a shadowy group of “globalist” elites as part of the so-called “New World Order.”  Among the events that “globalists” purportedly engineered are 9/11 and the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012. Jones has no real evidence of these conspiracies and has repeatedly changed the purported details of who was involved and why. It was his promotion of these conspiracies that brought Jones into alignment with Trump, who pushed the notoriously racist “birther” conspiracy about former President Barack Obama. When Trump appeared on Jones’ show during the 2016 presidential campaign, he praised Jones as having “one of the greatest influences” he had ever seen. Since then, Jones has stood by Trump—supporting his policies, attacking his detractors, and forwarding more outlandish claims. At one point during the 2016 cycle, Jones claimed that he was personally coordinating with Trump on conspiracies about Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. After Trump was elected, Jones said that he spoke to him on the phone and even took time on air to praise Trump’s penis. Yes, really. But since Trump returned to office, things have taken a turn for the worse for Jones. Alex Jones during an episode of “Infowars” in 2021. His company, Infowars, has been forced to sell off its assets after Jones lost the lawsuit brought against him by the surviving families of the Sandy Hook shooting. Jones used the show to claim that the shooting was a “false flag,” encouraging his listeners to go after the families of the kids who were shot and killed. Jones also complained last year that he was betrayed by Trump, who spent years promising to release the Epstein files only to pull back once in office. Jones has frequently cited the Jeffrey Epstein case as proof of his “globalist” rantings. Last year also saw the departure of Jones’ longtime employee and on-air personality Owen Shroyer, who said he was pressured to soften his criticisms of Trump. Now Jones’ career of cheering on Trump—precisely the sort of elitist he once claimed was the poster boy for the “globalists”—has led to this moment.  Trump granted Jones access in exchange for support, only to be precisely the same kind of leader on which Jones built his career opposing. Like Jones said, “This is a gigantic problem.”

Politics

Trump Shows He’s Mentally Gone By Ranting About His Ballroom As US Troops Die

To people who did not vote for Donald Trump, the fact that this president doesn’t seem to care about other human beings is obvious. The second Trump presidency has shown how little Trump cares about every other person not named Trump. PoliticusUSA is non-partisan news and opinion that is 100% independent. Support us by becoming a subscriber. Subscribe now Whether it is people getting sick from RFK Jr.’s decisions at HHS, the suffering and death being caused by his immigration policies, the lack of concern about the increasing economic struggles of the American people, or the casual way that he and his administration dismiss the deaths of US troops, the message constantly being sent is that Trump doesn’t care. The American people have been waiting for days for the president to address the nation live and explain why he launched a war of choice against Iran at this moment. What the people got was a bored and nearly comatose-sounding president claiming that he wouldn’t get bored with war:  And we have from right from the beginning. We projected four to five weeks, but uh, we have capability to go far longer than that. We’ll do it. Whatever. Somebody said, uh, today, they said, oh, well, president wants to do it really quickly after that. He’ll get bored. I don’t get bored. There’s nothing boring about this. Do you agree with that, Peter? I don’t think there’s anything, Mr. General. I think there’s nothing boring about it. Somebody actually said. From the media. I think he’ll get bored after about a week or two. No, we don’t get bored. I never get bored. If I got bored, I wouldn’t be standing here right now. I guarantee you that to go through what I had to go through. Video: As you will see below, Trump showed how far gone he is later in his remarks. Story continues below. Read more

Politics

The Impossible Predicament of the Uninsured

The day after Thanksgiving, I got a voicemail. A woman identified herself as a doctor at the University of Louisville hospital: “I believe I may have one of your family members here.” The message was hard to understand. Most of my family lives in Kentucky, so I didn’t know whom the doctor was referring to. I called the hospital, but kept getting put on hold. Then I tried my aunt—if someone was in trouble, she’d be the one to know. But she didn’t answer. A few hours later, her son got in touch with me. My aunt was the one in the hospital. She’d had an aneurysm on the right side of her brain, and it had burst. The drainage tube the doctors used to stop the bleeding kept slipping loose; after three tries, they finally got it to stick. Only then could they do surgery. My cousin FaceTimed me afterward, from the ICU. “Are you ready?” he asked. He angled the camera down to my aunt’s face, and I started sobbing like a sudden rainstorm. A few days later, I got on a plane from Washington, D.C., to Kentucky and went straight to join my family at the hospital. We had always called my aunt “The Glamourina.” She wore feathered hats with sparkly shirts and experimented with different hairstyles: a butterscotch-blond cropped cut, an afro, a bob streaked with highlights. She paid for my first real manicure, when I was in high school. We wore matching striped shirts to the salon, and used an eyeliner pencil to draw fake moles above our lips, like Marilyn Monroe. She is 58 now, and raised two kids as a single mother. She always treated me like one of her children, and I grew up to look more like her than like my own mom. When I’d talked with her the week before she ended up in the hospital, she’d asked me to play our favorite song, “I’m So Proud of You,” by Julie Anne Vargas. Now the top half of her head was shaved and staples ran in a ladder across it. IVs were taped to each arm, and a machine next to her bed was helping her breathe. She couldn’t speak. When she opened her eyes, they rolled. Her older son was especially alarmed by how quickly she’d declined. He wanted the doctors to come into her room so they could explain what had happened. But one of our older relatives stopped him, saying that we couldn’t afford to make demands, let alone trouble, because “she don’t have a lick of health insurance.” We knew that the hospital couldn’t deny her care, but we understood the tightrope you walk when you don’t have money. All she could afford to be was grateful. We don’t know what caused my aunt’s aneurysm, but she’d had persistent headaches for months, and she’d been worried. Once, when she was driving, the left side of her body turned numb and her toes curled up. She pulled over but didn’t go to the hospital; she couldn’t afford it. My aunt worked as a hair stylist at a salon for years. Most recently, she was the overnight caregiver for an elderly woman, but she had opted out of her employer-sponsored health insurance because she couldn’t afford the premium. She’d occasionally had coverage in the past, but it never guaranteed that she’d actually be able to afford health care. She called me once, defeated, because she was trying to fill a prescription at Walgreens and the pharmacy had flagged an issue with her insurance. She would need to pay out of pocket, and she didn’t have the $134.89. She was often frustrated by spending long spells on hold with insurance agents, and was overwhelmed by the complexity of the plans. [Annie Lowrey: Annoying people to death] My aunt’s experience with the health-care system is familiar to many Americans. In a 2023 survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation, nearly a quarter of adults said signing up for a plan was simply too confusing. Even those who have coverage may decide to delay or skip treatment because they can’t afford the out-of-pocket costs, resulting in emergency-room visits and hospitalizations that could have been prevented. Some years, my aunt made so little money that she might have qualified for Medicaid, but not recently—the income cutoff if you’re single in Kentucky is $1,835 a month. Some years, she bought coverage through the Affordable Care Act’s exchanges, but eventually she decided it was too expensive. Many more people are now making that same decision. In 2025, the Republican-controlled Congress voted to let Biden-era subsidies in the ACA, which had helped some 22 million people afford their coverage, expire. Within just two weeks of the cutoff, at the end of December, enrollment had dropped by 1 million people. According to one group’s estimate, families are paying $200, $300, or $1,000 more a month; many have seen their premiums double. [Read: The coming Obamacare cliff] In January, President Trump released his proposal for a “Great Healthcare Plan,” which suggests that savings from the former subsidies could be sent directly to “eligible” Americans. But who would be eligible? The proposal makes no mention of the many people who don’t have coverage. Then, in February, the Trump administration released a list of 43 prescription drugs that Americans can buy for reduced prices. But some of these were already available at those prices or in generic forms, and they make up a tiny fraction of the drugs Americans need; the prescription my aunt couldn’t afford, for instance, is not listed. Nothing about Trump’s pronouncements changes the fact that millions more Americans will soon be stuck where my aunt was: in the middle—sometimes insured, sometimes uninsured, but always too poor to get the care they need. As I stared at my aunt in the ICU, I noticed that her eyebrows were freshly waxed, and her nails had bleach-white French tips. Only the week before, she’d texted me about getting

Politics

‘I’ve been to the mountaintop’: Celebrating Martin Luther King Jr.

 On April 3, 1968, Martin Luther King Jr. delivered what would be his final speech at Mason Temple in Memphis, Tennessee. He would be killed by an assassin’s bullet the following day.  King was in Tennessee to support sanitation workers who were demanding better wages and working conditions. King had not initially planned to deliver his speech, “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop,” but he changed his mind after seeing the audience that had gathered. “All we say to America is, ‘Be true to what you said on paper,’” King said, tying the promise of America’s founding to the biblical Promised Land. YouTube Video Today, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, is a national holiday dedicated to remembering and honoring King’s life and legacy. That remembrance is fitting; King now belongs to all of humanity, his moral stature far beyond our limited power to add or detract. What remains is our responsibility to dedicate and devote ourselves to the great promise for which King and others gave the last full measure of devotion.  Well, I don’t know what will happen now. We’ve got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn’t matter with me now, because I’ve been to the mountaintop. And I don’t mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land! And so I’m happy, tonight. I’m not worried about anything. I’m not fearing any man! Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord!!” Hear, hear! 

Politics

Josh Shapiro Settles Some Scores

Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro was already irritated by what he describes as “unnecessarily contentious” questions from the team vetting him to be Kamala Harris’s running mate when a senior aide made one final inquiry: “Have you ever been an agent of the Israeli government?” The question came from President Biden’s former White House counsel Dana Remus, who was a key member of Harris’s vice-presidential search team. Shapiro, one of the most well-known Jewish elected officials in the country—and one of at least three Jewish politicians considering a run for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination—says he took umbrage at the question. “Had I been a double agent for Israel? Was she kidding? I told her how offensive the question was,” Shapiro writes in his forthcoming book, Where We Keep the Light, a copy of which The Atlantic obtained ahead of its release on January 27. The exchange became even more tense, he writes, when Remus asked whether Shapiro had ever spoken with an undercover Israeli agent. The questions left the governor feeling uneasy about the prospect of being Harris’s No. 2, a role that ultimately went to Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. After Harris and Walz lost to Donald Trump, many Democrats were critical of her decision to bypass Shapiro, the popular governor of the nation’s largest swing state. In his book, Shapiro says that the decision may not have been fully hers; he says he had “a knot in my stomach” throughout a vetting process that was more combative than he had expected. Shapiro wrote that he decided to take his name out of the running after a one-on-one meeting with Harris that featured more clashes, including about Israel. The account highlights some of the fault lines that Democrats are navigating as they try to put the 2024 campaign behind them and chart a path back to the White House. With his book, Shapiro aims to showcase why Democrats lost and how his brand of consensus-building politics can usher them back to power. But before the consensus building, it seems, Shapiro felt compelled to do some score settling. Harris, after all, had written a surprisingly candid account of her truncated and, ultimately, tortured selection process for a running mate, and it did not make Shapiro look good. When my colleague Tim Alberta first informed Shapiro of Harris’s description of their meeting in her book, 107 Days, he grew uncharacteristically sharp-tongued. “That’s complete and utter bullshit,” he told Alberta. “I can tell you that her accounts are just blatant lies.” Shapiro is more measured in Where We Keep the Light, taking pains not to attack Harris herself and instead blaming her staff for probing him in a way that at times felt gratuitous. “Remus was just doing her job,” Shapiro wrote about the Israeli-spy inquiry. “I get it. But the fact that she asked, or was told to ask that question by someone else, said a lot about some of the people around the VP.” (Remus and an aide to Harris did not respond to a request for comment.) In a statement, Shapiro’s spokesperson Manuel Bonder didn’t address the apparently unpleasant vetting process, and would only say that the governor had written “a very personal book” about his faith, his family, and what he has learned from a career of public service. He said the 2024 election was “one small part” of Shapiro’s “much broader story.” Shapiro does not write about the vice-presidential search until near the end of his book, which otherwise serves up the standard fare of a pre-campaign-launch political memoir, tracing his rise from a childhood in suburban Philadelphia to the governorship of the nation’s fifth-most-populous state. Shapiro writes about the importance of his Jewish faith, his role pursuing justice for survivors of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, his admiration for—and early support of—President Obama, and the astute political instincts of his wife and adviser, Lori. The book opens with the harrowing firebombing of the governor’s mansion on Passover last year by a man who later told prosecutors that he blamed Shapiro for the deaths of Palestinians in Gaza. Shapiro and his family had to flee the home, which suffered significant damage from the fire, in the middle of the night after being alerted by a state trooper. The governor writes that his willingness to publicly embrace his Jewish faith before and after the attack has been welcomed by people of various religious backgrounds, suggesting that his experience as part of an observant Jewish family would be a prominent part of any run for the presidency. [Read: By the time political violence gets worse, it will be too late] Where We Keep the Light is typical of the sort of memoir that candidates release before running for president. In it, Shapiro extols the virtues of using politics to improve people’s lives. He also makes subtle but clear policy distinctions between himself and other prominent members of his party, including some eyeing the party’s presidential nomination. He gets ahead of some of the major questions that Democrats are likely to face in the 2028 primary, writing, for example, that he would have handled coronavirus lockdowns differently, that he did not support the defund-the-police rhetoric in the summer of 2020, and that he privately suggested to Biden that he should consider dropping out of the presidential race after an abysmal debate performance against Trump. He also defends his support for cutting taxes and his more permissive stance on fossil fuels, policies that put him outside the mainstream of the Democratic political class. He writes that anti-Semitism has become “much scarier, much more real” in recent years and suggests a clear distinction between free speech and protest activity that veers into intimidation. But the governor also devotes several pages to providing his side of the story from the 2024 search for a vice-presidential candidate, after Harris wrote a detailed account of the traditionally secretive process, which included a less-than-warm meeting with Shapiro. Their sit-down on August 4, 2024, took place

Scroll to Top